On Oct. 28, 1980, Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter held their only debate of the presidential campaign. The conventional wisdom was that Reagan needed to show himself to be unthreatening and a plausible commander-in-chief after months of warnings from Carter that the former actor was both a warmonger and dangerously inexperienced. Reagan cleared that bar and what was perceived as a close race turned into a decisive rout a week later.
By 1980 standards, Donald Trump's performance at Monday night's debate was a fiasco. The network of alliances that the United States built around the planet after World War II--in Europe and Asia, in the South Pacific, and in the Americas--created a durable framework that has allowed our nation and much of the world to thrive. But Trump depicts our allies as parasites, not trusted, valuable partners. Given that a president is relatively unconstrained in foreign affairs, it is easy to imagine what a wrecking ball Trump might be in the Oval Office.
But in 2016, with anger at America's status quo running high, the old rules may not apply.
Trump put Hillary Clinton on the defensive over her history of support for trade pacts and on the fact that Islamic State has flourished in recent years.
Other issues could haunt Trump. His blithe defense of stiffing contractors in various business deals should resonate with anyone who's ever gone unpaid for providing a service. And Clinton's seemingly credible late-debate allegation about Trump demeaning a Latina beauty pageant contestant as "Miss Housekeeping" was an eye-opener and should generate headlines.
But the dynamics of this race are so unusual that it is impossible to know what, if anything, will stick with voters. After 16 months of Trump sounding like he did last night, he's dead even in the polls. Will the debate change that? We hope so. But wishing doesn't make things so.
Editorial on 09/29/2016