Good Behavior, Bad Behavior and the Usual Dose of Sexism
At Tuesday's debate, the few personal attacks Trump had prepared for Harris were noticeable for their studied lack of sexism—at least outwardly.
The Persistent is available as a newsletter. Sign up here to get it delivered to your inbox.
Donald Trump has gotten (slightly) wiser since 2020.
That might seem like a hot take after he blundered and lied his way through a badly-received debate performance on Tuesday night—even a Fox News voter panel immediately following the event admitted that Harris had won—but it’s true.
On stage, the former president appeared without his usual armor: a penchant for nicknames and name-calling.
Absent were the claims, made by Trump in the past, that Harris is “low-IQ” or “dumb.” Gone were the questions about her “mental capacity.” As the vice president steamrolled Trump with policy specifics and details pulled from her various roles as attorney general, senator, and vice president, it became obvious that attacking her on those grounds would be a very bad idea. Because if the person standing in front of him, ripping his arguments to shreds, was “low-IQ,” then what on earth would that make him?
And what of the sexist, grab-’em-by-the-pussy Trump the world has been privy to so many times in the past? Well, he wasn’t on full display, that’s for sure.
The few personal attacks Trump had clearly prepared in advance for Harris were noticeable for their studied lack of sexism—at least outwardly.
This is the man who once called Carly Fiorina “ugly” (before backtracking and announcing that he actually thinks she has an “attractive face”) and accused Megyn Kelly of having “blood coming out of her wherever.” He’s the same guy who’s accused female critics of having “horse faces” and of being fat.
But on Tuesday night, the furthest Trump went was to call Harris “weak” in one aside, before going on to neutralize his own remark by referring to her as a dangerous Marxist. He mimicked something she said to Mike Pence during her vice-presidential debate with Pence in 2020—“Excuse me, I’m speaking”—before adding, “Sound familiar?” But the reference was subtle, lost on most people outside of the Beltway (and frankly didn’t pack the same punch when the man saying it was taking up most of the airtime anyway.)
It was clear Trump had been schooled in keeping his cool. And no wonder.
It was clear Trump had been schooled in keeping his cool. And no wonder: The Trump campaign is in panic mode after its position on reproductive rights has shown the former president losing support from one of the key demographics it relies on—white suburban women. Those women were the ones Harris was clearly talking to when she responded to Trump’s claims that doctors routinely “execute babies” after they’re born by saying that he was showing a “disrespect for the women of America.” Later, she listed a number of moderate Republicans who have endorsed her ticket because they are “tired” of the “extreme” nature of Trump’s re-election campaign.
But make no mistake: the sexism was there; it was just better-veiled than before.
In the lead-up to the debate, for example, Trump wrote on Truth Social that, “no boxes or artificial lifts will be allowed to stand on during my upcoming debate with Comrade Kamala Harris,” implying that the Harris campaign had requested such a thing. Had it? The Harris Campaign has not commented. If the 5’4” Harris had done so, it wouldn’t be a hugely unusual request for a debate, especially considering that Trump stands at least 6’ tall. It would be prudent for the Harris campaign to seek to avoid a remaking of that viral moment in 2016, when Trump was repeatedly pictured looming over Hillary Clinton as she sought to deliver her proposals.
Either way, Trump’s focus on the idea of those “boxes or artificial lifts” shows the extent to which his campaign relies on body language to convey its messaging. Trump (tall, strong) vs. Harris (short, weak).
Indeed, as the candidates walked out onto the stage on Tuesday night, due to kick off proceedings with a handshake, Trump remained by his own podium. That forced Harris to physically concede ground and go to him. It was supposed to rattle her—but if it did, it didn’t show.
In fact, Trump refused to make eye contact with his opponent throughout the debate. As Harris leaned toward him and tried to engage, his eyes and body faced forward. At times, Trump’s refusal to properly spar with his opponent made for uncomfortable viewing. Harris gesticulated, referred to Trump by name and as “the former president,” and often addressed him directly in the second person as “you.” Trump, by contrast, never mentioned Harris’s name or job title. For a man who professes a hatred for pronouns, he used a whole lot of “she.”
Trump never mentioned Harris’s name or job title. For a man who professes a hatred for pronouns, he used a whole lot of “she.”
Nor did he try on any of his nicknames for the vice president (“Laughin’ Kamala” or, the truly bizarre, “Kamabla”). His flat-out refusal to refer to Harris by name—nickname or otherwise—was telling.
Not using women’s names (except in very specific, hate-filled contexts) is a far-right trick that goes back decades. By referring to Harris as “she” repeatedly, Trump played to the basest prejudices of his supporters: the ones who need reminding, again and again, that some woman is trying to become president.
Write to us at hello@thepersistent.com.
Harris’s name—and, even more so, her job title—gives her power and legitimacy. By contrast, “she” could be anyone. “She” is a caricature of a feckless woman, both volatile and foolish, over-emotional and incompetent, bleeding-heart-liberal and scary. “She” is whatever you make her. “She” is a sexist man’s worst nightmare.
“She” was also supposed to be able to give the easily-angered Trump some distance from his opponent. But there was blood in the water when the vice president invited viewers to attend a Trump rally, from which she claimed supporters often leave early because they’re “bored” by his incoherent speeches.
What came next was a 20-minute segment of disjointed ranting, during which Trump at one point claimed transgender immigrants were having operations in detention centers.
But if any pithy line loomed large over Tuesday’s debate, it was the one beloved of women’s rights placards: “If I wanted the government in my womb, I’d fuck a senator.”
And that brings us right back to the crux of the GOP’s problems: Republicans traditionally campaign on freedom—The nanny state isn’t here to tell us what to do, what to think, what’s private to our families…and so on—and now their most powerful, emotive line has been gifted to the Democrats.
Can you really say you’re the party of freedom if you’re telling people whether they can have IVF? Or if you’re obsessed with legislating on abortion? Even a late proposal by Trump to make IVF free to all (a hugely unpopular policy in his own party) hasn’t been able to undo the damage of his own past speeches and those of his running mate. Indeed, at a campaign event in the swing state of Virginia on Monday, Gwen Walz — wife of Harris’s running-mate, Tim Walz — said: "We don't take kindly to bullies like Trump and Vance to us when or how or if to start our families,” to raucous applause.
With the lightness of his more bombastic attacks neutered, Trump looked like what he really is on the debate stage: an unsmiling old man unable to articulate a vision for the future. He treated his opponent differently because of her sex—and that helped orchestrate his downfall.
As for Harris, her campaign has already submitted its request for a second debate date.
Holly Baxter is the author of CLICKBAIT, and an executive editor at The Independent. She is based in New York City.
Write to us at hello@thepersistent.com.
