by Kali Hernandez Fraire and Kayla Rogers
If the second presidential debate of 2024 proved anything, it is that the most effective governing body of the United States is firmly in the column of the left wing. And no, I do not mean the executive branch embodied by Vice President Harris. The governing body I am referring to is the media– that which information flows through to reach the people. The media governs by deciding what information is okay for the public to be exposed to and what information is dangerous.
Several claims given by President Trump– such as the cases of Haitian immigrants eating pets in Springfield, Ohio, the feeling of economic dread currently shared by the majority of Americans, and the fact that crime has substantially risen under the current administration, to name a few– are dangerous to the powers that be. Meanwhile, several of the Vice President’s claims– such as there being no US servicemen currently in warzones, the threats of a national ban on abortion under Trump, and an intertwining of the Trump campaign and the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025– were not fact-checked by the moderators despite being wildly untrue.
Here’s what some students have to say about the debate.
Anonymous
If you watched the reality TV show – I mean, the Presidential Debate featuring Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump two weeks ago, boy were you in for a treat. We witnessed a lot of banter between the two candidates, blame-shifting, and policies discussion when we were lucky.
Kamala Harris came out swinging, telling Trump he had been fired by 81 million people amid his false claims of a stolen 2020 election (one of her many slams). Still, she stumbled when asked about her true intentions to maintain fracking efforts. Trump, on the other hand, worked the defense, falling back hard on his claims of rampant illegal immigrant border crossings. At one point, he made the outwardly false claim that (legal Haitian) migrants were eating American pets in Springfield, Ohio, saying this was the fault of Harris as the “failed border czar.”
We saw a grand display of theatrical claims tossed across the stage between the two of them. I am not a theater girl, but I did enjoy this entertaining display of overly theatrical performative politics – as I am sure many others did, too.
This one-and-done debate is impossible to encapsulate in one column, so I encourage you to watch the debate yourself and read the proposed plans for each of the candidates’ presidencies. It is all our responsibility to educate ourselves, register to vote, and decide on more than the two hours we witnessed on September 10, 2024, how to cast our vote!
Lilia Saxon, Class of 2027
As someone who is ineligible to vote in the United States, yet whose life is quite literally dependent on it, elections are always a hard time. To be fair, this debate did give me and some of my peers a sense of hope above all. It helped me grasp the possibilities and options available to U.S. citizens. However, after watching the debate I was also left with frustration. Astonishingly, some people are still about their vote, while others are even questioning whether they should vote at all. If one thing is clear, it’s that despite being a democracy, the U.S. is systematically built for a two-party system. This alienates a third party from the two dominating parties and eliminates the third party’s chance of winning elections. Thus, voting for a third party would only increase the chances of Trump winning, and so would boycotting voting at all.
As I continued to have conversations with my non-citizens and citizen friends, it became apparent that, realistically, we are faced with two possibilities. Another xenophobic, misogynistic, racist, white extremist Trump presidency; or, on the other hand, Vice President Harris, who offers a chance to steer the country away from that path. While her presidency may not bring the sweeping change that some hope for, it at least represents resistance against the dangerous ideologies that Trump continues to promote and has promised to enact.
Voting is both a privilege and a responsibility. Even when the choices aren’t perfect, it is a privilege that not everyone can exercise. In these elections, please consider the weight of the decisions you make at the ballot box, as they directly affect the lives of people who cannot vote. Your vote is a voice for yourself and for those who are voiceless in this political system. Your vote has the power to shape the future for not only yourself but for countless others whose lives and opportunities depend on the outcomes of these elections. Your vote determines the direction you want to take.
Anonymous
The Presidential Debate filled me with many emotions: frustration, rage, confusion, fear, and pure energy. The main feeling I walked away with was that neither side valued my voice. Like most of the country, I do not consider myself a Democrat or Republican. I typically vote blue because Trump and his agenda are–in my opinion (and most political scientists’)–the worst possible option. However, Democrats simply do not represent me. I refuse to reconcile the genocide in Gaza, and judging from the mood shift during the watch party when Harris supported “Israel’s right to defend itself,” it is evident that many people on campus share my disdain.
I will likely vote for Harris in this upcoming election because the alternative is so grave–but I feel that I am desperately clinging to a vision of a future that no politician will move toward. Our representatives across the aisle profit from polarization, and the Earth is dying at their hands and the corporations that pay them. The United States perpetuates an unequal world that permits the killing of people across the globe for profit and a false sense of security. If we don’t change soon, we won’t have another chance. I will continue to advocate for my values in November and refuse to be complacent in an unjust political system. I encourage you to do the same if you feel as I do. And if you don’t, let’s do better than our politicians and talk about it.
Kayla Rogers, Class of 2025
Here’s the fact checks on some claims in the debate.
Fact Check:
Eating Pets–According to NPR, local police in Springfield, Ohio says this claim is completely baseless. Haitian immigrants in the area have received increasing levels of racial harassment since Vance and Trump made this claim.
Crime Rate–According to the FBI’s 2024 Crime Report, crime has been steadily decreasing since it peaked in 2021. Some reports from different sources argue to what extent this decrease is, but there is not a fact-based claim that crime is increasing.
US servicemen in warzones– According to The Wall Street Journal, although the United States is not at war with any country, many US service members are deployed and some have died in international conflicts since Biden has been in office. The United States is a major player in wars across the globe even if not explicitly at war, therefore troops are based in warzones.
Project 2025– Trump did not write Project 2025. However, according to NPR and FactCheck.Org by the Annenberg Public Policy Center, 140 of his former officials, aids, and cabinet had a hand in its creation. Some have speculated that these are individuals that Trump would need if he returned to office, which muddies the water of his connection to the project.