Members of the Escondido Republican Women watch the debate from their headquarters in Escondido, California. Reuters

It seems that the Donald Trump-Kamala Harris televised presidential debate on Tuesday has been for Democrats what it was not in the Trump-Joe Biden television faceoff months ago. That debate forced Biden to step aside, and Vice President Harris who has stepped into the race has taken full control of the reins on Tuesday.

The New York Times, with its liberal credentials, and The Wall Street Journal, with its pro-business conservative stance, agreed that Harris got under Trump’s skin. But WSJ said that the ABC anchors were a great support to Harris, and that they let her off lightly while scrutinising Trump relentlessly.

The WSJ had however to concede that Harris scored over Trump, without making any of her policy stances clear. The apparent success of Harris and the flustered Trump in the debate does not guarantee that Harris will win the battle of the ballot on November 5. There is no doubt however that Harris has ever since she was made the Democrat presidential candidate restored the balance in the contest, and that she has even gained ground for the Democrats.

The debate showed that the aggressive Trump knows how to punch his way when he feels that he can corner a yielding opponent, which was indeed the case with Biden. But when faced with an aggressive opponent, who knows a thing or two about cornering the rival, then Trump does not stand the ground. He resorted to extreme retorts like the immigrants eating domestic pets in Ohio. It revealed his virulence on the immigration issue but it did not expose the real problems that immigration posed.

There were doubts before Tuesday whether Harris had it in her to defend herself and articulate policy. She leaves the issue undefined. Instead, she had adopted the offensive strategy, and she was left attacking Trump’s obviously weaker aspects. It was confidence and pugilistic strategy that won her the evening. This exposes the vulnerable Trump on many fronts. He had had an easy time through the months leading to the Republican nomination. He did not participate in the party primaries.

He was contemptuous of the tradition of primaries as he went on his aggressive spree. It is also the case with Harris that she did not face the Democrat primaries, and it is doubtful whether she should have survived the ordeal. She did not in 2020. Biden’s late decision to quite enabled her to reach the nomination podium without much ado.

The television debate in presidential elections which was first held in 1960 between Democrat John Kennedy and Republican Richard Nixon went the way of charismatic Kennedy. But in the polls, Kennedy scored past Nixon with a bare one per cent edge in the popular vote. And Nixon managed to win the 1968 and 1972 presidential polls against Democrats who were at war with themselves in the tumultuous late 1960s.

So, the photogenic image on the television screen does not win presidential elections. The challenge from Trump remains substantial because his voter base of disgruntled and frustrated poor whites and the Christian evangelicals stands quite strong, and the opinion polls show that Harris has sneaked past Trump by a few percentage points.

The battle between Trump and Harris shows that America remains a deeply divided country on political ideology, on the state of affairs in the economy, and on the issue of immigration. Trump is not an ideological conservative. In many ways, he does not believe in the traditional Republican values. That makes him a weak candidate. His rancorous populism does attract the crowds but it does not offer solutions to America’s problems. Harris too is not rooted ideologically though she is mouthing the liberal verities rather vaguely. It is a strange election in many ways.