The recent debate between former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris has sparked controversy among Republicans, with many claiming it was an unfair “3 versus 1” fight. The criticism stems from accusations that the moderators, David Muir and Linsey Davis of ABC News, were biased, frequently fact-checking Trump while being lenient with Harris. Republicans felt Trump faced not just Harris, but also the moderators, making it an uneven debate.
Claims of Bias and Selective Fact-Checking
Prominent Republicans, including Tom Fitton of Judicial Watch, were quick to criticise the moderators for what they viewed as unequal scrutiny. Fitton tweeted that Muir and Davis were “attacking” Trump rather than fact-checking fairly. A key point of contention was Harris’ claim that police officers had died during the January 6 Capitol riot—a statement that Republicans assert was incorrect. They also took issue with her bringing up the “both sides” comment from Charlottesville, which Trump supporters insist has been widely misinterpreted.
Former Trump press secretary Kayleigh McEnany echoed these concerns, arguing that Harris was allowed to reference debunked claims, such as Trump’s alleged support for a “bloodbath” if he loses the election, without being fact-checked. Republicans also pointed out that Harris was not pressed on several controversial aspects of her political career, including her stance on healthcare and her role in managing illegal immigration as the “border czar.”
Trump Supporters’ “3 on 1” Narrative
During the debate, a Trump campaign spokesperson texted a reporter, complaining about the “3 on 1” nature of the event. Supporters felt that the moderators interjected frequently when Trump spoke, challenging his statements on crime rates, immigration, and more, while allowing Harris to make claims without similar scrutiny. For example, when Trump linked rising crime rates to increased migration under Harris’ watch, Muir interrupted to state that FBI statistics show violent crime is decreasing. Trump retorted that the data excluded cities like Los Angeles and New York, where crime has reportedly surged.
Senator Eric Schmitt (R-Mo.) voiced frustration, tweeting, “ABC’s selective ‘Fact Checking’ is why no one believes biased ‘Fact Checking.’” Other conservatives, including Hogan Gidley, a former Trump White House spokesman, criticised the moderators for failing to challenge Harris on several key issues, leaving Trump to fact-check her claims himself.
Lack of Tough Questions for Harris
Republicans also accused the moderators of going easy on Harris, claiming she was not pressed on contentious issues like her role in overseeing immigration and her past policy flip-flops. Harris has previously supported policies like eliminating private health insurance and decriminalising illegal border crossings, but those topics were not central to the debate.
Many Trump allies felt that the moderators missed opportunities to hold Harris accountable for her record, particularly her handling of the border crisis, where illegal immigration has reached record highs under the Biden administration. This left some Republicans feeling that the debate was not a fair platform to scrutinise Harris’ performance in office.
Harris’ Strong Performance
Despite Republican frustrations, many Democrats and political analysts praised Harris for her strong and focused performance. Harris managed to avoid major gaffes and consistently positioned herself as the candidate of the future. Her direct appeals to the audience and attempts to rattle Trump by bringing up the size of his rallies and his legal troubles appeared to resonate with viewers. Analysts noted that Harris’ performance stood in contrast to previous debates involving President Biden, where his energy and sharpness were often called into question.
Several political commentators also pointed out that Harris effectively baited Trump into defensive positions throughout the night. Her remarks about Trump’s rallies and immigration policies put him on the back foot, forcing him to defend his record and engage in disputes with the moderators.
Claims of Bias and Selective Fact-Checking
Prominent Republicans, including Tom Fitton of Judicial Watch, were quick to criticise the moderators for what they viewed as unequal scrutiny. Fitton tweeted that Muir and Davis were “attacking” Trump rather than fact-checking fairly. A key point of contention was Harris’ claim that police officers had died during the January 6 Capitol riot—a statement that Republicans assert was incorrect. They also took issue with her bringing up the “both sides” comment from Charlottesville, which Trump supporters insist has been widely misinterpreted.
Former Trump press secretary Kayleigh McEnany echoed these concerns, arguing that Harris was allowed to reference debunked claims, such as Trump’s alleged support for a “bloodbath” if he loses the election, without being fact-checked. Republicans also pointed out that Harris was not pressed on several controversial aspects of her political career, including her stance on healthcare and her role in managing illegal immigration as the “border czar.”
Trump Supporters’ “3 on 1” Narrative
During the debate, a Trump campaign spokesperson texted a reporter, complaining about the “3 on 1” nature of the event. Supporters felt that the moderators interjected frequently when Trump spoke, challenging his statements on crime rates, immigration, and more, while allowing Harris to make claims without similar scrutiny. For example, when Trump linked rising crime rates to increased migration under Harris’ watch, Muir interrupted to state that FBI statistics show violent crime is decreasing. Trump retorted that the data excluded cities like Los Angeles and New York, where crime has reportedly surged.
Senator Eric Schmitt (R-Mo.) voiced frustration, tweeting, “ABC’s selective ‘Fact Checking’ is why no one believes biased ‘Fact Checking.’” Other conservatives, including Hogan Gidley, a former Trump White House spokesman, criticised the moderators for failing to challenge Harris on several key issues, leaving Trump to fact-check her claims himself.
Lack of Tough Questions for Harris
Republicans also accused the moderators of going easy on Harris, claiming she was not pressed on contentious issues like her role in overseeing immigration and her past policy flip-flops. Harris has previously supported policies like eliminating private health insurance and decriminalising illegal border crossings, but those topics were not central to the debate.
Many Trump allies felt that the moderators missed opportunities to hold Harris accountable for her record, particularly her handling of the border crisis, where illegal immigration has reached record highs under the Biden administration. This left some Republicans feeling that the debate was not a fair platform to scrutinise Harris’ performance in office.
Harris’ Strong Performance
Despite Republican frustrations, many Democrats and political analysts praised Harris for her strong and focused performance. Harris managed to avoid major gaffes and consistently positioned herself as the candidate of the future. Her direct appeals to the audience and attempts to rattle Trump by bringing up the size of his rallies and his legal troubles appeared to resonate with viewers. Analysts noted that Harris’ performance stood in contrast to previous debates involving President Biden, where his energy and sharpness were often called into question.
Several political commentators also pointed out that Harris effectively baited Trump into defensive positions throughout the night. Her remarks about Trump’s rallies and immigration policies put him on the back foot, forcing him to defend his record and engage in disputes with the moderators.