“As I watched, I couldn’t help thinking in wonderment: “That angry man, who lives with fantasies in his head, is actually running dead even in the presidential race?” His economics was by no means his weakest point in the debate, but the facts—as opposed to the fantasies—are that we’ve had among the best (not worst) economic performances in the world, that jobs have been created in huge numbers (not destroyed), and that inflation has fallen sharply (not remained as high as it was). As Pat Moynihan wisely said, people are not entitled to their own facts.”

Alan Blinder, Gordon S. Rentschler Memorial Professor of Economics and Public Affairs

“Trump seems to think immigration is his best issue; he pivots nearly every question there (January 6th? The border!). Yet, while Trump makes unhinged racist claims about pet-eating immigrant criminals, Harris argues she would be tougher on asylum seekers. Whoever wins this election, the future for people seeking refuge in the US looks bleak.”

Amelia Frank-Vitale, Assistant Professor of Anthropology and International Affairs

“What a difference a debate makes. Harris articulated a passionate case for reproductive freedom, putting Trump on the defensive. And he admitted he still does not have a plan to replace the ACA.”

Heather Howard, Professor of the Practice; Co-director, Global Health Program; Faculty Affiliate of the Center for Health & Wellbeing

“Former President Trump treated this debate like one of his rallies: in unhinged comments, he prevaricated time and again without responding once to a question, e.g., regarding January 6, or his opposition to the bipartisan border bill, or to his cozying up to dictators. VP Harris stayed on point, combining detailed responses to questions about the economy, the border, and reproductive rights, while slashing away at Trump’s weaknesses, criminal violations, and opposition from so many senior officials whom he appointed. The clear winner: Harris — articulate, focused, indeed far more “presidential” than the former president.”

Amb. Daniel C. Kurtzer, S. Daniel Abraham Professor of Middle East Policy Studies

“The debate clarified the choice more than it is likely to influence the outcome of this election. With unhappy voters wanting a change, both not-quite non-incumbents promised a new direction. VP Harris spoke to undecided voters by offering to turn the page on the chaos and division. She mounted little defense of the Biden record or of her own controversial past positions. Former President Trump played the hits, including a reprise of the “big lie” about the 2020 elections. He appealed to voters who feel nostalgia for a better economy and think Democrats and migrants are destroying the country. Supporters of both candidates are likely pleased with what they saw.”

Frances Lee, Professor of Politics and Public Affairs; Co-Director, Center for the Study of Democratic Politics

“Harris demonstrated Trump’s weakness of character and reminded the audience why Trump would be problematic for democracy and the rule of law. The moderators did well to press both candidates on the issues and their records while challenging Trump’s gross exaggerations and lies. Trump rambled and lobbed vague insults. He failed to effectively attack Harris on her vulnerability: public concern about the economy and her liberal past positions. This election will be close and will come down to voter turnout.”

Tali Mendelberg, John Work Garrett Professor of Politics; Co-Director, Center for the Study of Democratic Politics

“Vice President Harris made a clear and powerful case that a Trump presidency would sow division and damage our democracy; increase health care costs and further erode a woman's right to choose; and reverse the industrial base the Biden-Harris administration has built—on everything from clean energy to AI and other emerging technologies. Former President Trump resorted to stock phrases but was unable to counter the Vice President's substantive points.”

Ali Nouri, Lecturer of Public and International Affairs

“Policy differences are healthy for democracy, and tonight’s debate featured some important disagreements on issues related to abortion, immigration, the economy, foreign policy and more. But Trump’s continuing refusal to accept the results of the 2020 elections, sowing distrust in the integrity of our nation’s elections system, is by far the most dangerous disagreement. We live in a divided and highly polarized nation, and swing voters are seeking leaders who will unify and not further divide us. As long as Trump refuses to respect the integrity of our nation’s institutions, it will be hard for undecided voters to put him in charge of those very same institutions.”

Udi Ofer, John L. Weinberg/Goldman Sachs and Co. Visiting Professor and Lecturer of Public and International Affairs; founding Director of the Policy Advocacy Clinic, Princeton University

“Harris opened her response to the question about climate change by emphasizing the climate extremes devastating the livelihoods and lives of too many Americans and then made a smooth transition to the benefits of basing large parts of the US’ future economy on solving the problem. In contrast, Trump didn’t grapple with the climate problem or its solution, instead launching into an unsubstantiated and incoherent tirade about President Biden’s supposed corruption. Unfortunately, the issue was left to the end and even Harris didn’t respond as clearly and crisply as the climate issue deserves.”

Michael Oppenheimer, Albert G. Milbank Professor of Geosciences and International Affairs and the High Meadows Environmental Institute; Director, Center for Policy Research on Energy and the Environment

“When Trump had to reach for the endorsement of Hungary’s autocratic Viktor Orban, you knew he was in trouble. Harris rightly noted that autocrats root for Trump because they can manipulate him with flattery and favors."

“Trump claimed Putin never would have invaded Ukraine if he had been president, even though Trump spent his presidency acting as if Putin could do no wrong. Trump said he would end the war in Ukraine in 24 hours, but Harris rightly warned that he would do that by abandoning Ukraine."

“On Gaza, Harris again endorsed a ceasefire and the release of the hostages – of course – but didn’t say what she would do to pressure the Israeli military to stop what she described as the killing of far too many innocent Palestinians. She said she would always give Israel the ability to defend itself from Iran but not whether she would continue to arm it as it bombed Palestinian civilians.”

Kenneth Roth, Charles and Marie Robertson Visiting Professor and Visiting Lecturer

“Trump continued to deny the results of the 2020 election and failed to express any regret for the events of January 6th. He voiced sympathy for Putin. He refused to say that it’s in our interest for Ukraine to prevail. He cited Viktor Orban as a character reference. He is a transparent autocrat. And like other autocrats, he relied on fear and division to garner support. Let us hope the American people see through his act.”

Rory Truex, Associate Professor of Politics and International Affairs

“This may well be the only time the American public sees the two candidates debating, so it was a shame that the ABC moderators failed to enforce speaking times equally and let Donald Trump have significantly more time than Kamala Harris who they kept cut off while she tried to respond. In the end, she had 37 minutes of speaking time to his 43 — a 16% difference —, but it was much worse in the more watched first hour when the moderators allowed Trump to speak for a whopping 40% longer than Harris.”

Zeynep Tufecki, Henry G. Bryant Professor of Sociology and Public Affairs

“One of the most memorable moments of tonight’s debate was when Trump doubled down on the lie that he won the 2020 election, placing him at odds with moderate members of his own party and swing voters who might otherwise consider him a viable option. Harris was well-prepared for this moment, citing numerous high-profile Republicans and former Trump administration officials who now oppose him because of his actions on and after January 6. Harris’s responses to questions about her own controversial record and policy plans were much less detailed and clear—a missed opportunity to address weak spots in her own candidacy.”

Lauren Wright, Associate Research Scholar and Lecturer in Politics and Public Affairs