Battle of the Brain Farts

The debate had little to do with age, and everything to do with bluster

Which do you prefer? Meaningless bull shit or lost in thought? (Ruperto Miller)

Above the fold:

I spent eight days poring through Trump’s responses in the Presidential debate to answer the question, how difficult would it be for anyone to win that debate in the public perception? During that time, I realized:

1. If Trump used Biden’s speaking style, he would have looked even worse than Biden, with an inordinate number of cognitive collapses, and even more mangled, undecipherable phrases (14, or in 20 percent of the 80 claims he made.) Even more astounding, Trump forgot to discuss the two most important issues of his campaign — immigration and Biden’s fitness — when he delivered his closing statement. As a former debater, I consider that a major mental lapse.
2. Trump’s self-assurance masked a substandard performance, as is typical of someone so well practiced at prevarication. When he stumbled cognitively, he barged through it until he could collect his thoughts. This is in stark contrast to the more contemplative Biden, who was acutely aware of his mistakes and who would pause to collect his thoughts.
3. Trump ignored almost every question, changing the topic to his talking points (Biden screwed the economy, Biden screwed the country, immigration) regardless of their relevance to the question. Even when Biden challenged his facts, or Tapper and Bash asked him to stay on point (sometimes more than once), he continued to repeat the same claims and providing no additional support for them. I suspect he felt confident to do that because the press ignores all but his most egregious gaffes (Hannibal Lecter and the shark/electricity dilemma).
4. Biden faced an impossible task. Trump’s strategy was to bury Biden with a combination of sucker punches: buried fallacies, switching the subject, inaccuracies, slurs on Biden’s character, lies, and shifting the debate back to his issues, and not those chosen by the moderators. (I documented these sucker punches in this lengthy, claim-by-claim analysis of Trump’s responses. )
5. Trump’s strategy left Biden with an on-the-fly decision every time Trump spoke. How much to rebut, how much to ignore, and how much to focus on his own position, which Trump would simultaneously mock and ignore no matter what choice he made.
6. Despite the appearance of a strong start, Trump actually got weaker and more confused as the debate progressed, stumbling the most when he strayed from his list of go-to arguments. (See, for example, his bizarre segue from immigration to Evan Gershkovich.) Biden, by contrast, grew stronger, doing serious damage to Trump’s positions, if not his arguments. (Former federal prosecutor James Zirin provides a breakdown of Biden’s comeback.)
7. If we scored the debate by points on rounds, Biden won. For all of Trump’s fury, his blows were light and never knocked Biden out. When Biden threw serious punches, Trump didn’t fight back, he danced away.

Perception determines the outcome of debates, and not reality, and even the liberal media is focusing on the disaster narrative while downplaying the serious questions the debate raised about Trump’s mental acuity. Tragically, members of the Democratic party played into that narrative rather than uniting behind Biden as Republicans have Trump. This only reinforces the disaster narrative in public perception. Instead they should take a lesson from how the Republican front bolstered Trump’s support and donations from Republican voters.

Trump forgot to discuss the two most important issues of his campaign — immigration and Biden’s fitness — when he delivered his closing statement. How is that not a major mental lapse?

Biden faced an impossible task. Trump’s strategy was to bury Biden with a combination of sucker punches: buried fallacies, switching the subject, inaccuracies, slurs on Biden’s character, lies, and shifting the debate back to his issues, and not those chosen by the moderators.

As a former debater and debate coach, I can’t picture any replacement for Biden who would have fared better, and intend for this analysis to demonstrate the difficult challenge Trump posed.

After a week of pouring through the transcript, I can see only one strategy whoever faces Trump will face should there be a second debate:

• Ignore every thing Trump says. Don’t even listen.
• Answer questions on Trump’s policies with this: “Despite what he may say, Trump’s record shows…”
• Punctuate by saying, every time, “my staff is working non-stop through the night to provide you links to prove I’m right at (www.choosethename.com). (Personally, I would make it www.trumpisfullofshit.com, but I’m not planning to lead America.)
• Conclude with: “This is my vision of America…”

Below the fold:

I’ve poured through the minutia of the Biden/Trump debate, and I can only conclude that Biden wouldn’t have won that debate in the eyes of the public, even if he hadn’t stumbled early on. Trump sabotaged the debate with a combination of non-stop lies, non sequiturs, character assassinations, and bullshit that was rock hard after baking it in the Mar-A-Lago sun.

Unfortunately for Biden, many of his allies are debating whether to replace him, even though they would have performed no better. Republicans, at least, back their candidate even though his a 34 times convicted criminal who has spoken the truth only when he says, “My name’s Donald Trump.” Democrats freak out and dither among themselves when the wind changes.

I’ve taken part in, judged, and coached more debates than I can remember, and I needed more than a week of reviewing this transcript to conceive the plan I’ve suggested to prevail against Trump’s unfettered and uncivil attacks. But I don’t have the President’s ear. I have yours. So following is my attempt to show the impossible task Biden faced in that debate.

It’s easy to say for casual observers to conclude Biden failed to meet the challenge of that debate, but I’d hate to be the person on stage facing Trump. I’m not sure I’d have fared better. When confronted with a shotgun attack of bullying and bullshit — and that’s what Trump’s debate presentation was — our brains often freeze.

Unfortunately for Biden, many of his allies are debating whether to replace him, even though they would have performed no better. Republicans, at least, back their candidate even though his a 34 times convicted criminal who has spoken the truth only when he says, “My name’s Donald Trump.”

Now imagine you’re the President of the United States, a President caught in the middle of a war between terrorists who launched an attack more horrific than Al Qaeda’s assault on the World Trade Center and a country determined to eradicate a civilian population in their response. A Russian invasion threatens the existence of an ally, but Republicans want to hold back funding over border policies upon which they demand, but refuse to act. You’re on call 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days a year. And, as leader of the free world, you’re used to being treated with deference and respect. Then you face a smirking bully, blaming you for the problems the problems he started.

Imagine your son is about to go to prison and you can’t intervene to help him, even though you’re the President. Not only that, a jury convicted your opponent of 34 felonies, is under indictment for more, and was judged liable for fraud, sexual assault, and defamation of character. Then imagine the first words you encounter in a debate are: “You’re a criminal, your family is criminal, and you all deserve to go to jail. I made the country great you. You turned it to shit. And nobody gave me credit for your accomplishments, credit I deserve. You made it worse, and the good things that happened were an accident. You were a disaster.”

Now you’ve got ten seconds to respond. Where do you start?

This wasn’t a debate, this was a full frontal assault. It was like throwing the Champion of the Nice Guy League into the ring with the pit bull who won World’s Heavyweight Championship of Dogfighting. Worse, his handlers let him off the leash.

Imagine your son is about to go to prison and you can’t intervene to help him, even though you’re the President. Not only that, a jury convicted your opponent of 34 felonies, is under indictment for more, and was judged liable for fraud, sexual assault, and defamation of character. Then imagine the first words you encounter in a debate are: “You’re a criminal, your family is criminal, and you all deserve to go to jail.”

It’s easy to think Biden lost it. And he did lose. His focus. But he didn’t lose the debate.

Every one, even the best of us, has a bad day, and sometimes it’s in public. When my son was ten, my wife and I took him to see Roger Clemens pitch against the Tigers. They shelled him for six runs early in the game, and he left the mound. Did Boston panic and replace him with a different, untried pitcher? If they had, it would have been a bigger mistake than leaving Bill Buckner to play first base in the final inning of the 1986 World Series.

Or if the Patriots had decided during the third quarter of the 2021 Super Bowl to replace Tom Brady with a younger quarterback because they were trailing by 25 points.

I analyzed Trump’s claims line by line, just to see how easy it would be to match wits with him. And I confirmed my suspicions that the task would be difficult for a seasoned debater who competed in a tournament every week. Except in this debate, the rules deny them time to sit at their desk and prepare their rebuttals, requiring them instead to stand for ninety minutes and respond to their opponent’s claims in an instant.

I focused on Trump’s statements, not Biden’s. Who won on the issues is not the question here. It’s how Trump handled the issues raised.

This is a sample spreadsheet of a debate (It would be much more higher college levels). Note, the first column is empty because teams usually attach a permanent copy of their first affirmative arguments with a paper clip.

Below is the flowchart that would have been required to respond to Trump. (It wouldn’t have fit on the 11 x 14 art pads we used in college.) I shaded the irrelevant arguments (he makes at least one attempt to address the question) in yellow, and non-responsive answers (he doesn’t even bother to answer the question) in pink.

By the time I’d finished I found an astonishing record of 5 errors in fact or logic to every claim Trump made, one lie for every claim, and that he lost his train of thought completely in 20 percent of his assertions. But for Biden to respond, he’d most likely have been accused by Trump of nitpicking.

Scorecard of Trump’s debate

Let’s look at the record based on CNN’s transcript of the 2024 Presidential Debate

Notes: When I discuss logical fallacies, readers should know many of them go by different names and different scholars describe many of them differently.

Others might quibble with my interpretations. For instance, I frequently describe a claim as both a red herring and irrelevant, which are quite similar. But I try to separate the two. For instance, on the question, “How would you expand health care coverage to all Americans,” I would consider the claim that “Biden rolled back Veteran health benefits” to be a red herring, but not necessarily irrelevant. However, I’d consider the claim “Biden’s destroyed our military,” as both.

Similarly, I would consider a claim, “Biden’s tax plan will bankrupt you,” to be hyperbole. But the claim, “Biden’s tax plan will bankrupt you by raising your taxes three to four times what they are now” would be both hyperbole and a gross exaggeration. As I’m using the terms, hyperbole is a rhetorical device used to make the facts sound worse than they may be. Gross exaggeration is a matter of the facts themselves.

However, questioning the exact name and interpretation of a fallacy shouldn’t change the fact that Trump’s reasoning was flawed.

Finally, I debated whether to use the word “false” or “lie” to describe misstatements of fact. I finally decided that where Trump continues to make publicly debunked claims, lie describes the claim better.

By the time I’d finished I found an astonishing record of 5 errors in fact or logic to every claim Trump made, one lie for every claim, and that he lost his train of thought completely in 20 percent of his assertions.

Finally, I originally published this article on Substack, and the breakdown links will lead you to Substack posts. They are still available free of charge.

Round One: The economy

Question: “What do you say to voters who feel they are worse off under your presidency than they were under President Trump?”

Summary: Trump sprays a lot of words to make three points.

1. His economy was the best ever, but for Covid, for which nobody gives him credit.
2. Joe Biden only created jobs for immigrants, the rest of the jobs bounced back from COVID.
3. Inflation is killing America.

Scorecard: Here’s the breakdown so far. Six logical fallacies, 1 debatable claim, 4 gross exaggerations, 5 lies, 1 brain fart, and 16 facts to the contrary (i.e., corrections to his accounts of events). And that’s in the first three minutes of the debate.

Notice how he never speaks about any of his policies or his vision of the future. This will be a consistent trend throughout the debate. While Biden’s vision is also distinctly lacking, he at least discussed policies — restore jobs to manufacturing, lower the cost of housing with new building, and capping rents.

How would you respond to all of this in two minutes? Do you ignore him and present your case after a blistering barrage of bullshit like that? Do you abandon your presentation and respond to his bullshit? Can you respond to all of that in two minutes? Do you somehow do both?

Do you finally understand how difficult a challenge Biden faced? And the challenge only gets greater.

Sidebar: Notice how Trump never speaks about any of his policies or his vision of the future. This will be a consistent trend throughout the debate. While Biden’s vision is also distinctly lacking, he at least discussed policies — restore jobs to manufacturing, lower the cost of housing with new building, and capping rents.

Round 1 transcript and analysis

Round 2: Tariffs

Question: You want to impose a 10 percent tariff on all goods coming into the U.S. How will you ensure that that doesn’t drive prices even higher?

Summary: Trump sprays a lot of words to make three points.

1. Tariffs won’t raise taxes.
2. I gave the largest tax and regulatory rollbacks in history.
3. Biden caused inflation.
4. I was getting us out of Afghanistan.

We’re not counting his last argument as irrelevant since he indicates he’s rebutting (untruthfully) an earlier Biden comment.

Scorecard: Better than his opening speech with only 5 logical fallacies, 2 debatable claims, 3 gross exaggerations, 3 irrelevant arguments, 3 unwarranted assumptions, 2 lies, 1 brain fart, and 4 facts to the contrary . He also changes the subject in every other paragraph.

If Trump was a boxer, his style would be to punch his opponent in the fact then leap to the other end of the ring before his opponent can swing back.

Round 2 transcript and analysis

Round 3: National Debt

Question: With the U.S. facing trillion-dollar deficits and record debt, why should top earners and corporations pay even less in taxes than they do now?

Summary: Trump throws a lot of arguments but says little about tax cuts. Most of his arguments are irrelevant.

1. His economy was the best ever, but for Covid, for which nobody gives him credit. (Same as Round 1)
2. America is no longer respected
3. COVID killed more people under Biden than me
4. American is a third world nation thanks to Biden
5. Immigration

Scorecard: Three logical fallacies, 1 contradiction, 1 shifted position, 2 debatable claims, 3 gross exaggerations, 5 irrelevant arguments, 2 unwarranted assumptions, 1 vague (in fact, meaningless) assertion, 8 lies, 1 brain fart, and 10 facts to the contrary. Notice that he changes the subject from the issue in question, national debt, to something else five times in the course of two minutes.

Round 3 transcript and analysis

The Biden Meltdown

BIDEN: He had the largest national debt of any president four-year period, number one. Number two, he got $2 trillion tax cut, benefited the very wealthy. For example, we have a thousand trillionaires in America — I mean, billionaires in America. And what’s happening? They’re in a situation where they, in fact, pay 8.2 percent in taxes. If they just paid 24 percent or 25 percent, either one of those numbers, they’d raised $500 million — billion dollars, I should say, in a 10-year period.

We’d be able to right — wipe out his debt.…Look, if — we finally beat Medicare.

• This is the one of the few times I will comment on Biden. What happened is Biden realizes he spoke incorrectly, confusing millions, billions, and trillions, even though he’s correct in saying the tax increases would help wipe out the debt, just as they did during Clinton’s term. He’s already confused his numbers earlier when he understated the number of jobs recovered by a factor of a thousand (he meant to say 15 million jobs). But his awareness of his repeated stumbles on numbers (which Trump doesn’t even bother with, he just grabs the largest number available) most likely interrupted his entire chain of thought. It happened to me more than once in debates with far lower stakes.
• Sadly, this is the moment for which America will judge him despite all of Trump’s mental breakdowns, such as wanting to have dinner with that nice guy Hannibal Lecter, and speculating on whether it’s better to die by shark or electrocution, and then blaming Biden for the fart.

Round 3a: Rebuttal

Summary: Trump ignores Biden’s real argument about the cost of his tax cuts and creates a red herring from what was clearly a misspoken phrase.

1. Biden is destroying our social safety net
2. America is no longer respected

This isn’t debating, it’s just piling onto an opponent when they stumble.

Scorecard: Six logical fallacies, 1 contradiction, 1 gross exaggeration, 5 irrelevant arguments, 1 vague assertion, 4 lies, and 5 facts to the contrary.

Round 3a transcript and analysis

Round 4: Mifepristone and Misoprostol

Question: As president, would you block abortion medication?

Summary: Trump answers the question “will you block abortion medication” with “no.” He then goes on a tear of tangents that have nothing to do with the question.

1. Everybody wanted to repeal Roe and return the question to the states.
2. Don’t blame me, the Justices repealed Roe.
3. Legislative abortion decisions are the will of the people.
4. Follow your heart and get elected.
5. Biden and Democrats want to kill living babies.

Ludicrous when you realize what his words actually mean, which is likely why Trump avoided saying what he really meant.

Scorecard: Seven logical fallacies, 1 gross exaggeration, 3 irrelevant arguments, 1 vague assertion, 2 lies, 1 brain fart, and 5 facts to the contrary.

Round 4 transcript and analysis

Round 4a: Rebuttal

Summary: Trump makes three claims, all of them non-responsive to Biden’s rebuttal that Trump lied when he claimed everybody wanted abortion to return to the states, and that leaving abortion decisions to the states would create confusion.

1. Migrants are raping and murdering young women.
2. I returned abortion to the states.
3. Everyone wants abortion returned to the states.

Scorecard: Non-responsive, 3 repeated claims, 7 logical fallacies, 1 gross exaggeration, 1 irrelevant argument, 1 vague assertion, 3 lies, 1 brain fart, and 5 facts to the contrary. And he spends ninety percent of his answer off-topic.

Round 4a transcript and analysis

Round 4b: Abortion restrictions rebuttal

Question: Do you support any legal limits on how late a woman should be able to terminate a pregnancy?

Summary: Rather than answering the question about what limits on abortion he would allow, Trump simply repeats different spin on a red herring we’ve heard before

1. Roe granted doctors unlimited power.

Scorecard: Non-responsive, 1 repeated claim, 2 logical fallacies, 2 contradictions, 1 gross exaggeration, 1 lie, 1 brain fart, and 2 facts to the contrary.

For the entire round, we have non-responsive answers on both rebuttals, 16 logical fallacies, 4 repeated claims, 21 logical fallacies, 3 contradictions (including a contradiction of a contradiction), 3 gross exaggerations, 3 brain farts, 9 lies, and 12 facts to the contrary.

Round 4b transcript and Analysis

Round 5: Immigration

Question: Why should voters trust you to solve the immigration crisis?

Summary: Once you get past a major brain fart, Trump makes three claims.

1. We had the safest borders in the world before Biden opened them to everyone.
2. Biden didn’t need legislation to fix immigration.
3. Migrants are dying by the thousands

Scorecard: Non-responsive, one repeated claim, six logical fallacies, one gross exaggeration, three lies, a major league brain fart, and eight facts to the contrary. Unfortunately, things go downhill.

Round 5 transcript and analysis

Round 5a. Deportation

Question to Trump: Will you deport every undocumented immigrant in America, including those who have jobs, including those whose spouses are citizens, and including those who have lived here for decades? And if so, how will you do it?

Summary: This entire round of answers is non-responsive. The question was, “Does that mean that you will deport every undocumented immigrant in America, including those who have jobs, including those whose spouses are citizens, and including those who have lived here for decades? And if so, how will you do it?” He answers none of the elements of the question. What he says is:

1. We killed two bad guys. Biden killed hundreds of thousands.
2. Immigrants murder young girls.
3. Biden’s open borders will destroy our country.
4. Immigrants live in luxury hotels while our veterans are homeless.
5. Biden has overturned all my policies, even those passed by Congress.

Scorecard: Five Non-responsive claims, one repeated claim, 11 logical fallacies, one debatable claim, three gross exaggerations, one vague unverified statements, four irrelevant arguments, six lies, one brain fart, and 12 facts to the contrary.

Round 5a transcript and analysis

Round 5b: Rebuttal — Who cared more for veterans

Summary:

1. I never said soldiers were suckers.
2. Literally incomprehensible stuff.

Scorecard: Non-responsive, two logical fallacies, one debatable claim, one gross exaggeration, one lie, four brain farts, and four facts to the contrary.

Round 5b transcript and analysis

Round 6: Russia’s War on the Ukraine

Question: Russian President Vladimir Putin says he’ll only end this war if Russia keeps the Ukrainian territory it has already claimed and Ukraine abandons its bid to join NATO. Are Putin’s terms acceptable to you?

Summary: Basically, Trump makes one argument and repeats multiple variations: Biden was weak and I am strong. But we can still break this down.

1. Veterans and soldiers hate Biden
2. Putin didn’t respect Biden
3. The Afghanistan withdrawal emboldened Putin
4. Biden caused the Israel/Hamas conflict
5. The Ukraine war was a Biden/Zelinski con game
6. I’ll solve before I’m President
7. Biden’s a sucker for not getting the allies to pay more.

Scorecard: Two non-responsive claims, 1 repeated claim, 11 logical fallacies, 2 debatable claims, 2 gross exaggerations, 4 irrelevant arguments, 4 lies, 1 contradiction, and 15 facts to the contrary.

Round 6 transcript and analysis

Round 7: The Israel/Hamas conflict

Question: What additional leverage will you use to get Hamas and Israel to end the war?

Summary: Trump wants to play the strong man card claiming Israel should wipe Hamas out. Other than that he doesn’t even try to address the questions posed.

1. Israel wants the conflict
2. Bidens supports the Palestinians
3. Europe kills us on trade, but my tariffs stopped them
4. I made NATO members pay. Biden doesn’t.

Scorecard: Even though Trump made only four claims, all four were non-responsive. He also made 2 repeated claims, 11 logical fallacies, 2 gross exaggerations, 2 irrelevant arguments, and with 6 facts to the contrary.

Round 7 transcript and analysis

Round 8: Democracy

Question: (To Trump) What do you say to voters who believe that you violated that oath through your actions and inaction on January 6th and worry that you’ll do it again?

Summary: In this round, Trump smears and scapegoats other players while refusing to answer the question.

1. Few people hold me responsible.
2. I gave you the best America ever. Biden ruined it.
3. Biden is out to get me.
4. I told the protestors to be peaceful.
5. I offered troops to Pelosi and the D.C. Mayor.
6. There were also riots in Portland and Seattle.
7. The Jan. 6 committee destroyed evidence.

Scorecard: Five Non-responsive claims, 5 repeated claim, 14 logical fallacies, 2 gross exaggerations, 1 irrelevant argument, 8 lies, and 16 facts to the contrary.

Round 8 transcript and analysis

Round 8a: Trump convictions

Question: (To Trump) Can you clarify exactly what it means about you feeling you have every right to go after your political opponents?

Summary: Trump takes a circuitous path to bury his position, which is his right to retaliate against Biden

1. My retribution is success
2. The Biden family are the criminals
3. I did nothing wrong
4. My conviction was a plot by Biden and the Justice Department
5. My poll numbers went up after my conviction

Scorecard: One non-responsive claim, one repeated claim, six logical fallacies, 2 contradictions, 1 debatable claim, 1 irrelevant argument, 4 lies, one brain fart, and 8 facts to the contrary.

Round 8a transcript andanalysis

Round 8b: MAGA Republicans

Question: (To Trump) Do you believe that the tens of millions of Americans who are likely to vote for President Trump will be voting against American democracy?

Summary:

1. The Charlottesville story is made up.
2. Biden is lying about his motivation to run.

Scorecard: Two non-responsive claims, 4 logical fallacies, 1 debatable claim,1 lie, and 4 facts to the contrary.

Round 8b transcript and analysis

Round 9: Income disparity

Question: (To Biden) What do you say to black voters who are disappointed that you haven’t made more progress?

Summary: Trump pulls both responses from his very narrow playbook

1. Biden caused inflation.
2. Biden opened borders to immigrants who steal black jobs.

Scorecard: Two non-responsive claims, 2 repeated claims, 4 logical fallacies, 1 gross exaggeration, 1 vague unverified statements, 2 lies, and 5 facts to the contrary.

Round 9 transcript and analysis

Round 10: Climate Change

Question: (To Trump) You’ve vowed to end your opponent’s climate initiatives. But, will you take any action as President to slow the climate crisis?

Summary: These claims are difficult to categorize. Technically, he only made two claims about the topic:

1. We had the best air and water ever
2. The Paris accord would cost the US $1 trillion and China and Russia nothing

Then he went on a long ramble about

1. Police
2. Biden prejudice against blacks
3. His own successful policies
4. Immigrants (surprise, surprise)
5. Insulin, and
6. More immigrants

Scorecard: Three non-responsive claims, 2 repeated claims, 6 logical fallacies, 1 debatable claim, 2 irrelevant arguments, 9 lies, and 12 facts to the contrary.

Round 10 transcript and analysis

Round 11: Social Security

Question: Will you name tonight one specific step that you’re willing to take to keep Social Security solvent?

Summary:

1. Biden is something bad (never specified)
2. They lied about me
3. Immigrants are claiming Social Security
4. Immigrants are putting our veterans on the streets

Scorecard: Four non-responsive claims, 4 repeated claims, 6 logical fallacies, 1 gross exaggeration, 4 vague unverified statements, 4 irrelevant arguments, lies, one brain fart, and 1 new fact to the contrary. (The other facts to the contrary have been made elsewhere).

Round 11 transcript and analysis

Round 12: Child care

Question: What would you do to make childcare more affordable?

Summary: Trump continues to veer off-topic with a slew of claims, none of them addressing the issue posed. He never addresses the issue of child welfare.

1. Biden doesn’t fire anybody
2. He’s the worst President ever
3. Polling says I’m the best, he’s the worst.
4. He wants to raise your taxes.

Scorecard: 4 non-responsive claims, 4 repeated claims, 5 logical fallacies, 1 debatable claim, 1 gross exaggeration, 4 irrelevant arguments, 4 lies, and 4 facts to the contrary.

Round 12 transcript and analysis

Round 13: Opioid Crisis

Question: What will you do to help Americans right now in the throes of addiction, who are struggling to get the treatment they need?

Summary: On the question of how Trump would help with opioid addiction, one of his 2016 campaign issues, Trump claimed

1. Biden created a trade deficit with China.
2. Biden kept my tariffs
3. I secured the border better than Biden
4. Evan Gershkovich

Scorecard: Four non-responsive claims, 1 repeated claim, 4 logical fallacies, 3 gross exaggerations, 4 irrelevant arguments, 9 lies, 1 brain fart, and 12 facts to the contrary.

Round 13 transcript and analysis

Round 14: Voter Perception

Question: (To Biden) How do you address concerns about your capability to handle the toughest job in the world well into your 80s?

Summary: Trump dodges the question consistently, but the moderator won’t let him finish until he at least addresses the question.

1. I passed tests and I’m a great golfer
2. Jan. 6 had nothing to do with me
3. I wouldn’t run if Biden weren’t so bad
4. Russia invaded Ukraine because of Biden
5. I will accept free and fair elections

Scorecard: 5 Non-responsive claims, 3 repeated claims, 10 logical fallacies, 2 gross exaggeration, 10 lies, 1 brain fart, and 10 facts to the contrary.

Round 14 transcript and analysis

Trump closing statement

Summary: Trump either complains, or introduces totally new issues in his closing moments.

1. The military hates Biden.
2. I would never have let the Hamas attacks happen.
3. I would never have let Russia invade Ukraine.
4. We have riots everywhere, worse than Charlottesville,
5. I cut taxes and regulations, but he’s cutting my tax and regulation cuts.
6. The Right to Try Act was a wonderful thing.
7. I did wonderful things for veterans (whom he confuses with the military)

A closing statement should do two things. 1) Summarize your strongest claims, and 2) (Even more important) Share your vision for the future and what you intend to accomplish. His vision and plans for the future have never been clear in the debate, other than “I’ll do it better than him.” (Although, if we were to believe his disparagements of Biden, Bullwinkle the Moose would do a better job.) His close statement lacks them entirely.

That being said, even statements that summarize his claims make them any more compelling.

But here’s the thing. Trump says the word “immigration” once, but never discusses immigration in his close, even though it’s the single most important issue of his campaign. Nor does he mention Biden’s age or fitness for office.,

These two issues are the cornerstones of his campaign but he forgets them entirely. That is a major mental lapse.

Closing statement transcript and analysis

Post debate analysis:

As I mentioned earlier, so many critics have discussed Biden’s poor performance at the Presidential debate, but no one has really discussed whether anyone younger would have fared better. As someone who debated four years in high school and another four in college (with a number trophies to show for it), and coached debaters as well, and who has also judged hundreds of college and high school debates, I can honestly say any politician, no matter how savvy, would have struggled with popular perception in this debate.

Mainly because it wasn’t a debate. There was Joe Biden trying to debate, and Donald Trump.

In high school, where judges often consisted of history teachers, coaches and PE teachers, and even members of the local Junior League, we dreaded facing guys like Trump because they were slippery, dishonest, and so full of false confidence judges were persuaded by false claims, misdirection, and forcefulness.

I can honestly tell you that most debate coaches, especially at the college level, would have given the win to Biden, especially with Trump abandoning his two most important issues during his closing statement, although with extremely low scores for his speaking ability. But that’s how it goes. The best speaker doesn’t always win, the best debater does.

I’m trying to phrase this in a way that will be the least self-serving. My partner and I beat the reigning national champions the only time we had the honor of facing them. They were slick, polished speakers. And they had one of the best coaches I’ve ever known. Were we a better team than them? In that round, we were. The next time they would have been better prepared.

In high school, however, where judges often consisted of history teachers, coaches and PE teachers, and even members of the local Junior League, we dreaded facing guys like Trump because they were slippery, dishonest, and so full of false confidence judges were persuaded by lies, misdirection, and forcefulness.

I can only compare it to a test my department required of my college students. Since I’m retired, I can confess I couldn’t see the value of a written test after they’d passed the difficult papers I assigned. So I designed a test with easy questions, and even left the room, making it clear I wouldn’t know if they discussed the answers. And yet most of them failed. Class after class, semester after semester.

I couldn’t understand why until I listened outside the door. Just once. And I witnessed the worst student in the class convincing students far smarter than him he was right. I asked a couple afterward why they listened to him, and they said, “We weren’t sure about the some of the answers. But he was so sure, we figured he must be right.”

And that’s the problem with debaters like Trump. It’s easy to watch the debate and say, “How could Joe not knock him down to size? He must be losing it?” But Joe made the mistake most politicians would make. He tried to respond to Trump’s bullshit instead of articulating his message. And that’s an easy mistake to make when a bully is lying non stop, switching subjects, and throwing out a dozen unrelated thoughts every two minutes — thoughts that often have nothing to do with the issue under consideration — and accusing you of being the worst criminal in the world at the same time.

Then there’s the inevitable hubris of decent politicians, the assumption that nobody could find a clown like Trump credible.

I witnessed the worst student in my class convince students far smarter than him he was right. I asked a couple afterward why they listened to him, and they said, “We weren’t sure about the some of the answers. But he was so sure, we figured he must be right.” And that’s the problem with debaters like Trump.

Former Texas Governor Ann Richards made the same mistake with George Bush in their debate. I told my wife she lost in the voter’s mind, which my wife couldn’t believe. But she made a strategic mistake. She actually jousted with his often tenuous claims. The problem was, Bush stuck to a message, better than Trump did Thursday night. He hammered the same three points over and over. It didn’t matter that they were basically false.

Hillary Clinton made that mistake with Trump and it cost her the election.

Hopefully Biden now recognizes clowns have power. Hopefully, the Democrats finally take him seriously, too. And back their candidate, instead of abandoning him in a panic.

And find a vision for God’s sake. Something more than save democracy and inflation isn’t as bad as it feels. Perhaps a vision of a clean planet with clean air. Of an economy where corporations don’t make Americans fight with each other over culture and color as they scramble for table scraps. Of an America where you can love who you want and be who you want without someone trying the cancel you. Where immigrants can come to America and earn their citizenship legally. Preach that positive vision to counteract Trump’s nightmare vision of MAGA hell.

If you enjoyed this story, please buy me a coffee