The US is experiencing what is arguably the most turbulent presidential debate of all time.
There are low blows between incumbent Donald Trump and Joe Biden.
There is little political substance for that.
The US elects a new president.
In the first
election
debate it was verbally heated.
It was a hodgepodge of
verbal blows
in a way that has never before been seen in this form.
The political substance of the speech duel between
Donald Trump
and
Joe Biden
?
Pretty bad.
Washington - Nobody, so the daily newspaper "Boston Globe" concluded, won the first of the three debates, neither
US President Donald Trump
nor the
Democrat Joe Biden
.
Only the loser is clear: the
United States
.
In its balance sheet, the New York Times spoke of a debate the country had never seen before - and a discussion that was difficult to bear for viewers.
In fact, the audience of millions had been able to watch a chaos event at prime time, which was marked by the ruthless brutality of the two politicians in their dealings with each other.
The president, lagging behind in the polls, relied on
interrupting
his opponent
permanently
.
He made fun of Biden's university grades, agitated against the Ukraine and China deals of Biden's son Hunter and blasphemed the problems of the Democrat in getting the party's “radical left wing” (Trump) behind him.
And then there were personal accusations like this: "There is nothing intelligent about you, Joe".
Donald Trump and the US election debate: Political substance is neglected
Biden, on the other hand, after eight years as Vice President under Barack Obama actually experienced statesmanship, was repeatedly disturbed by Trump's provocations.
Hissing at an incumbent president with "Would you shut up?" And "That clown" was something the country had never seen since the first debates between Richard Nixon and John F. Kennedy in 1960.
+
No room for politeness: personal attacks shaped the duel between Donald Trump and Joe Biden.
© SAUL LOEB and JIM WATSON / AFP
The leading US media then also complained
about one
thing: In the verbal battles with constant blows below the belt,
political substance was
neglected.
There were actually enough issues to deal with - from Trump's taxes, the Bidens health plan, climate protection and the corona pandemic to the question of how safe the postal vote is - and whether Trump would ultimately admit defeat.
Donald Trump drives "bulldozer style" against Joe Biden - who did the performance harm more?
In view of the constant interruptions, especially on the part of the president - a tactic he had already used in 2016 - it was often difficult for the audience
to clearly see
the
differences between the candidates on the issues
.
Also the reminders of the presenter Chris Wallace from the conservative broadcaster "Fox News" that Trump should stick to the rules of the game and not interrupt, did not work.
A commentator for the New York Times aptly spoke of a “bulldozer style” by the president, which Trump is risking alienating those independents who supported him four years ago.
The magazine "Atlantic" ruled that Trump's goal was apparently to undermine trust in the electoral process and democracy.
But Joe Biden didn't seem focused either.
In the last half hour in particular, the 77-year-old applicant occasionally looked for clear formulations to counter Trump.
So who has improved their chances of voting through this memorable debate?
A lightning poll by broadcaster
CBS
showed slight
advantages for Biden
.
Even prominent conservative commentators like Rich Lowry of The Review magazine said the president had failed in his ultimate goal: to bring Biden to a collapse.
At the same time, Trump avoided clarifying two important points.
On the one hand, he refused to expressly condemn white nationalist movements like the “Proud Boys” - and especially railed against the left-wing radical “Antifa” movement.
Then he refused to call the electoral process safe - and served the audience with conspiracy theories, although there is so far no evidence of widespread electoral fraud.
In the end, observers like an analyst for the “New York Times” were left with the frustrated conclusion: “What debates crap”.
List of rubric lists: © SAUL LOEB and JIM WATSON / AFP