Kamala Harris Did Just the Right Thing at the Debate — With Help from ABC

Heading into Tuesday’s debate, Kamala Harris faced a bigger challenge than Donald Trump. She had to behave in a way that would allow swing voters to imagine her sitting in the Oval Office.

She passed that test. She was calm and generally clear and there wasn’t a shitty word to be heard.

That’s not to say she’s now on the path to victory. It’s just that because of the unprecedented manner and timing in which she secured the party’s nomination, and because she was going to be the country’s first female president, she had some work to do with independent voters.

She did well enough to pass the prerequisite test of looking and sounding like a president, a test Trump had to pass in 2016 when he first applied for the award.

At the same time, Harris’s success is marred by the fact that she had the help of biased ABC moderators. They were on her side and let her get away with answering their questions too often.

She consistently made speeches instead of answering, but the moderators did not press her to answer their questions clearly.

Asked, for example, about her share of responsibility for the debacle of the withdrawal from Afghanistan, she never responded, simply saying that she supported President Biden’s decision.

She then brought up the Democrats’ view that Trump negotiated initial terms with the Taliban and that moderators David Muir and Linsey Davis let him pass. There was no mention of the 13 American service members killed.

As for Trump’s responses, the moderators repeatedly insisted that he was wrong and offered what could be called corrections. They were completely off-topic and proved once again that the mainstream media simply cannot be trusted to play fair.

One such case involved a Democratic abortion bill that would have allowed the euthanasia of a live, full-term fetus.

Trump was right, but the moderators unfairly undermined what he said by casting doubt on his statements among viewers.

This is not moderation, this is electoral interference.

Overall, Trump gave a middling performance. He seemed to look down on the moderators for much of the evening and too often brought up the Biden-Harris decision to allow millions of unvetted illegal immigrants into the country. Mere repetition is not enough to convince, and he missed an opportunity to broaden his argument.

Correct on hydraulic fracturing

On the other hand, he was right about fracking. As the debate unfolds in Philadelphia and Pennsylvania and the two sides prepare to decide, he cited Harris’ 2019 comment that she would ban fracking.

She denied it and the moderators moved on.

Otherwise, Trump didn’t seem very adept at using their questions to make his policy points and was too often defensive with Harris and the moderators.

She, on the other hand, often turned to him to talk to him, or at least to talk about him, and approached him on a wider range of topics.

And where he rarely changed his expression, she posed for the camera, alternately smiling, shaking her head no and resting her chin on her hand thoughtfully. Several times, she tried to interrupt Trump as he answered.

Her performance was aimed at undecided voters, and it’s strange to imagine her practicing. Still, she probably got some reassurance about her skills, at least in debate, and that could have long-term significance.

So far, she and her campaign have played it safe by ensuring that she doesn’t speak for more than a few seconds without a teleprompter.

Her aides have also developed a peculiar habit: responding belatedly and reluctantly to public pressure about her cover-up. After refusing for more than a month to answer media questions or grant an interview, she agreed to sit down with CNN.

Still no details

It was a 26-minute tie that was instantly forgettable. If it’s ever remembered, it’ll be for Harris bringing along running mate Tim Walz, who looked like a cross between a father figure and a security guard, and for host Dana Bash’s soft-spoken tone and willingness to take no for an answer.

Similarly, pressure has been building for weeks for Harris to detail her policy positions, particularly as anonymous aides have repeatedly said she no longer supports some of the most controversial positions. Among them were banning fracking, which could have sunk her in Pennsylvania, and adopting lenient border policies.

And so, on Monday, on the eve of the debate, his campaign filled its previously empty “issues” page with dozens of… platitudes.

She has now promised to support “good-paying jobs” and “ensure safety and justice for all.” She also pledges to “secure our borders” and “cut energy costs and tackle the climate crisis.”

She didn’t get any further Tuesday night, but none of that matters to her supporters, including, incredibly, her media handmaidens. Their willingness to support a candidate who turns his back on them marks a new low in media corruption.

---

Find The Post’s coverage of the debate

---

It’s no coincidence that ABC has, according to one study, the most unbalanced coverage, with almost all Harris coverage positive and almost all Trump coverage negative.

The moderators’ performance is consistent with this record and shows that they care more about the outcome than their duty to inform the public about a candidate. Beating Trump is all that matters to them.

The fact that she has agreed to be lenient with them and with the voters also suggests that the media do not really trust her. If they believed she was capable of defending and expressing popular positions, they would encourage her to do so.

Instead, they have accepted her campaign’s decision to keep voters in the dark because they believe she has a better chance of being elected than if she is forced to explain and defend her positions publicly.

The question now is whether her debate performance will give Harris and her advisers enough confidence to allow her to be a true candidate free of restrictions.

The first sign is that yes, since Harris’ camp has reportedly demanded a second debate.

Trump should say yes. And next time, he should smile from time to time and show viewers a happy warrior, ready to finish the job he started.