Takeaways from the Harris-Trump Presidential Debate 

Republican presidential nominee and former US President Donald Trump reacts in the spin room, on the day of his debate with Democratic presidential nominee and US Vice President Kamala Harris, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, US, September 10, 2024. (Reuters)
Republican presidential nominee and former US President Donald Trump reacts in the spin room, on the day of his debate with Democratic presidential nominee and US Vice President Kamala Harris, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, US, September 10, 2024. (Reuters)
TT

Takeaways from the Harris-Trump Presidential Debate 

Republican presidential nominee and former US President Donald Trump reacts in the spin room, on the day of his debate with Democratic presidential nominee and US Vice President Kamala Harris, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, US, September 10, 2024. (Reuters)
Republican presidential nominee and former US President Donald Trump reacts in the spin room, on the day of his debate with Democratic presidential nominee and US Vice President Kamala Harris, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, US, September 10, 2024. (Reuters)

Democrat Kamala Harris and Republican Donald Trump met on Tuesday for their first and perhaps only debate, a square-off that could have a significant impact on the Nov. 5 election as polls show a tight race.

Here are takeaways from the debate:

RILING HER RIVAL

Harris made a point to get under Trump's skin, as her campaign had forecast.

She urged viewers to attend a Trump rally, where she said Trump would say bizarre things such as windmills cause cancer (something he has, in fact, said) and where, she taunted, attendees would leave out of exhaustion and boredom.

Trump, who prides himself on the crowds he draws, was clearly riled.

"My rallies, we have the biggest rallies, the most incredible rallies in the history of politics," he said. He accused Harris of busing in attendees to her rallies.

Trump then falsely claimed that immigrants in the country illegally were killing and eating people's pets in the city of Springfield, Ohio, an unsubstantiated claim that has circulated on social media and been amplified by Trump's vice presidential running mate JD Vance.

"In Springfield, they're eating the dogs! The people that came in, they're eating the cats!" Trump said. "They're eating the pets of the people that live there."

City officials in Springfield have said those reports are untrue, which the ABC moderators pointed out after Trump’s comments.

"Talk about extreme," Harris responded, laughing.

PLAYING DEFENSE

Another of Harris’ goals, as a former California prosecutor, was to call Trump out for his past actions, particularly his efforts to overturn the 2020 election.

An hour into the debate, her strategy appeared to be paying off. Trump was continually on the defensive.

Asked about the Jan. 6, 2021, siege of the US Capitol, he insisted he "had nothing to do with that, other than they asked me to make a speech." He also maintained, falsely, that he had won the 2020 election.

Harris used Trump’s actions as an argument for the country to turn the page.

"Donald Trump was fired by 81 million people, so let's be clear about that, and clearly he is having a very difficult time processing that, but we cannot afford to have a president of the United States who attempts as he did in the past to upend the will of the voters in a free and fair election," Harris said.

The vice president dug at Trump a little more, saying world leaders were "laughing" at him and calling him a disgrace – language that Trump has employed himself at rallies in reference to how he says other countries view President Joe Biden.

A few minutes later, Trump erupted, claiming Harris had received "no votes" in claiming the Democratic nomination and suggesting she replaced Biden as part of some sort of coup.

"He hates her," Trump said of Biden. "He can’t stand her."

The exchanges may have aided Harris' argument that Trump, as she put it, lacks the "temperament" to be president.

RACIAL DIVIDE

Deep into the debate, the long-simmering topic of race came up. Trump was asked why he had publicly questioned Harris’ dual heritage as a Black and South Asian woman.

"I don’t care what she is," he responded. "I read that she was Black. Then I read that she was not Black."

Asked to respond, Harris accused Trump of using race to divide Americans throughout his career. She cited how he and his father turned away Black renters in the 1970s and how Trump led the public outcry against five young Black and Latino men who were wrongly convicted of assaulting a jogger in New York City's Central Park in 1989.

More recently, he openly questioned whether President Barack Obama was a US citizen, Harris noted.

"I think it's a tragedy that we have someone who wants to be president who has, consistently, over the course of his career, attempted to use race to divide the American people," she said.

"I think the American people want better than that," Harris added. "We don't want a leader who is constantly trying to have Americans point their fingers at each other."

Instead of trying to defend his record, Trump pivoted back to the economy and tried to pin Biden’s economic policies on Harris. "She’s trying to get away from Biden," he said.

Harris used the attack to pitch herself again as a change agent.

"Clearly, I am not Joe Biden, and certainly not Donald Trump," Harris said, "and what I do offer is a new generation of leadership for our country."

HANDSHAKE

Heading into the debate, there was a question as to how Harris and Trump, who have never met, would greet each other.

Harris settled the issue, definitively. She walked over to Trump at his podium, extended her hand and introduced herself as "Kamala Harris."

It was a disarming way for Harris to approach a man who has spent weeks insulting her race and gender.

SPARRING ON THE ECONOMY

In the debate’s opening minutes, Trump and Harris went to battle on one of the issues that is top of mind for voters: the economy.

Harris detailed the economic policies she has rolled out in recent weeks, which include a substantial tax credit for small start-ups.

Trump focused his comments on tariffs, saying he would protect the American economy from unfair foreign competition.

While both sides got their jabs in, Harris got to speak first on a topic where she trails Trump in terms of voter trust.

She appeared to force the former president onto his back foot, and Trump essentially played defense on one of his strongest issues.

"She doesn't have a plan" Trump said, after Harris' opening comments. "It's like Run, Spot, Run."

A SCHISM ON ABORTION

The two candidates also engaged in a fractious debate about abortion, an issue where polls show Harris has the upper hand.

Trump defended the US Supreme Court’s 2022 ruling that ended constitutional protection for abortion and sent the issue back to individual states, arguing, incorrectly, that it was an outcome desired by both Republicans and Democrats. Democrats have long supported a constitutional right to abortion.

"I did a great service in doing it. It took courage to do it," Trump said.

Trump contended that some states allow babies to be aborted after birth, a point corrected by ABC News moderator, Linsey Davis.

Harris flashed some outrage at Trump’s assertion that abortion becoming a states-rights issue was a popular result, referring to states that have passed restrictive bans.

"This is what people wanted?" Harris asked. "People being denied care in an emergency room because healthcare providers are being afraid of being hauled off to jail?"

Trump was asked whether he would veto a federal abortion ban if one were passed by Congress. He insisted it would never happen, but refused to answer the question definitively.

WORLDS APART

One of the most heated policy discussions came when Trump and Harris clashed over how they would handle Russia's ongoing invasion of Ukraine.

The candidates' responses revealed the degree to which their views on America's role in the world fundamentally differ.

Trump refused to say he wanted Ukraine to win the war, even as ABC moderator David Muir pushed him on the point, saying only that he wanted to wrap up the conflict as soon as possible.

Harris shot back, arguing that what Trump really wanted was Ukraine's quick and unconditional capitulation.

"If Donald Trump were president, (Russian President Vladimir) Putin would be sitting in Kyiv right now," Harris said.

'WEAPONIZED' JUSTICE

In one heated exchange, Trump and Harris accused each other of conspiring to "weaponize" the Justice Department in a bid to go after their enemies.

Trump said the indictments he faces for conspiring to overturn his 2020 election loss and for his mishandling of classified documents - as well as his conviction for forging documents related to hush money payments to a porn star - are all the result of a conspiracy cooked up by Harris and Biden.

There is no evidence for that assertion. Harris shot back by pointing out that Trump has promised to prosecute his enemies if he wins a second term.

"Understand this is someone who has openly said he would terminate, I'm quoting, terminate the Constitution," Harris said.

The exchange underlined how Harris and Trump see the stakes of this election as existential. Both see their opponent as a threat to democracy itself.



Tomato Diplomacy Breaks Ankara-Tel Aviv Boycott with Palestinian Mediation

A vegetable seller arranges boxes of tomatoes at a market in Tel Aviv (Getty Images)
A vegetable seller arranges boxes of tomatoes at a market in Tel Aviv (Getty Images)
TT

Tomato Diplomacy Breaks Ankara-Tel Aviv Boycott with Palestinian Mediation

A vegetable seller arranges boxes of tomatoes at a market in Tel Aviv (Getty Images)
A vegetable seller arranges boxes of tomatoes at a market in Tel Aviv (Getty Images)

At the start of the war in Gaza, Israelis were angered by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. He not only compared Israel’s military action to Nazi crimes but also called for an economic boycott of Israel.

In response, Israeli Foreign Minister Yisrael Katz announced a counter-boycott, and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich imposed a 100% tariff on imports from Türkiye.

Direct flights between the two countries, which had reached 40 a day during peak tourist season, were also canceled.

The trade target set by both countries to increase commerce from $9 billion in 2022 to $10 billion in 2023 fell short, dropping to $7.5 billion. Of this, $5.3 billion was Turkish imports, with the remainder being Israeli exports.

Türkiye supplied Israel with key materials, including 22% of its construction goods and 9% of its agricultural products. This left Israel’s construction sector facing a major crisis, and the agricultural sector under pressure, as Israel also relied on produce from Gaza.

The effects were felt quickly, with fruit and vegetable prices soaring, pushing inflation higher. This added to the broader economic losses Israel faced due to the war.

On his part, Smotrich confirmed that the war would cost Israel up to 250 billion shekels (around $67 billion) by 2025, echoing earlier warnings from Bank of Israel Governor Amir Yaron.

The Israeli finance minister also warned against unchecked military spending, confirming that Tel Aviv was fighting the longest and most expensive war in Israel’s history, with direct costs of 200 to 250 billion shekels (the dollar is currently 3.7 shekels).

Before the war, Israel imported about 1,200 tons of tomatoes per week from Türkiye, accounting for 30% of its consumption. When these imports stopped, a crisis emerged, as Israel’s domestic tomato production—centered in western Negev near Gaza—was disrupted by the conflict.

Israel initially imported 500 tons of tomatoes from Jordan, but it wasn’t enough to meet demand, and no other alternatives were available. As fruit and vegetable prices soared, frustrating the public, a solution quietly came from Türkiye.

After long government discussions, accusations against Erdogan were dropped, and Israel decided not to enforce a boycott. The reason became clear: tomatoes. Behind the scenes, Israel received nearly 700 tons of Turkish tomatoes in just one week, along with other goods, helping ease the crisis.

In short, both Israel and Türkiye agreed on a way to bypass the boycott. Traders in both countries, with government approval, handled the process. To avoid breaking laws or defying top officials, the goods are labeled as bound for Palestine and registered under Palestinian traders from the West Bank, who earn a hefty commission.

Typically, goods for the Palestinian Authority pass through Israeli ports. After clearing customs, Palestinian agents receive the goods and hand them over to Israeli traders. As the system became routine, Palestinian traders no longer needed to show up, and Israeli agents took over, sending the commission directly to the Palestinians.

This week, it was revealed that an August 26 order from the Ministry of Agriculture allowed Turkish tomatoes to be imported despite the ban, using a third country as a cover, as long as the route was clearly documented.

The question is: Is Türkiye’s approach unique, or are other countries also announcing boycotts but finding ways to keep ties with Israel?

Dr. Moshe Ben-David, a 72-year-old historian and former Israeli intelligence officer, argues that boycotts are ineffective today.

Ben-David, a close ally of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, believes Israel’s war costs are heavy but manageable.

Speaking in Tel Aviv, he noted that estimates from the Bank of Israel and the Finance Ministry put the total cost of the war between 2023 and 2025 at 250 billion shekels. This includes direct costs like aircraft, ammunition, fuel, food, reservist pay, and evacuations, as well as indirect costs such as tourism losses and compensation for damaged properties.

Despite this, Israel has $200 billion in reserves, and Ben-David pointed out that stockpiles of essential goods have recovered since the war began.

Israel’s GDP, now around $400 billion, is almost back to pre-war levels. Daily credit card spending, which makes up 50% of GDP, has risen by 25%, showing strong consumer confidence.

The annual yield on government bonds has also increased to 5%, slightly higher than during the COVID-19 peak, but has since stabilized.