As Trump and Harris spar, ABC’s moderators grapple with conducting a debate in a polarized country

Advertisement

Advertise with us

The ABC News moderators were great. No, actually they were a “disgraceful failure." They cut off Kamala Harris too much. No, actually they corrected Donald Trump unfairly.

Read this article for free:


or

Already have an account? Log in here »

To continue reading, please subscribe:

Subscribe and receive a limited-edition Free Press branded hat or tote.

Digital Subscription

One year of digital access for only $205*

  • Enjoy unlimited reading on winnipegfreepress.com
  • Read the E-Edition, our digital replica newspaper
  • Access News Break, our award-winning app
  • Play interactive puzzles

*First annual payment billed as $205.00 + GST for one year. This annual subscription will automatically renew at $233.00 + GST every 52 weeks (10% off the regular annual price of $259.35). Offer available to new and qualified returning subscribers only. Cancel any time.

To continue reading, please subscribe:

Add Free Press access to your Brandon Sun subscription for only an additional

$1 for the first 4 weeks*

  • Enjoy unlimited reading on winnipegfreepress.com
  • Read the E-Edition, our digital replica newspaper
  • Access News Break, our award-winning app
  • Play interactive puzzles
Start now

*Your next Brandon Sun subscription payment will increase by $1.00 and you will be charged $17.95 plus GST for four weeks. After four weeks, your payment will increase to $24.95 plus GST every four weeks.

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 11/09/2024 (747 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

The ABC News moderators were great. No, actually they were a “disgraceful failure.” They cut off Kamala Harris too much. No, actually they corrected Donald Trump unfairly.

Such is the contentious tenor of the times in 2024’s campaign season. And so it went Tuesday night at Trump’s and Harris’ first — and possibly only — debate.

In an illustration of how difficult it is to conduct a presidential debate in a polarized country, ABC News moderators David Muir and Linsey Davis fact-checked and corrected Trump four times Tuesday and were attacked angrily by the former president and his supporters. The moderators asked about economic policy, the war in Ukraine, abortion, the Jan. 6 U.S. Capitol insurrection and changes in Harris’ stances since her 2020 presidential run.

San Francisco Republican party Chair John Dennis watches a presidential debate between Democratic presidential nominee Vice President Kamala Harris and Republican presidential nominee former President Donald Trump at Mad Dog In The Fog on Tuesday, Sept. 10, 2024, in San Francisco. (AP Photo/Juliana Yamada)
San Francisco Republican party Chair John Dennis watches a presidential debate between Democratic presidential nominee Vice President Kamala Harris and Republican presidential nominee former President Donald Trump at Mad Dog In The Fog on Tuesday, Sept. 10, 2024, in San Francisco. (AP Photo/Juliana Yamada)

It was the only scheduled debate between the two candidates, although Fox News Channel has proposed another one. Trump, following Tuesday’s session, said he’d be “less inclined to because we had a great night.” On social media, Trump echoed many of his supporters in criticizing ABC, saying the debate was essentially three on one.

In the end, Trump logged 43 minutes and 3 seconds of time talking, while Harris had 37 minutes and 41 seconds, according to a count by The New York Times.

Opinions on the coverage were a political litmus test

The debate’s stakes were high to begin with, not only because of the impending election itself but because the last presidential debate in June — between Trump and sitting President Joe Biden, whose performance was roundly panned — uncorked a series of events that ended several weeks later with Biden’s withdrawal from the race and Harris stepping in.

Opinions on how ABC handled the latest debate Tuesday were, in a large sense, a Rorschach test on how supporters of both sides felt about how it went. MSNBC commentator Chris Hayes sent a message on X that the ABC moderators were doing an “excellent” job — only to be answered by conservative commentator Ben Shapiro, who said, “this is how you know they’re complete s—-.”

While CNN chose not to correct any misstatements by the candidates during Trump’s debate with Biden in June, ABC instead challenged statements that Trump made about abortion, immigration, the 2020 election and violent crime.

During a discussion of abortion, Trump made his oft-repeated claim that Democrats supported killing babies after they were born. Said Davis: “There is no state in the country where it is legal to kill a baby after it was born.”

Muir pointed out that Trump, after years of publicly not admitting to his defeat to Biden in the 2020 election, had recently on three separate occasions conceded he had lost. Trump replied that he had been sarcastic in making those recent statements.

“I didn’t detect the sarcasm,” Muir said.

After suggesting that crime had gone up during the Biden administration, Muir pointed out that violent crime had gone down during that period, prompting an argument with the former president. ABC also noted, after Trump had repeated a debunked report that immigrants were killing and eating pets in Ohio, that there had been no evidence that had happened.

ABC moderators did not correct any statements made by Harris.

“Could they have done more? Yes,” said Angie Drodnic Holan, director of the international fact-checking network at the Poynter Institute, said in an interview. “Did they do enough? I would say yes. The alternative was none.”

Toward the end of the debate, CNN fact checker Daniel Dale said on social media that “Trump has been staggeringly dishonest and Harris has been overwhelmingly (though not entirely) factual.”

Both candidates didn’t answer some questions

People watch the presidential debate between Republican presidential nominee former President Donald Trump and Democratic presidential nominee Vice President Kamala Harris, Tuesday, Sept. 10, 2024, at the Gipsy Las Vegas in Las Vegas. (AP Photo/John Locher)
People watch the presidential debate between Republican presidential nominee former President Donald Trump and Democratic presidential nominee Vice President Kamala Harris, Tuesday, Sept. 10, 2024, at the Gipsy Las Vegas in Las Vegas. (AP Photo/John Locher)

As is often the case in debates, the moderators often saw specific questions go unanswered. Harris, for example, was asked to address Trump’s criticism that the U.S. Justice Department has been weaponized against him. She did not. She also skirted questions about changes to some of her past positions on issues. Muir twice asked Trump whether he wanted Ukraine to win its war against Russia, and he didn’t answer.

The split screen views of both candidates onscreen told different stories. Trump often looked angry or smiled at some of Harris’ statements, while avoiding eye contact with his opponent. Harris looked over at her opponents several times, often in bemusement, sometimes in open amusement, sometimes shaking her head.

Online anger toward how ABC handled the evening began while the debate was ongoing, and quickly became a talking point.

“These moderators are a disgraceful failure, and this is one of the most biased, unfair debates I have ever seen,” conservative commentator Megyn Kelly posted on X. “Shame on ABC.”

Answering online critics who complained ABC stacked the deck in Harris’ favor, Atlantic writer James Surowiecki wrote that “the way they ‘rigged’ the debate is by letting (Trump) hang himself with his own stream of consciousness rambles.”

“It was like a 4Chan post come to life,” CNN’s Jake Tapper said.

On Fox News Channel, anchor Martha MacCallum said after the debate that Harris “was never really held to the fire.” Commentator Brit Hume agreed with her, but said something else was at play.

“Make no mistake about it,” Hume said. “Trump had a bad night.”

___

David Bauder writes about media for the AP. Follow him at http://x.com/dbauder.

Report Error Submit a Tip

More Stories

Signs of local neo-Nazi recruiting efforts spark concern

Conrad Sweatman 7 minute read Preview

Signs of local neo-Nazi recruiting efforts spark concern

Conrad Sweatman 7 minute read Saturday, Sep. 26, 2026

A far-right canvassing push in Manitoba this month is raising concerns among Winnipeg residents.

Stickers promoting Nationalist-13, a men’s-only neo-Nazi group also known as NS-13 based primarily in Hamilton, Ont., have appeared in Winnipeg and parts of southern Manitoba. The stickers bear national socialist branding and messages such as “White Man, Fight Back” and “White Community, Political Action, Training and Fitness.”

Winnipeg writer Jess Woolford recently encountered an NS-13 poster on Pembina Highway.

“It was appalling,” Woolford said. “It has the Nazi death heads covering people’s faces. It was pretty disturbing to come across this … I just didn’t expect to see it so blatantly displayed in my neighbourhood.”

Read
Saturday, Sep. 26, 2026

Winnipeg Police Service recognizes, honours residential school survivors as Orange Shirt Day approaches

Malak Abas 3 minute read Preview

Winnipeg Police Service recognizes, honours residential school survivors as Orange Shirt Day approaches

Malak Abas 3 minute read Yesterday at 7:27 PM CDT

Winnipeg Police Service members lit a sacred fire outside of their North District Station in recognition of residential school survivors ahead of the upcoming Orange Shirt Day.

“We know that the relationship between policing and Indigenous communities has not always been one of trust,” WPS Chief Gene Bowers told visitors at a gathering outside of the station Sunday afternoon.

“We cannot change that history, but we can acknowledge it, we can learn from it, and we can take responsibility for how we move forward.”

The sacred fire, guided by elder Mike Calder, will burn for 24 hours at the Sinclair Street station, and then be allowed to extinguish naturally. It’s the second year the WPS has lit a sacred fire in recognition of residential school survivors — last year, the fire was lit outside of WPS headquarters on Smith Street.

Read
Yesterday at 7:27 PM CDT

Discrediting independent media is the game plan

Editorial 4 minute read Preview

Discrediting independent media is the game plan

Editorial 4 minute read 2:00 AM CDT

United States President Donald Trump’s decision to bar several news organizations from White House briefings is, thanks to a court decision, teetering on the edge of collapse.

Read
2:00 AM CDT

Jets place two on waivers

1 minute read Updated: 9:58 AM CDT

The Winnipeg Jets are one step closer to being down to numbers.

On Sunday afternoon, centre Danny Zhilkin and defenceman Henry Thrun were placed on waivers.

That decision would suggest  defenceman Tyrel Bauer is in line to break camp with the NHL club for the first time in his career.

The final roster, with a maximum of 23 players, must be submitted on Monday afternoon.

Furby Street residents fed up with inaction on drug houses

Carol Sanders 6 minute read Preview

Furby Street residents fed up with inaction on drug houses

Carol Sanders 6 minute read Updated: 8:39 AM CDT

Anxious Furby Street residents contacted the city and their elected officials Friday to — once again — report people coming and going from a boarded-up house they call a dangerous “drug centre” and “den of thieves” that’s just steps away from a house under construction.

Linda Zak, who was holding a yard sale with a group of neighbours Friday morning, described the trouble the home attracts, while a woman slumped on the front steps and a man standing in the yard yelled to someone inside it.

“It is a drug centre,” said Zak, 77. “We know that. A couple of days ago, a person lit the front on fire. Now, as you look at it, you can see where the facade was burning and they were trying to harm people inside.”

“We’re very concerned about it being next to the home this man is building,” she said, pointing to the two-storey that’s nearly completed. The boarded-up house is in the 500 block of Furby.

Read
Updated: 8:39 AM CDT

Letters, Sept. 28

7 minute read 2:00 AM CDT

Other options are closer

Every Winnipeg driver learns this lesson eventually: keep your eyes on the horizon too long and the pothole gets you. Manitoba’s energy debate has the same problem. We keep looking far down the road for the next big project and missing what’s close at hand.

Scott Forbes (Time for 21st-century leadership at MB Hydro, Think Tank, Sept. 24) makes a strong case for more wind and storage. But much of this debate is still measured in thousands of megawatts, generated far from where the power is used.

The more immediate opportunity is close to home.