I wrote this column from Greece on June 28, the morning after the first debate between Donald Trump and Joe Biden. Had I watched it live, it would’ve been 4-6AM Greek time, essentially messing up my sleep schedule – something I preferred to avoid now that I’ve gotten over my jetlag. Once I awakened, I made a point of ignoring all news headlines before watching the debate. I’m glad I did, because there was some disparity between the media’s general take on things and what I actually saw. Much to my surprise, the media almost universally panned Biden, clearly declaring Trump the winner.
I’m not talking about Newsmax, One America, or even Fox News (which has veered leftward compared to say, ten years ago). I mean the New York Times, whose columnists, many suffering from TDS (Trump Derangement Syndrome), bemoaned “God help us,” to indicate how awful they thought Biden performed, and how that will result in a Trump victory in November.

My answer to all those who thought Biden performed terribly is: “Does that surprise you? Have you really not paid attention to how significantly Biden’s cognitive skills have declined right before our eyes, year by year, month by month, and even week by week?” Only a scant few suffering from BDS (Biden Denial Syndrome) would purport that Biden won the debate.
Clearly, the candidate who most helped himself, by far, was Trump. I’d say his performance warranted a grade of B to B Plus, with Biden earning a D Plus to C Minus. Still, Biden didn’t do quite as badly as widely reported –but that’s how narratives go. When stories are popping up all over the place about how the Democrats must replace Biden on the ticket, it’s a tell-all of how poorly he fared.

In short, Biden looked very, very old. His eyes looked glazed, as if his mind and focus were somewhere else. In stark contrast, Trump looked alert, young, and energetic. Though Trump’s performance was not without flaws, his scowls and mocking facial expressions were fewer than expected.
Trump also helped himself by emerging unscathed from the two issues most likely to hamper him: his views on the 2020 election/January 6, and abortion. Many Americans who’ll vote for Trump this year don’t like it when he talks about a stolen election and calls the January 6 rioters patriotic. But Trump kept that to a minimum, and Biden simply didn’t have the stamina or the oratorical deftness to capitalize on it. Same with abortion; it seems Trump has found his sweet spot: keep repeating that it’s up to the states, and remind voters that’s how Ronald Reagan saw it too.

Beyond his struggles to articulate his thoughts, Biden was also transparent in revealing his playbook strategy of harping on the same few words, just as Al Gore had done in his 1996 vice presidential debate against Jack Kemp, calling the Republican ticket’s economic platform a “risky tax scheme” over and over again. In Biden’s case, he made Gore seem like a sincere, unrehearsed speaker by comparison with his overuse of the term “the idea” about almost everything Trump said. “The idea that he… the idea that you…”

What disappointed me most as an American who’s made a career of studying the presidents is the high level of personal vitriol between the two men. In 2020, they didn’t shake hands, presumably as part of social distancing norms then in place, but this time around they couldn’t use the pandemic as an excuse; they didn’t shake hands simply because they can’t stand each other, and that was a very sad moment for the country.

Ironically, the disturbingly ample amount of toxicity in the room prompted some rules that should serve well for future debates: most notably, the candidates’ microphones were muted once they finished answering each question or rebutting, thus preventing them from interrupting one another. Also, there was no studio audience to deprive the event of its dignity and instead reduce it to a live sporting event replete with cheers and catcalls. Finally, much credit should go to CNN and its two moderators, Jake Tapper and Dana Bash, for their professional, evenhanded questions, and for not committing journalistic malpractice by transforming from facilitators to debaters (as past moderators have done – Chris Wallace and Martha Rattatz most readily coming to mind).

The debate is of historical importance as it is the first ever between two individuals who have both served as president of the United States. In that sense, the debate was effective insofar as each candidate had the opportunity to explain what he did as president, what his opponent did, and therefore why the former is the better choice now. Typically, challengers have the advantage in debates because they can attack the incumbent’s record, and by standing on the same stage rise to equal footing. Not this time: it’s a referendum on two presidencies, not one.

Assuming Biden and Trump indeed become their respective parties’ official nominees at this summer’s Democratic and Republican conventions, their second debate is scheduled for September 10. A lot can happen between now and then, and it’s not unimaginable that Trump can stumble and Biden can put on a better show. Nonetheless, one has to wonder whether Biden would’ve been better off ducking the debates altogether. In that case, Trump would’ve hammered Biden on the campaign trail, probably calling him “Chicken Joe,” but the fallout might’ve been less severe, just as Nixon might’ve been better off burning the tapes – citing national security reasons – instead of going the route he did.