While 67 million adults tuned into a debate rife with stinging ad hominem attacks and a plethora of fabricated evidence, the rest of the 250 million registered adult population chose not to. Fortunately, for the Biola students who found themselves with something better to do on a Tuesday night than watch a political food fight, I watched the debate, so you didn’t have to.

Here is everything you missed surrounding the two candidates’ policies, from the economy to eating dogs.

THE ECONOMY

Kamala Harris claimed Goldman Sachs, 16 Nobel laureates, and the esteemed Wharton School of Business support her “opportunity economy.” The precepts of the plan revolved around tax credits and various subsidies including a $25,000 down-payment assistance and a $6,000 child tax credit. 

Former President Donald Trump started the debate in foreign territory. He was on the defensive. Trump attempted to discredit the Joe Biden administration’s booming employment numbers in 2021, referring to these jobs as “bounce-back jobs.” He accused Harris of being the daughter of a “Marxist professor” who allowed Taiwan to extract the U.S. semiconductor sector right from under her. In response to Harris’ comments on trade tariffs, Trump doubled down, saying that the U.S. needed an across-the-board tariff on imported goods.

However, unlike other candidates who have crumbled under Trump’s towering presence, Harris overcame the barrage of attacks. She mustered a retort accusing the former president of selling China AI chips, which she claimed, spurred a suffocating U.S. trade deficit.

ABORTION

Trump is not the same champion for the right to life as he was in 2020. This time, he shied away from making any stronger claims against pro-choice policies despite his clear distaste for abortion. In a unique fashion, he criticized the six-week Florida abortion restriction for refusing to include exceptions for rape and incest.

The former president was caught on the back foot when confronted about whether he would use a presidential veto on abortion, which his vice presidential candidate, J.D. Vance, claimed he would. Trump slyly dodged the question while reiterating that he intended to bring the issue to the states, where he would support any agreement each state chose for itself. 

Trump’s last point on the matter was that Tim Walz advocated for post-birth abortion, which has yet to be confirmed. He is most likely referring to Walz’s removal of a clause that would remove provisions to provide for infants who have survived an abortion procedure.

Harris shied away from commenting on whether she would support abortions in the 7th, 8th, or 9th month and instead argued that “nowhere in America is a woman carrying a pregnancy to term and asking for an abortion. That isn’t happening; it’s insulting to the women of America.” She stated “women should have the right to their bodies” and the Trump administration should be held responsible for stripping those rights away. She voiced support for reintroducing Roe v. Wade in legislative form on a federal level.

Additionally, she argued for federal protections concerning IVF, which have been restricted in numerous trigger laws, such as the one found in Alabama. The vice president ended her rebuttal with the argument that Trump wants to imprison both you and your doctor for having an abortion.

THE BORDER

Harris was able to capitalize on the border in a way that put Trump on the back foot. “I am the only person on this stage who has prosecuted border agents and gun smugglers,” Harris claimed, using one of Trump’s historic talking points. “I tried to institute a bill that would limit the surge of guns and fentanyl, but it was killed by Republicans.” 

Her central claim on the border is summed up with one statement: “Trump would prefer to run on a problem than fix a problem.” Regardless of its validity, the picture that the former president uses the border to fearmonger his base may be a point that sticks in viewers’ heads in the following months.

In line with the theme of the debate, Harris ended her commentary on the border, stating, “I am going to invite you to one of Trump’s rallies. You’re going to see Trump talk about Hannibal Lecter … but not how to best serve the American people.”

Trump quickly punched back, stating, “People show up to my rallies.” 

Trump has not budged on his border policy, highlighting that “millions and millions of people are coming over the border.”

While numerous claims by Trump’s campaign on the devastation caused by illegal immigration have struck a chord with voters and pundits alike, unfortunately, his entire argument on the border was derailed by one ill-suited line: “In Springfield, they’re eating the dogs! They’re eating the dogs and the cats. They’re eating the pets!”

To bring him back to the topic, moderator Mike Muir asked, “How would you deport 11 million immigrants?”

This is a question that Trump did not have an answer for.

FOREIGN POLICY: ADDRESSING THE NATIONS OF ISRAEL, GAZA AND UKRAINE

Harris finally referred to Hamas as a terrorist organization and condemned the slaughter of 1,200 Israelis while affirming Israel’s unique right to defend itself. While she appears to support Israel, she is not as supportive as the former president. She criticized Israel’s tactics, stating, “How [Israel] does so matters. Far too many Palestinians are being killed, and this war must end. A ceasefire deal and the hostages out. An equal ability to defend their people.” 

The Harris campaign in the last few months has reiterated its goal for a two-state solution to bring peace in the Middle East.

The former president had a different perspective on Harris’s treatment of Israel. “She hates Israel. She wouldn’t be there when Benjamin Netanyahu spoke; she went to a sorority party.” 

Trump’s indictment of Harris’ supposed vindictive attitude toward Israel and attempted to highlight the perceived incompetence of the Biden/Harris administration by jesting, “She probably hates Arabs too because they are all going to be killed. I hope I’m wrong, but if she’s elected, in two years, Israel won’t exist.” 

Trump noted that the entire conflict in Israel is rooted in the Biden administration lifting Iranian sanctions, allowing them to accumulate $300 billion from a previously impoverished position. The conservative think-tank, the Heritage Foundation, estimates that unfrozen Iranian assets range closer to $100 billion dollars.

The conversation pivoted to another conflict abroad: Ukraine.

“I want the war to stop,” Trump answered when asked whether he wanted Ukraine to win. It appeared that Trump argued from a perspective of pacifism and American neutrality. He pointed out that Putin would have been much happier with a Trump presidency because he would be at his desk in Moscow with 300,000 fewer dead men.

“They sent Harris to be an emissary, and three days later, they were at war … If I were president, the war would have never started,” Trump said.

Trump’s comments leave many, including his supporters, wondering what could have been, for better or for worse.

Harris called out Trump’s neutrality as perfidious, stating, “As President, Trump would just give [Ukraine] up.” She accused the former president of sending love letters to Kim Jong-un and calling the invasion of Ukraine brilliant. It should be noted that Trump called Putin’s invasion brilliant because Putin invaded, knowing Biden would not protect Ukraine. 

Harris reframed Ukraine as an American success story, saying, “Ukraine stands as an independent country because of the weapons we have provided. If you were president, Putin would be sitting in Kyiv.”

CLOSING COMMENTS

Fundamentally, the debate devolved into one word: vision. Whose vision, though, is best for the country?

Former President Trump painted a picture of a tragic dystopia led by the vice president, which would only get worse.

“She said she is going to do this and do that, but why hasn’t she done it? They have had three and a half years to fix the borders. She should go down to the White House and get it done now. We can’t sacrifice our country for the sake of bad vision. We are a failing nation, a nation in decline, and we are being laughed at. We are at war in the Middle East; we are going to be at war in World War III.”

Vice President Harris, on the other hand, appealed for America to look toward the future.

“I think you’ve heard tonight two very different visions for our country. One that is focused on the future and the other that is focused on the past,” Harris said. “We are not going back. We are so much more connected compared to what separates us. I believe in what we can do together. Sustaining America’s standing in the world, respecting our military, respecting our rights and freedoms, and allowing women the decisions to their body.”

CONCLUSION

Regardless of who won the debate, what occurred at the U.S. Constitution Center will be remembered for jokes about Biden secretly hating Kamala, eating dogs, and whatever on earth an “opportunity economy” is supposed to mean. While this may be the case, the debate offers an excellent opportunity to reflect on our own imperfections. It is easy to pick out the flaws of either candidate, but we must remember that God uses imperfect people to do great things.

Beyond the talking points and jabs, both Harris and Trump introduced issues that will radically affect what it means to be a Christian today. Whether one believes that we best serve our brothers and sisters by limiting access to abortion or by enforcing more accepting immigration policies, as Biolans, it is our duty to stay educated and participate in electing leaders who advance the Kingdom of God.