 |
| Blood on the floor of the first debate. Photo: Brendan Smialowksi/AFP/Getty Images |
EUGENE ROBINSON, WASHINGTON POST
Donald Trump just got roughed up, and badly, by a girl. On Monday night, at the first presidential debate, Hillary Clinton made her opponent look ignorant, unprepared, egotistical, childish, petulant, impatient and at times totally incoherent.
How bad did it get? At one point, as Trump was groping blindly across the minefields of foreign policy, losing a foot here and a leg there, he announced, apropos of nothing, that “I think my strongest asset, maybe by far, is my temperament.” Clinton smiled sweetly and exclaimed, “Whew, okay!” The audience at Hofstra University, sternly instructed to remain silent throughout the debate, ignored the rules and burst into laughter.
They were laughing at you, Donald, not with you.
The 90-minute encounter, moderated by NBC’s Lester Holt, was less a debate than a beat-down. Clinton obviously had put in many hours of preparation. Trump apparently decided to wing it — and while this approach worked well during the Republican primaries, when nobody got much time to speak and pithy one-liners could win the day, it bombed in a one-on-one clash where there was no place to hide.
Trump’s biggest vulnerability is that he so rarely knows what he’s talking about. Minutes before his hilarious temperament declaration, he had been boasting that his criticism of NATO a few months ago caused the alliance to begin focusing on terrorism. “I think we have to get NATO to go into the Middle East with us, in addition to surrounding nations,” he said.
Clinton coolly reminded him — “informed him” would probably be more accurate — of some pertinent facts. “You know, NATO as a military alliance has something called Article 5, and basically it says this: An attack on one is an attack on all,” she said. “And you know the only time it’s ever been invoked? After 9/11, when the 28 nations of NATO said that they would go to Afghanistan with us to fight terrorism, something that they still are doing by our side.”
That’s pretty much the way the evening went, especially toward the end. Trump visibly ran out of gas, poor thing. His answers became increasingly scattered and elliptical. Pressed to defend his contention (long since disproved) that he was against the Iraq War, he complained repeatedly that “everybody refuses to call Sean Hannity.” Even Hannity, the Fox News host, must have been perplexed.
This was after he charged that Clinton “doesn’t have the stamina” to be president. But she looked fresh as a daisy throughout, while Trump wilted before our eyes.
One of Trump’s worst moments, at least to my eyes and ears, came when Clinton alleged that he paid no federal income taxes in at least some recent years. Trump offered no protest, instead interjecting, “That makes me smart.” Seriously? No one wants to pay more in taxes than required, but the idea of a self-proclaimed billionaire getting a free pass will be hard for many voters to swallow.
Throughout the debate, the split screen showed Trump mugging, fidgeting, shrugging, grimacing, offering an array of exaggerated smiles and frowns. He interrupted Clinton frequently, but she didn’t complain. She may have calculated that it benefited her cause for Trump to have the floor.
I am under no illusion that Trump’s abysmal performance will cause his most dedicated supporters to have second thoughts. They heard his central argument, which is that “politicians like Secretary Clinton” have failed — and it’s time to try something new.
But while the race has tightened to the point where Trump could actually win, Monday night vividly demonstrated why he should not — why he must not. Whether you like Clinton or not, it’s obvious that she can do the job. The debate had to make undecided voters question whether Trump even has a clue.
JONATHAN CHAIT, NEW YORK
Before the first presidential debate, a conventional wisdom had formed that Donald Trump merely needed to appear “presidential,” which the campaign media had defined as “non-sociopathic.” He failed to clear that bar.
Trump managed to tell a number of lies without consequence. He insisted he had never called global warming a Chinese hoax, when that very claim is still up on his Twitter feed. He insisted crime has risen in New York, when it has fallen.
What worked for Clinton was sowing doubts about Trump’s character. She mentioned his $14 million loan from his father, and Trump aggravated the damage by calling the loan “small” without disputing the sum. He gave no coherent reason for why he could not release his tax returns. He admitted to failing to pay contractors, insisting they had all done poor work, an excuse hardly any person who had done work for hire could find plausible or acceptable. He defended his record of refusing housing accommodations to African-Americans by saying he had signed a consent decree with no admission of guilt, and then, years later, built a club in Palm Beach that did not exclude people by race. His defense of the charge of fomenting birtherism was a disaster. When he tried out his campaign line that he merely wanted to force Barack Obama to produce his birth certificate, Lester Holt noted that he continued to question its authenticity in each of the next four years, at one point sputtering, “Look, it’s all words.”
The final exchange of the debate was the most devastating. Clinton in a clearly planned attack lacerated Trump for his dehumanization of women — the kind of sexualization that offends social conservatives and social liberals alike. She brought up his abuse of one of his beauty-pageant contestants — noting, as an aside, his fondness for hanging around them — and that he called one contestant “Miss Piggy” and, because she is Latina, “Miss Housekeeper.” When Trump fell for the trap by demanding her name, Clinton supplied it: Alicia Machado, driving home the justifiable impression that Clinton sees her as a human being, unlike her opponent, who sees her as a piece of meat. His response consisted of whining that her campaign was spending money to attack him in advertisements.
 |
| Damon Winter/The New York Times |
An ebullient Hillary Clinton, meanwhile, told reporters she had a “great, great time.” She plainly relished her moment of apparent triumph, and poked fun at Mr. Trump’s morning lamentations. “Anybody who complains about the microphone,” she said, “is not having a good night.” Her campaign moved quickly to capitalize on her opponent's treatment of a former Miss Universe, by putting her statements in an online ad..The 1996 pageant winner, Alicia Machado, has accused the Republican nominee of years ago calling her "Miss Piggy" and "Miss Housekeeping" because she's Latina. She was nicknamed “Miss Eating Machine” by Mr. Trump in 1996 and says she has never fully recovered.
Republicans learned again that their nominee will rise or fall politically as himself — brash, unpredictable, volatile and true to his own instincts.
A handful of voters in battleground North Carolina said after watching the debate that they leaned toward Hillary Clinton. Undecided women in Philadelphia’s suburbs, a crucial voting bloc, said Mr. Trump had not only failed to win them over but in many cases had repelled them.
Trump said his mike might have been tampered with and that he was right to comment on a beauty queen’s weight.
- He also threatened to make Bill Clinton’s infidelity a campaign issue.