Speaker 1: From Schwartz Media. I'm Ruby Jones. This is seven am.
Speaker 1: The US presidential campaign so far has been largely based
Speaker 1: on vibes, with the Democrats painting Donald Trump as a
Speaker 1: threat to democracy and Republicans calling Kamala Harris a radical
Speaker 1: Marxist who will destroy America, and with the election just
Speaker 1: around the corner, their first and possibly only debate was
Speaker 1: a chance to tell Americans about their visions for the country. So,
Speaker 1: with polls showing both candidates at a dead heat, what
Speaker 1: do we learn about what they're actually offering voters?
Speaker 2: And i'd invite yet enough that Donald Trump actually has
Speaker 2: no plan for you, because he is more interested in
Speaker 2: defending himself than he is in looking out for you.
Speaker 3: They have and she has destroyed our country with policy
Speaker 3: that's insane, almost policy that you'd say they have to hate.
Speaker 1: Our country today. Senior researcher at the Australia Institute, doctor
Speaker 1: Emma shortis on who came out on top of the
Speaker 1: US presidential debate and whether it was enough to make
Speaker 1: a difference. It's Thursday, September twelfth, So Emma, we just
Speaker 1: watched a tight, tense debate between Harris and Trump. Before
Speaker 1: we get to the details of that debate, what was said.
Speaker 1: Can we talk for a moment about its significance, because
Speaker 1: there was a lot of anticipation ahead of this ninety
Speaker 1: minutes and it seems like it was a critical moment
Speaker 1: for both candidates. So why is that?
Speaker 4: I think it's such an interesting question, rebe because generally speaking,
Speaker 4: in American politics and kind of in politics more broadly,
Speaker 4: debates at don't really matter. They don't tend to sway
Speaker 4: campaigns until they really do. And we learned that from
Speaker 4: the last debate, of course, between Joe Biden and Donald Trump.
Speaker 4: That was really the beginning of the end for Joe Biden.
Speaker 4: So it's completely understandable that there was a huge amount
Speaker 4: of focus on this debate, and I think it was
Speaker 4: framed correctly as a debate that had much higher stakes
Speaker 4: for Carmala Harris than it did for Donald Trump. You know,
Speaker 4: Donald Trump is a seasoned debater. Whatever you think of him,
Speaker 4: he is excellent at television. He essentially produced his way
Speaker 4: into the White House. So the pressure was on Harris
Speaker 4: really to perform strongly, and as much of the media
Speaker 4: has framed it, to introduce herself to the American people.
Speaker 4: So whether it makes or breaks the campaign, I think
Speaker 4: remains to be seen.
Speaker 1: And Carmala Harris in the lead up to the debate,
Speaker 1: she talked quite a bit about how she wanted policy
Speaker 1: to be the main focus, and that played out a
Speaker 1: little Harrison Trump. They did talk about policy, but they
Speaker 1: also talked about a lot of other things as well.
Speaker 1: They talked about race, about rallies, about abortion. There was
Speaker 1: a lot of misinformation. Talk me through what happened.
Speaker 4: Look, I think Ruby, it was surprising actually how much
Speaker 4: policy substance was in this debate.
Speaker 3: But her vice presidential pick says abortion in the ninth
Speaker 3: month is absolutely fine. He also says execution after birth,
Speaker 3: it's execution, no longer abortion because the baby is born
Speaker 3: is okay, And that's not okay with me.
Speaker 4: You know, you mentioned abortion for example, that there was,
Speaker 4: of course, you know, Trump's very violent lies about what
Speaker 4: effectively is the murder of babies that of course doesn't happen.
Speaker 4: But underneath that there was policy substance. You know, there
Speaker 4: were Kamala Harris's promises to sign legislation to enshrine abortion rights.
Speaker 2: For example, when Congress passes a bill to put back
Speaker 2: in place the protections of real V. Wade. As President
Speaker 2: of the United States, I will proudly sign it in
Speaker 2: to law. But understand, if Donald Trump were to be
Speaker 2: re elected, he will sign a national abortion ban. Understanding.
Speaker 4: There was a lot of policy talk around economics, you know,
Speaker 4: that framed the debate that opened the debate about inflation,
Speaker 4: About Trump's plan for tariffs.
Speaker 1: Do you believe Americans can afford higher prices because of terroiffs?
Speaker 3: They're not going to have higher prices? Which going to
Speaker 3: have and who's going to have higher prices as China
Speaker 3: and all of the countries that have been ripping us
Speaker 3: off for years.
Speaker 4: About Harris's plans for housing.
Speaker 2: We know that we have a shortage of homes and
Speaker 2: housing and the cost of housing is too expensive far
Speaker 2: too many people.
Speaker 4: And I think Harris actually showed herself to have quite
Speaker 4: a command of the policy, and alongside that, I think
Speaker 4: was also quite masterful in her use of body language
Speaker 4: and her physical reactions to Donald Trump what he was
Speaker 4: saying about policy that was really kind of ready made
Speaker 4: for social media. So there was an awful lot actually
Speaker 4: packed into that ninety minutes.
Speaker 1: And it was clear that Carbola Harris was at certain
Speaker 1: points really trying to get under Donald Trump's skin. I
Speaker 1: think the first time I noticed that was when she
Speaker 1: talked about his rallies, saying that people were tired and
Speaker 1: bored and leaving his rallies.
Speaker 2: And what you will also notice is that people start
Speaker 2: leaving his rallies early out of exhaustion and boredom. And
Speaker 2: I will tell you the one thing you will not
Speaker 2: hear him talk about is you. You will not.
Speaker 1: Tell me about that and about his response.
Speaker 4: Look, I think you're right, Ruby. She was really successful
Speaker 4: at getting under his skin. And I think that was
Speaker 4: an aim from the start. You know, she ignored I
Speaker 4: think a lot of his egregious lies and pivoted to
Speaker 4: the substance while very clearly getting under his skin.
Speaker 3: She said, people start leaving. People don't go to her rally,
Speaker 3: there's no reason to go. And the people that do go,
Speaker 3: she's busting them in and paying them to be there
Speaker 3: and then showing them in a different late So she
Speaker 3: and you.
Speaker 4: Could see across the debate as it went on, Trump
Speaker 4: was getting angrier and angrier. You know, he interrupted more
Speaker 4: and more, he raised his voice more and more, And
Speaker 4: that is something that many in his campaign and many
Speaker 4: around him have been trying desperately to avoid.
Speaker 3: Another subject what they have done to our country by
Speaker 3: allowing these millions and millions of people to come into
Speaker 3: our country. And look at what's happening to the towns
Speaker 3: all over the United States, and a lot of towns
Speaker 3: don't want to talk.
Speaker 4: What Harris did, and I think she did it quite masterfully,
Speaker 4: was not get sucked into attempting to fact check Donald Trump, because,
Speaker 4: I mean, how do you fact check something so ridiculous
Speaker 4: as a claim that people are eating pets.
Speaker 3: You know, in Springfield, they're eating the door, the people
Speaker 3: that came in, they're eating the cats, They're eating the
Speaker 3: pets of the people that live there.
Speaker 4: And it's not the first time he or his surrogates
Speaker 4: have said things like this. You know, this was Trump
Speaker 4: quite clearly speaking almost exclusively to his base, to his
Speaker 4: kind of right wing Fox News universe. What Harris did
Speaker 4: was implicitly reinforcing this narrative that Donald Trump and his
Speaker 4: surrogates are weird.
Speaker 1: And one of the big criticisms of Kamala Harris is
Speaker 1: that she's flip flopped on several issues since twenty nineteen.
Speaker 1: When she last ran for the presidential nomination. She was
Speaker 1: asked about that during the debate, not by Trump, by
Speaker 1: the moderators. What did you think of the way that
Speaker 1: she handled that question and how much truth is there
Speaker 1: in that claim.
Speaker 4: I think the only response that she can have to
Speaker 4: that is that exactly as she's been saying, you know
Speaker 4: that her values remain the same, and that can rely
Speaker 4: on her to be consistent in those values. And I
Speaker 4: think what she also successfully did and has done this
Speaker 4: on a number of fronts, is kind of put that
Speaker 4: back onto Donald Trump, because of course Trump has changed
Speaker 4: his policy positions on almost everything that you can think of.
Speaker 4: Nowhere is that more clear than on the issue of abortion,
Speaker 4: where he tries to maintain several quite different policy positions
Speaker 4: at once, depending on who he's speaking to or who
Speaker 4: he thinks he's speaking to. And so Harris has I think,
Speaker 4: successfully combated that in her contrast to Trump. I think
Speaker 4: the question is whether she's convinced enough and the right
Speaker 4: voters in the right places. Again, you know, remains to
Speaker 4: be seen.
Speaker 1: What is your sense after watching the debate about how
Speaker 1: much she might have been able to introduce herself to
Speaker 1: those voters.
Speaker 4: I think Harris did exactly what she needed to in
Speaker 4: this debate. You know, she didn't win it decisively, but
Speaker 4: after a little bit of a shaky start in her
Speaker 4: answer to the first question, she kind of gained in confidence,
Speaker 4: she gained in strength. She was clearly across the policy detail,
Speaker 4: and I think she would have assured many Americans who
Speaker 4: are maybe uncertain of her strength in areas of national security,
Speaker 4: which of course will play a big role in the election.
Speaker 4: She would have reassured many of those voters. And I
Speaker 4: think she's kind of successfully navigated the line between policy
Speaker 4: detail and just vibes, you know, because vibes are important
Speaker 4: in all seriousness. You know, her use of her facial
Speaker 4: expressions and her body language was ready made for social media,
Speaker 4: and that will have an impact on the campaign. The
Speaker 4: Harror's campaign clearly thinks that is at least part of
Speaker 4: an avenue to victory. And so I think in those senses,
Speaker 4: for Harris, the debate was successful and she can she
Speaker 4: and her supporters can kind of walk out of it
Speaker 4: confident that they can hold their own against a man
Speaker 4: who has dominated American politics for upwards of a decade.
Speaker 1: Karmala Harris may have won the debate, but is she
Speaker 1: offering Americans enough to win the election. That's after the break.
Speaker 2: So I was raised as a middle class kid, and
Speaker 2: I am actually the only person on this stage who
Speaker 2: has a plan that is about lifting up the middle
Speaker 2: class and working people of America.
Speaker 1: And Makamala Harris spoke a lot about the economy during
Speaker 1: the debate, about small business, about housing, about the middle class.
Speaker 1: So beyond those sound bites, can you tell me about
Speaker 1: what she's actually proposing. Yeah?
Speaker 4: Sure, So you're right that Harris does have this focus
Speaker 4: very much on the middle class. She talks about an
Speaker 4: economy of opportunity and and lifting up the middle class.
Speaker 2: I believe in the ambition, the aspirations, the dreams of
Speaker 2: the American people, and that is why I imagine and
Speaker 2: have actually a plan to build what I call an
Speaker 2: opportunity economy.
Speaker 4: Because here's the policies that she has announced in that vein.
Speaker 4: Are you know, what we might call price gouging, So
Speaker 4: legislating to stop big supermarkets from you know, taking advantage
Speaker 4: of inflation and raising prices are the critical policy areas
Speaker 4: as well, like housing for example, and housing affordability, which
Speaker 4: is playing a similar kind of role in American politics
Speaker 4: that it is in Australian politics. So Harris has purposed
Speaker 4: what Australians would kind of recognize as essentially a first
Speaker 4: homeowner's bonus of about twenty five thousand dollars, and is
Speaker 4: also you know, promising things like continuing or increasing the
Speaker 4: child tax credit. But these are all kind of piecemeal
Speaker 4: reforms and they are far from radical. The reason those
Speaker 4: policies are so specific is because any kind of substantial
Speaker 4: reform at the moment in American politics, especially anything that
Speaker 4: requires legislative reform, is basically impossible unless a candidate is
Speaker 4: able to win both Congress and the White House, so
Speaker 4: to have the House of Representatives and the Senate, they
Speaker 4: can't really do any kind of substantial reform. I mean,
Speaker 4: Harris indirectly acknowledges that when she's talking about abortion, which
Speaker 4: has such a strong issue for her. You know, when
Speaker 4: she says that she will sign a law codifying access
Speaker 4: to abortion, codifying abortion rights the minute it hits her desk.
Speaker 4: The only way to do that in the current system
Speaker 4: is for one party to win a filibuster proof majority
Speaker 4: in the Senate, and as things stand at the moment,
Speaker 4: there is just no prospect of that, which means American
Speaker 4: politics remains stuck in this stalemate, and neither candidate has
Speaker 4: any kind of answer to the question of how American
Speaker 4: politics gets past that.
Speaker 1: And can we speak a bit about immigration, because that
Speaker 1: was one of the issues that Trump clearly thought that
Speaker 1: he could corner. Carmala Harrison. But the Democrats trying to
Speaker 1: show that they are just as strong on borders as
Speaker 1: the Republican Party is. So what is Karmala Harris's policy
Speaker 1: approach there?
Speaker 2: So I'm the only person on this stage who has
Speaker 2: prosecuted transnational criminal organizations for the trafficking of guns, drugs,
Speaker 2: and human beings.
Speaker 4: And so Harris is focused on the border legislation that
Speaker 4: has been before Congress as part of the Biden administration,
Speaker 4: which many Democrats saw as quite a hardline approach to
Speaker 4: immigration to effectively kind of closing the border at what
Speaker 4: a judge to be times of considerable pressure. So when
Speaker 4: more people are arriving at the border and asking to
Speaker 4: be processed, you know the border will be closed. So
Speaker 4: this was a what Biden has framed as a bipartisan
Speaker 4: piece of legislation that the Republicans were about to pass
Speaker 4: until Donald Trump effectively told them not to because it
Speaker 4: would be politically more useful to him to not have
Speaker 4: this issue go away.
Speaker 2: That bill would have put more resources to allow us
Speaker 2: to prosecute transnational criminal organizations for trafficking and guns, drugs,
Speaker 2: and human beings. But you know what happened to that bill.
Speaker 2: Donald Trump got on the phone, called up some folks
Speaker 2: in Congress and said kill the bill. And you know why.
Speaker 4: And so Harris has focused on that and as integrating
Speaker 4: it into a kind of narrative that she is strong
Speaker 4: on national security. You know, for Harris, that's a very
Speaker 4: difficult line to walk because part of what she's also
Speaker 4: trying to do, quite clearly is to mobilize the young
Speaker 4: left wing base of the Democratic Party, which is clearly
Speaker 4: opposed to these immigration reforms. I don't think Harris is
Speaker 4: going to convince anybody who's you know, already bought Donald
Speaker 4: Trump's line about immigration that she's the better option on
Speaker 4: this issue. You know, if you're a kind of Trump
Speaker 4: voter in a place like that, who's bought this stuff about,
Speaker 4: you know, an invasion of immigrants and there's stuff about
Speaker 4: eating your pets, you know, Harris is not going to
Speaker 4: convince you. So I think it's kind of unclear to
Speaker 4: me what Harris is trying to do here and how
Speaker 4: she thinks she can walk that line.
Speaker 1: And Trump also spoke a lot about how Baden and
Speaker 1: Harris had destroyed the economy and about crime being out
Speaker 1: of control. But in terms of how he would change things,
Speaker 1: how he would address those issues, what is he offering.
Speaker 4: I mean, Trump's offering what he's always offered. He's talking
Speaker 4: about closing the border. He's talking about building a wall.
Speaker 4: Some of his surrogates are talking about hugely significant reforms
Speaker 4: like dismantling the Department of Homeland Security and integrating that
Speaker 4: kind of border control responsibility into the military. So we're
Speaker 4: talking about extremely radical reform to the American immigration system
Speaker 4: alongside things like reinstituting Trump's so called Muslim ban, you know,
Speaker 4: where particular ethnicities, particular nationalities were targeted for immigration bands.
Speaker 4: In that sense, I think, you know, Harris's framing of
Speaker 4: Trump wants to go back is kind of quite accurate.
Speaker 4: You know, he wants to go back to the promises
Speaker 4: of his first administration, but successfully implement them this time.
Speaker 4: You know, that essentially would be the difference between a
Speaker 4: first and a second Trump administration. You know, a second
Speaker 4: administration will have learned the lessons of the first.
Speaker 1: Yeah, Harris's campaign messaging is really leaning into this phrase
Speaker 1: of we will not go back and that it's time
Speaker 1: to turn the page, which really is about attacking Trump
Speaker 1: more than it is about selling her own policies and
Speaker 1: vision for America. So do you think that she is
Speaker 1: offering Americans enough hope to be successful.
Speaker 4: I think it's it's certainly true that Harris is offering
Speaker 4: a stark contrast to Donald Trump, both in policy substance,
Speaker 4: but also in the sense of the message that she's
Speaker 4: offering to Americans. Because you're right, it's not necessarily particularly
Speaker 4: detailed about the nature of that future, but the sentiment
Speaker 4: underneath it is really important. And I think on the
Speaker 4: debate stage, you know, where we had the kind of
Speaker 4: close up visions of the two candidates, it was so
Speaker 4: incredibly clear that there are two very different versions of
Speaker 4: America that are pitted against each other in this election.
Speaker 4: Those two versions of America have existed essentially since its foundation.
Speaker 4: These are long held divisions, mostly along racial lines, that
Speaker 4: were fought out and never resolved in the Civil War.
Speaker 4: And what you could see on the debate stage was
Speaker 4: the kind of physical embodiment of those divisions, and it's
Speaker 4: not necessarily the policy substance or the kind of granular
Speaker 4: technical policy detail underneath that that will be the deciding
Speaker 4: factor in people's minds. It matters, of course, it matters,
Speaker 4: but those it is that bigger question I think about
Speaker 4: which of the two versions of America is going to
Speaker 4: be victorious in November.
Speaker 1: Emma, thank you so much for your time anytime, Thanks
Speaker 1: for having me. Also in the news today, Victoria police
Speaker 1: clashed with anti war protest ess outside a major defense
Speaker 1: expo in Melbourne yesterday, with police using sponge grenades and
Speaker 1: flash bang devices to control parts of the crowd. Police
Speaker 1: say over twelve hundred people attended the protest outside the
Speaker 1: venue hosting the three day event, which was showcasing weapons
Speaker 1: technology from more than eight hundred domestic and international organizations.
Speaker 1: And the National Anti Corruption Commission announce its currently investigating
Speaker 1: six current or former politicians. The Commission said another three
Speaker 1: investigations are focused on current or former parliamentary staff, but
Speaker 1: did not specify any other details about the investigations. And
Speaker 1: Ruby Jones seven am will be back tomorrow. Thanks for listening.