Kamala Harris Broke Donald Trump

piefedderatedd@piefed.social to politics @lemmy.world – 618 points –
theatlantic.com

Even so devoted a bootlicker as Senator Lindsey Graham declared the debate a “disaster” for the ex-president.

Donald Trump is so feral and narcissistic, so unrestrained and so outside the norm of American politics, that he’s difficult to debate. It’s disorienting. Very few people have been able to stand up to him without being pulled into the muck. In the past, even when he lost debates on points, he dominated his opponents.

But on a Tuesday night in Philadelphia, Kamala Harris cracked the code.

111

Trump was always broken. Harris just drew attention to it in the right way.

no but she really hacked him like a cyberpunk runner.

the issue of immigration is her worst and his best polling issue. so when she was answering that question she added this part about crowds leaving his rallies early. the moderator moved past that and almost helped him by refocusing the question on immigration but he just couldn't let it go. he not only focused on the crowd remark, but also went immediately unhinged, screaming about people eating cats.

it's like a fucking cheat code. look at his reaction to her saying people have early. it's like the sound the game makes to let you know the cheat code is activated.

Right? Such an obvious trap and he jumped into it, head first. Fascinating to see

To attack a narcissist, you need to attack the cracks in the reality they paint for themselves.

It just so happens that as someone who has been an enthusiastic and professional grade debater for 40+ years, Harris also knew exactly how to do this without getting his mud on herself, and she knew to do it just as he was hoping to hit his stride.

It was great to watch. So many politicians from so many walks of life have been completely humiliated by Trump's ridiculous persona. He's so inflammatory, so full of lies, and so narcissistic professional politicians have been reduced to flinging his poo back at him. Instead Harris made him wallow in it.

I'm just pleased to see that they finally recognized how to debate Trump. He's a fat fart of a narcissist who debates with a cloud of grievance and endless lies. He isn't a regular candidate; he is simply a bully. And like all bullies, deep down he needs to make other people feel small because that's the only way he can not feel small himself.

The mistake that so many others have made is that they treat Trump like any other ordinary candidate. Instead, it seems like team Harris actually sat down with a few psychologists, got to the core of Trump's fragile psyche, and figured out how to break him. If he wasn't such a cruel villain himself bent on ruining the lives of countless others, I would actually think such a trick is unfair and cruel. But sometimes you have to do what's wrong in order to do what's right. Trump is so consumed with his own ego that he is literally willing to order the extrajudicial imprisonment and summary execution of people who offend his ego. He is a dangerous man that cannot be allowed near any real power. And if taking advantage of his mental deficiencies is unfair play, so be it. I am willing to break the mind of a signal malignant narcissist if it means saving the Republic. I have no more sympathy for his mental illness than I do for those of countless dictators through history. The worst tyrants of the 20th century may have had some legitimate psychological illnesses that made them act the way they do, but that does not excuse their actions. Mentally deficient or not, they need to be taken down by any means necessary.

Hell, the only reason I don't endorse violence to keep these people out of power is that it's counter-productive to create martyrs. These people need to be shown as the fools they truly are. Only then can the spell be disrupted. If Trump's attempted assassin had succeeded, a dozen baby Trumps would have quickly risen up following the same playbook. Trump instead needs to be defeated not with violence, but with total abject humiliation and defeat at the ballot box. He needs to die not as a martyr at the height of his power, but from old age, as a sad, tired old man, repeatedly defeated and ranting at the clouds, repeating facebook rumors, til his dying breath. THAT is how you defeat Trumpism. You have to break his psyche so fundamentally that he never recovers. He needs to be defeated resoundingly and made such a fool that no one will ever attempt his playbook again, or at least until his humiliation has passed from living memory. Ideally he will end up dying in prison. But regardless he needs to live to til the end of his natural life, making a greater fool of himself with every word he speaks, from now until the end, digging his pit of shame ever deeper. THAT is how you defeat a demagogue like Trump. You don't out-logic him. You don't kill him. You break him. You shatter what his left of his ego and mind. Leave him a blubbering fool trapped in the remnants of his own shattered ego. That is how you deal with Trump. You have no mercy, and you break him.

Holy crap she got me too!

I didn't realize she pulled out that bait on the immigration issue! That was calculated as fuck!

her campaign is so fucking competent, it's refreshing. she had the taylor swift ace up her sleeve and planned to play it that day no matter what

Yea, I feel like I didn't see anything new from him. Kamala just lead him around like a dog on a leash, and exposed it better than anyone else has.

One thing I've come to believe is that the extended media reaction to a debate affects public opinion more than the debate itself. The media don't quite dictate viewers' judgments, but they shape and solidify them. And what this string of posts is making clear is that on the day after Donald Trump is still losing the debate. He's probably going to try to stage some dramatic bullshit to derail this media train.

Very astute observation. I think the only thing I disagree with is that I personally think the media do to a large extent directly dictate viewers judgements. Which makes the rest of your points even more salient.

He's going to eat a live dog to prove how hawrable it is.

You projected puppy crunching noises and fur-muffled trump gagging noises into my brain, and it was so vivid I felt it would be a shame not to share that imagery with you. <.<

Absolutely. If the media outlets had decided that Trump won, then Trump won. Almost no one actually watched the debate. They only looked at "highlights" curated for them.

I mean, overnight numbers suggest it's a second most watched TV event since Superbowl, but you're not wrong in that people don't necessarily pay attention or process it. Highlights are the part people grab onto and boy do we have a lot of good ones.

Do you have a link to the numbers, please? I'm curious if the international numbers are reported separately.

(Me and at least three other households I know watched it in Canada. My friend in VA did not, and hadn't even heard about Fido til I mentioned it this afternoon.)

I would have but I'm getting conflicting numbers and supposedly the overnights aren't as accurate. You've got the numbers from Neilson which were 67 million, that's the latest guess.

https://www.nielsen.com/news-center/2024/over-67-million-viewers-tune-in-for-abc-news-harris-trump-debate/

And that usually excludes streaming, but I think it's US (maybe Canada). Higher than the first debate, but oddly lower than 2020 (maybe cause of lockdown?). I think it's missing a very sizable chunk from international and streaming, though. If I had to guess, it's likely double. Hell, even Taylor Swift caught it streaming.

I understand my very presence on lemmy makes me less representative of the mean but I was hooked from start to finish.

Wouldn’t be surprised if he replaced Vance with RFK Jr now as that would kill discussion of the debate.

He arguably can't.

He and vance are on the ballot. So is RFK, funny enough. Which is why RFK is trying to get off the ballot in swing states. The reason Biden could tag Kamala in is that the DNC had not actually chosen a candidate yet.

My suspicion is that an exception would be made rather than run into the mess of leaving republicans unelectable in states. But it would still be a giant shitshow and not in a good way.

This may be a cynical take, but it would still be Trump on the top of the ticket, and the media would be immediately distracted from his debate failure. He would most likely come out ahead in the end.

That motherfucker been broke.

He’s been broke for a long time. The only thing he actually owns is debt, which he will never, ever pay.

He should resign. Clearly he isn't capable.

Resign from what, life? I'm on board that's just an odd phrasing

Would not object. It's been a good run, Donald.

Shhh. You don't have to lie. Not to him. At this point, I don't think anyone'll have to even tug on his reins; he'll walk to the back shed on his own. Pick up the shells after. Don't litter.

On that stage we saw the two things most capable of utterly destroying Trump: A prosecutor, and Trump.

She should have mentioned his tiny little hands after shaking them - dude has such a LDE vibe, I bet he'd have lost his shit.

She's more mature than to stoop down to his level and ridicule someone's appearance or anything like that. The handshake was enough to get to him and plant that seed, a complete and total power move.

The moment I saw that handshake I was like "oh. Power move". I think he even said "have fun" lol

She said her name to him, which was a nice move. He never said her name, or looked at her the entire time. That is actually weird, it's like he knows if he does, he will freak

I just saw a seasoned prosecutor taking control of the well. That's what they do. Her facial expressions? That's also prosecutor in action.

Loved it all but of course I'm biased...

"We go high" is what got us into this mess. Remember Hilary? Democrats need to get off the idealistic high horse already and do what works.

You can absolutely play their game without getting mud on you.

Edit: Basically there are a ton of stupid people and if they can't be convinced then they should be used

Did nobody notice the moment when he tried to silence her and added, 'sound familiar' to make some sexist remark about telling women to shut up? "I'm talking now, sound familiar?"

She said "I'm speaking" to shut up pence in the 2020 debate. That's what he was referring to. Still he's a dick.

Also she wasn't even really interrupting him. If you watch the clip, she was muted and he was easily heard over her. It wasn't as if she was really steamrolling.

You can tell it got under his skin in 2020, and this was just a pathetic way to "get back" at her for being a woman who asserted herself in a debate.

It’s genuinely so amusing how badly that little dig backfired on him. I’ve seen other people also not realizing he was trying to riff on “I’m speaking”. The thing he failed to realize is that essentially any professional women that were watching have likely heard that kind of shit from an older man at some point in their career, and it makes him look like (more of) a complete asshole.

He got the line wrong so even most who would recognize it didn't and the "sound familiar?" didn't make any sense.

Wish I could read the article.

Here's a few you can try in the future. You can take a paywalled link and append the address to the following sites:
archive.is/
archive.ph/
12ft.io/
removepaywall.com/

Just take the website link from the taskbar and paste it directly after. This works the vast majority of the time.

Some might complain about getting around paywalls, but I don't mind. The web was built to be free. If you want to have your info and stories completely behind a login, fine. Make your page require a log in to even see stories. Make that worth it to people, and you can build an audience. But don't have your pages and stories accessible to draw people in, only to slap them with a paywall. That strategy always felt like a slimy bait-and-switch to me. I remember back in the 90s when Congress had a serious debate over whether for-profit commercial activity should even be allowed online at all. And it's been downhill from there. Put your content on the open web or not. Pick a lane. Want a walled garden? Build a walled garden and don't let people see inside without paying. But don't lure people into your garden and then slap them with a pay booth once they're starting to enjoy the flowers. If it's even possible for people to use a paywall removal site, it proves you're trying to pull a bait-and-switch on readers.

Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall. Humpty Dumpty had a great fall. All the king's horses and all the king's men Couldn't put Humpty together again.

Trump is Humpty Dumpty.

Even so devoted a bootlicker as Senator Lindsey Graham declared the debate a “disaster” for the ex-president.

Lindsey Slam!

What did they expect Kamala Harris used to be a prosecutor?

He thought he could take her because everyone around him always tells him what a good smart special big boy he is and they let him win at everything. As we all saw, his temper tantrums when he loses are something special.

According to his base he won the debate. But I think a lot of moderates and independents are going to think he looked like an idiot after that debate.

Yea, his base will follow him to McDonalds and back, no question. They love their Hamberdeler.

It was super effective. I am surprised he didn't faint

Cautious hope that this may a "Have you no sense of decency sir?" moment.

Liberals should be careful with this. Y'all want them to feel like Trump did alright. We can't have him being switched out at the 11th hour for a more competent candidate

Trump would rather die than not be the center of attention. He's a narcissist, not feeling like the center of attention literally feels like dying. His ego wouldn't allow it. His fear of going to jail wouldn't allow it. And the fact that the republican party would implode wouldn't allow it.

The scary thing (for Republicans) is that their whole party is currently held together by hairspray, orange spray tan solution, and Depends diapers.

Trump cannot drop out. As long as he's alive, he's running.

That wouldn't work. The idiots are voting for Trump not the Republican party. If they replaced him the idiots would see that as the Republicans betraying them. Then they would split the vote and write trumps name in anyway. Complete victory for Dems in that scenario

When Trump goes, the rest will tear each other to shreds. As insane as he is, he's the figure who's holding it together. Like a fat gormless toad sitting on a stone in the middle of the pond.

As an outsider to American politics, I predict a (temporary) collapse in support for the Republican party the minute he's ousted.

I don’t know. That might help accelerate the disintegration of the GOP.

But like others have said, if he’s alive he’s running.

rfk jr was too late to withdraw for filing deadlines, I have no idea what would happen if trump withdrew. His only way out of this is to kill JD Vance and make it look like a democrat did it.

I recognize the feral and narcissistic paragraph from somewhere else. Source for this?

I'm confused why people think Kamala won the debate - she was just regurgitating pre prepared meaningless lines.

She clearly and concisely responded the questions she was obviously going to be asked. You may disagree with the answers, or you may just not like politicians, but she was obviously prepared and professional.

Donald rambled, lied, and went off topic constantly. He spent more time talking about what Kamala said than his own policy. When he was pressed on policy he had unclear answers or dodged entirely (e.g. "concepts of a plan").

He came across as unhinged, bordering on detached from reality, and he seemingly doesn't have any plan or vision for the country, except that it definitely isn't project 2025 (except it probably is). He was undeniably more interesting to watch, but not in a good way. Based purely on the debate from last night it's not clear if he's fit to lead a book club, let alone a nuclear superpower.

That's what debates have been pre-Trump.

There were never any surprises. They were expected to be composed and articulate.

It was mostly about getting voters to tune in at prime time because despite there being round the clock news, most people don't actually pay close attention to politics.

I remember now what I always hated about debates, they were always boring reminder that both parties are the same

If kamala didn't win who did? Because it certainly wasn't trump.

Imo they both sucked

If you had to say one of them won, who would you pick?

I don't disagree that there wasn't a ton of useful information in the debate, there was barely room for anyone to talk actual policy, but Harris came across as a rational human who at least pretended to care about others while Trump was a blabbering idiot.

Did you hear trump? He didn’t answer a single question, ranted about eating pets half the time, talked about how big his rallies are, and yeah that was all he did.

So it's expected from Trump. Kamala didn't answer any questions either but for some reason is getting a pass. She is just regurgitating cheap slogans, what good is that?

how?

did she come out strong on worker's rights, healthcare, the environment, upping the minimum wage, police reform, or anything that would directly help the citizens?

debate watched was Harris and Trump babbling for over an hour with no concrete plan for anything out of either of them

Keep yelling at clouds banana. One day someone’s gonna stop ignoring you, I promise. Just don’t hold your breathe please, we all care for your health.

It has to be exhausting to constantly have such a shitty take.

exhausting to keep watching your fellow citizens eat shit from the two parties keeping the US down and loving it so much so that third parties are not considered

what did Harris say that was enough to get a vote besides the fact she is not Trump

Convincing people not to vote for Democrats doesn't result in 3rd parties being considered. It results in the GOP winning which makes it even more impossible for 3rd parties to gain ground.

Democrats aren't keeping 3rd parties down, first past the post is. One of the 2 parties has to gain enough control to eliminate FPTP voting. Guess which party is completely against that idea and guess which one has a modicum of support?

(this is rhetorical, I have no interest in having any further conversation with you. It's a waste of my time)

I feel like most points against you have been pretty adequately addressed by other posters except one. Why ignore punctuation and capitalization, but still take the time to double return your sentences? If you're breaking grammar rules to be edgy, why make your comment readable at all? Just throw it all together in one long ass sentence. It would save you precious milliseconds that could be better used attempting to elaborate on your completely asinine takes :)

That is so true, my fellow human who is definitely a citizen of the United States!

more of a dissident of the United States btw

not able to vote or do a lot of things that people who will blindly vote for Democrats or Republicans and play ball take for granted

the more the US falls apart under Democrat and Republican leaders the more people seem to latch on to them, but it is the wrong lifeboat and the last hundred years should have been a red flag that something more is needed to keep this sinking country afloat

On a sinking boat, alone, in the middle of the ocean:

"We should really get a different boat."

Thank you. I can't believe no one's thought of this.

You only think we're sheeple because you have such a massive forest/trees problem.

You can keep inflicting your lack of perspective on us condescendingly, but just know that's all you're doing.

I only watched the first 10 minutes or so of the debate, and even I know Kamala Harris had plans for things she talked about. This is just a bad faith comment.

she did yes but none of it involved anything that is really needed

universal healthcare, police reform, environmental protections, minimum wage

only thing the Democrats stood strongly on was women rights which they have ignored for over half a century

so long so rights have now started to be lost and only now are they voicing an opinion on top for asking for donations

Very interesting that you think people don't need help with childcare or affording housing. That's a really nice and privileged bubble that you live in, I hope for your sake it never pops.

Harris answered the questions she was asked, and she was dealing with a non-participant flinging poo as her opponent. She couldn't possibly bring up every subject you wanted her to in the time she was given, especially since a lot of that time ended up going to Trump while he screeched over her and the moderators.

people need help with childcare and affordable housing because of bipartisan politics

takes a higher minimum wage and better education to help with both of these plus workers' rights and universal healthcare and police reform and environmental reforms

what good is help with childcare bills when the parent and/or parents is/are not paid enough to purchase food or other necessities and while they are on their way to get their child from that child care facility that they get assistance with they get pulled over and hassled by police and when they finally come home the electricity is off because they are not given living wages for the work they put in and then the kids grow not understanding as adults how to fix the situation in their country because they lack the tools better education would have provided thus the circle continues and the Republican and Democrats get their low paid factory worker that lacks the knowledge to improve their lives and will keep propping up the two party sham

takes more than just helping with childcare which is only needed because Democrats and Republicans both do not support living wages because their financial backers do not support it

was all show that seemed rigged and was void of substance that the US citizens desperately needed decades ago

Debates are terrible places for substance; you've got 2 minutes to talk and you still need to address your opponent and they can derail or misconstrue what you just said without a proper rebuttal. The point is to argue your side of things, which I think she did fine and was very strategic in avoiding things that would have put her at a disadvantage.

It's like a Lemmy comment. You can have a good idea, write a paragraph or two, and you'll still have people call you out because you can't fully explain a topic in this format.