Staff ReportsThe recent debate featuring Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump bore all the hallmarks of a classic political showdown, complete with a hefty dose of moderator bias. Despite the vaccines already being lined up for the next grudge match, a post-debate poll by the Trafalgar Group shows that Harris’s so-called ‘victory’ in the debate may not be worth the paper it’s printed on.
Trafalgar, a polling group with a solid track record, surveyed key battleground states— Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, North Carolina, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. While a slick 55.3% of viewers declared Harris the winner, those numbers seemed more like a victory lap for a participation trophy than a sign of real campaign momentum. Pre-debate glory didn’t translate to success in the vote tally, as the needle barely fluttered. In fact, post-debate, Trump retained a slight edge among these vital voters: 48.2% for Trump versus a measly 47.9% for Harris. A statistical tie becomes an unremarkable wash despite Harris’s star turn on the debate stage, which was aided by overzealous fact-checking courtesy of the ABC moderators—David Muir and Linsey Davis.
It was glaringly obvious that ABC/its 'moderators' were doing their best to swing the whole debate in Heels Up's favor; her unmuted mic, her litany of unfact checked lies, and she was allowed to ramble on and on while DJ Trump was stymied and fact checked by the 'moderators' at…
— SherryForTrump2024 (@sharon4DJT) September 11, 2024
Speaking of bias, it’s hard to overlook just how much this duo seemed to be rooting for Harris. Reportedly, they jumped on Trump’s statements five times while letting Harris skate by without so much as a nudge. One can only wonder if moderate means checking facts or just offering a helping hand to the Vice President. Muir and Davis let Harris twist the narrative on Trump’s words about the “bloodbath” in the auto industry and misrepresent crucial historical events, like the Charlottesville incident from 2017. But hey, no biggie—Trump wasn’t allowed any such luxuries.
It’s also amusing that the critics are already raising eyebrows at Trafalgar’s credibility. Sure, a Republican consultant founded it, and it has a distinct conservative slant. Still, it’s funny how the same mainstream outlets singing the praises of other polls often fail to mention they landed somewhere between shooting in the dark and flinging spaghetti at the wall. Meanwhile, Trafalgar accurately predicted Trump’s 2016 win and correctly forecasted Biden’s victory in 2020. Apparently, some people just have an easier time with self-fulfilling prophecies than actual facts.
Despite the surge of doubt, the fact that Trump managed to hold steady in the face of media opposition signals that his base remains energized. Even as he faced the overwhelmingly friendly fire of establishment moderators and a supposedly fierce competitor, he retained his grip in battleground states. This underlines a critical aspect that escaped the ever-so-loyal fans of Kamala Harris: Trump’s resilience in the face of adversity, and that’s not a trait to overlook as the 2024 campaign gears up.
In summary, amidst the whirlwind of supposed debate success and media favoritism, it appears that Harris’s time in the spotlight might have barely flickered. While she managed to win the optics, the actual polling results reveal a different story. As Americans brace for the upcoming electoral battle, it’s clear that the debate might have turned into a theatrical performance for Harris. Still, for voters, it produced the kind of data-driven doubt that any candidate should dread. The question now hangs eerily: will this performance help Harris’s campaign? In battleground states where votes genuinely matter, the answer is likely a resounding “no.”
