Winners and losers of the ABC presidential debate

Objective observers fairly universally believe that the vice president Kamala Harris beat the former president Donald Trump in Tuesday night’s debate. But when it comes to media personalities, the winners and losers come from all political sides.

ABC News received mixed reviews for the impossible-to-satisfy debate, with critics coming mainly from conservatives who decried what they saw as unfair treatment of the Republican candidate. Some of that criticism was overblown, but some of it was based on what appeared to be a different standard by which they judged the two candidates.

Ultimately, this great political night brought out the extremes in everyone. The reactions and performances ranged from reasonable to hyperbolic to downright crazy. Some came away with a better reputation, while others were tarnished by poor reasoning. Here are the winners and losers of the ABC presidential debate:

WINNERS: Dana Bash and Jake Tapper

Before the first debate (in which the then Democratic candidate, President Joe Biden), Trump and his media representatives did their best to play referee with preemptive complaints. It didn’t work, and CNN’s moderators chose not to interfere in the debates, failing to fact-check or intervene on Biden’s behalf, whose performance was so poor that he eventually dropped out of the race. The ABC debate was very different, and while some progressive voices preferred the approach of calling out Trump’s false statements, much of the post-debate discussion centered on the moderators. In sports, the best referees go unnoticed. Because of ABC’s moderation of Tuesday night’s affair, Tapper and Bash’s standing across the partisan spectrum is now higher.

LOSERS: David Muir and Linsey Davis

David Muir and Linsey Davis did a pretty satisfactory job. I honestly have no problem with their quick fact-checks on Trump’s proven false — and potentially dangerous — claims about infanticide and immigrants eating pets. Their mistake, however, was failing to get the two candidates on the same page when both Harris and Trump completely avoided questions and instead opted for pre-ordained talking points. Yes, politicians do this all the time, but it seems like only Trump was in a rush to answer the topic at hand.

Muir, for example, asked the vice president why it took until the fourth year of the Biden-Harris administration to meaningfully address the border issues. Harris ignored the question and simply blamed Trump for asking his Republican congressional representatives to kill the bipartisan bill—a reasonable response for the Democratic nominee, but instead of challenging Harris to answer the question posed, Muir took Harris’ bait and asked Trump why that was. It was a fascinating discussion that lent credence to conservative criticisms—albeit overblown—that this was an unfair fight. And again, while much of the right-wing backlash was overblown, ABC News’ reputation suffered in the eyes of conservatives.

WINNER: Brit Hume

Because of their outsized influence, the reactions of Fox News pundits after any major political event are fascinating to watch because they help predict how many of them will follow suit. Hume is by some measure one of the longest-serving panelists on Fox News’ most prominent panels, and he didn’t mince words after the debate, declaring it a “bad night” for Trump. He earned the title of “winner” not for declaring Trump’s performance bad, but for speaking truth to power and not simply giving a largely pro-Trump audience the commentary they wanted to hear.

LOSER: Megyn Kelly

Sorry Megyn. I am pleased with your recent success in preaching to outraged conservatives, but your live tweet of the Trump-Harris debate not only bordered on insanity, it also served to show how far to the margins you have gone. If someone had not watched the debate and had only gotten their information about its proceedings from Kelly’s feed, they would have thought that Vice President Harris was a bundle of nerves and awkward facial expressions—that she was not only the obvious loser, but that Trump had done virtually nothing wrong. That is not what happened at all. To her credit, Kelly was among the first to denounce the moderators’ bias toward Harris, but even that criticism was so overblown that it undermined credibility. Kelly took her defense of Trump to an absurd level when she appeared on NewsNation Wednesday and defended the former president for his ridiculous claim that immigrants eat Americans’ pets. Kelly is a keen political and cultural observer, but as is always the case, if one focuses solely on denouncing one political camp, the overall judgment itself is called into question.

WINNER: Bill O’Reilly and Geraldo Rivera

O’Reilly and Rivera are very different media personalities but have a lot in common: They are former Fox News employees who were longtime friends with Trump and now reunite at NewsNation (where I am also a contributor). But while their media analysis isn’t always spot on, they are both willing to tell it like it is, even if it means calling out their old friend, thereby jeopardizing a relationship with a current or former friend. Bill O’Reilly wasn’t afraid to see the debate for what it was, openly declaring that Trump had a bad night while offering other nuanced analyses. Geraldo was much harsher on his then-New York friend, calling his performance frightening and embarrassing. Again, it’s not their criticism of Trump that earns them the title of “winner”—it’s their willingness to tell it like it is and to value their honest opinion over any friendly alliance.

LOSER: Chris Hayes

MSNBC’s post-debate panel was absolutely ecstatic after the debate, and for completely understandable reasons. Their candidate did as well as could reasonably be expected, and Trump went full Archie Bunker by openly sharing absurd and dangerous conspiracy theories. It’s in these cases that it’s best to keep partisan exuberance in check, but that wasn’t a consistent principle followed by Hayes, who couldn’t contain his gleeful exaggeration when he called Kamala Harris’s debate performance the best debate performance of all time. I mean, sure, MSNBC viewers were thrilled to hear that, but any accolade of that level usually comes with the wisdom of time and distance. That kind of overreaction attracts monetizable viewers but does little to secure Hayes’ reputation as a sober and reasonable observer.

WINNER: John Dickerson

The political media loves presidential debates for a variety of reasons, including that they are a high-profile event that generates a ton of content but, more importantly, that they attract viewers who contribute to the bottom line and generate revenue. During an appearance on The Late Show with Stephen ColbertThe CBS contributor said what almost no one dares to say out loud, that presidential debates “don’t actually have clothes on” when he admitted that presidential debates probably don’t matter that much. It was a brave and astute observation that few in the political media world are willing to admit politically, and a cautionary tale for Kamala Harris supporters who anticipate a significant surge in the polls after debates that may not happen at all.

LOSERS: Mollie Hemingway and Sean Davis

The Federalist’s editor and CEO were so apoplectic about the apparent bias of ABC News’ debate moderators that they literally called for criminal prosecution of the network. Davis shared on social media, “Take away ABC’s broadcast license and criminally prosecute the moderators and executives for campaign finance fraud,” which Hemingway (a Fox News contributor) then amplified on X. The irony here is that each of these morons has long warned about the crackdown on free speech and baselessly claimed that “Big Tech” is out to get conservatives, but their reaction to a few tough questions from the former president is so ridiculously insane that it’s hard to take them seriously, or any Fox News show that features them seriously.

WINNER: Yamiche Alcindor

The NBC contributor probably produced the best moment of the post-debate chat room when she confronted the senator JD Vance Alcindor criticized Vance for his baseless claims that Haitian immigrants eat pets, an absurd accusation amplified during the debate by former President Trump. Given that she is also of Haitian descent, this dangerous and racist trope was deeply personal for Alcindor, but she challenged Vance with the right mix of even-handed questions and passionate anger over a story that many of us still can’t believe is being covered.

WINNER and LOSER: Bret Baier and Martha MacCallum

Both Fox News anchors spoke out about the debates that followed, with Baier emphasizing how confident and well-prepared Kamala Harris was in her delivery. MacCallum, meanwhile, was one of the first anchors to complain about what she saw as unfair treatment by the ABC News moderators, which was a very telling assessment from a news anchor who is ostensibly an honest news anchor but has the courage and insight to say it. So on that score, they came out on top.

On a call the next morning to Fox and his friends, However, former President Trump threw them both under the bus, saying he would only participate in a Fox News-hosted debate if one of the network’s friendliest voices – Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, Or Jesse Watters — had to be moderated. It was embarrassing and left the Fox and his friends The curved couch was somewhat stunned that Trump had spoken in an insulting manner about the Fox anchor on Fox. Credit to Brian Kilmeade for defending his colleagues to Trump, but rest assured, Baier and MacCallum’s standing in the Trump world took a hit because of this moment, which everyone should take as a badge of courage.

This is an opinion piece. The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone.