Brian Lehrer: It's the Brian Lehrer Show on WNYC. Good morning again, everyone. We'll play some excerpts from last night's presidential debate now and for the rest of the show, and invite your reactions. Call or text us with anything that stood out to you or your political analysis of the debate. If there are any undecided voters left in the audience or people who were leaning one way or another but weren't sure if you would vote at all, we would love to hear from you. 212-433-WNYC, 212-433-9692. Call or text.

Since I'm not sure if those undecided people even exist, we also invite you to point to a debate moment or overall impression or feeling that stuck with you overnight and you're still thinking about it, or you be the pundit. You be the political analyst. Do you think the debate will matter to the outcome, outcome of the election in any way? Maybe you're not undecided or flippable yourself, but you have friends or relatives who might be in a swing state that maybe you don't live in or live in anymore and you heard from them since the debate.

Who has family in Pennsylvania or Georgia or Arizona, et cetera? 212-433-WNYC. Help us report this story, or you be the political analyst. Did the debate or the post-debate news of Taylor Swift posting an Instagram endorsement of Harris in response to the debate, did it, will it matter? 212-433-9692.

We'll bring on Susan Page from USA Today in just a minute, but first, I'll play an excerpt. This might have been the policy heart of the debate. Forgive me for talking about policy, not just vibes and who's getting under whose skin, but this may have been the policy and credibility heart of the debate from the opening section, which was about the economy, and they did spend the first 15 minutes or so on it. Harris tries at this moment to move the subject to their policies and who’s actually thinking about the wellbeing of the people rather than personal or political grievances, which was how she tried to label Trump throughout. You’ll hear the beginning of Trump's response, too.

Kamala Harris: Let’s talk about our plans and let’s compare the plans. I have a plan to give startup businesses 50,000-dollar tax deduction to pursue their ambitions, their innovation, their ideas, their hard work. I have a plan, $6,000 for young families for the first year of your child's life to help you in that most critical stage of your child's development. I have a plan that is about allowing people to be able to pursue what has been fleeting in terms of the American dream by offering help with down payment of $25,000, down payment assistance for first time homebuyers. That's the kind of conversation I believe, David, that people really want tonight, as opposed to a conversation that is constantly about belittling and name-calling. Let's turn the page and move forward.

David Muir: Vice President Harris, thank you. Let's turn to policy. Let's turn back to policy.

Linsey Davis: President Trump, we have to move on.

Donald Trump: [crosstalk] [unintelligible 00:03:19] destroying our country.

Linsey Davis: President Trump--

David Muir: Let's turn to policy, please.

Donald Trump: She has a plan to defund the police. She has a plan to confiscate everybody's gun.

Linsey Davis: President Trump, you have to move on to other issues.

Donald Trump: She has a plan to not allow fracking in Pennsylvania or anywhere else.

Linsey Davis: Okay, [crosstalk]--

Donald Trump: That's what her plan is until just recently.

Brian Lehrer: That, from last night's debate. Here to help out with her analysis is Susan Page, Washington Bureau Chief for USA Today and author of biographies of Barbara Bush, Nancy Pelosi, and most recently, journalist Barbara Walters in her book The Rulebreaker: The Life and Times of Barbara Walters. Her debate analysis that she posted on USA Today last night carried the headline In tonight’s debate, Harris showed up as a prosecutor. Trump showed up as himself. Susan, thanks for doing this after a late night. Welcome back to WNYC.

Susan Page: Hey, Brian, it's always a privilege to be with you.

Brian Lehrer: We'll get to the clip we played in just a minute, but your headline, Harris showed up as a prosecutor. Trump showed up as himself, what does that refer to briefly in each one's case?

Susan Page: Yes. Well, for Trump, we know he was getting a lot of advice, much of it public, from people who support him saying, don't attack Harris on personality or personal issues. Stick to policy. She has vulnerabilities there. He didn't take that advice. He showed up as the classic Trump that is familiar from previous debates focused on personal attack and his grievances. She showed up as the prosecutor she used to be. She was extremely prepared. She was very crisp. She had facts and figures. She was more comfortable, I think, prosecuting Trump than explaining in depth her own proposals for the presidency, but I've got to say those are exchanges that worked to her benefit.

Brian Lehrer: Yes. To the clip that I just played, I know everyone is talking about whether Harris got under Trump's skin and that there were these shocking moments, like the moderators having to correct Trump on bizarre claims of immigrants eating their neighbors’ pets, or Democrat-run states allowed showing executions of newborn babies as if they were abortions. We'll get to the place of those in the debate. The clip I played at the top, Harris went to the central issue of inflation for housing, childcare, and starting a small business. Trump's response there was basically, don't believe her on policy. Her real policies are things she says she won't do, that you won't like, confiscate guns, ban fracking, defund the police. Is it plans versus no plans and whether you believe what either of them says they'll do that in a way is at the heart of this race right now?

Susan Page: Yes, I think that's an important part of this race. When I heard that clip, what I heard was such a missed opportunity for Donald Trump because he could have said what he said at the 105-minute mark, which was, if you have such great ideas, why haven't you put them in place? You've been in the White House as vice president for three and a half years. Why haven't you already done these things that you say you support and will do? That is a fair argument to make, a fair question to raise to Kamala Harris, but it's one that he didn't raise until the debate was nearly over.

Brian Lehrer: He also didn't come back with his economic policies. Harris is trying to convince Americans on the number one issue, according to so many polls, the economy, inflation especially, that she's got plans to deal with the cost of living. Trump has plans, too, right? He was out in Nevada telling hotel workers that he would eliminate taxes on tips. He's been telling seniors that he will end taxing Social Security on the federal income tax level, but he didn't bring up any economic things other than basically to say drill, baby, drill, because it'll keep the cost of energy down.

Susan Page: His economic policy is really big tax cuts for various groups, including wealthy people and people who get tips, and big tariffs, even bigger tariffs than he imposed during his term of office. He did defend tariffs. A lot of economists think big tariffs are not a good idea and will result in more inflation for Americans. He denied that was true, but he didn't [crosstalk]--

Brian Lehrer: He didn’t make the case. That was another thing that jumped out at me. They did sort of start to have a policy discussion about tariffs. Harris said- or maybe even the moderators asked, won't that be a big tax on the American people, because if it costs more to import, then those companies will pass the cost on to the buyers? Trump said no, that tariff will be levied against China and other countries, but he didn't explain why.

He didn't explain why the logic doesn't pertain that when the companies that are making those things, it's not China making those things, it's companies making those things, and then they get imported for sale. Yes, the consumer's going to have to pay enough that the company makes its profit. He didn't even try to explain his position, which to most economists seems untenable. The tariffs only go to the country that's exporting the stuff.

Susan Page: He did not explain and defend his policy positions for another term in the White House, but in fairness, you'd have to say that Kamala Harris also did not take advantage of opportunities to explain in any depth what her policy proposals would be and her policy initiatives as president. She said, I have a plan, and she has proposed a couple of specific things, most of which she enumerated in the debate, but this, Brian, I think perhaps to your frustration, not really much of a policy debate.

Brian Lehrer: Yes. I guess the point she was trying to make over and over again and in the clip we played and at other times is at least I'm focused on plans to help you. He's focused on all these grievances.

Susan Page: I think a more fundamental contrast, she kept saying, I'm focused on the future. Let's turn the page. I'm part of a new generation of leaders. Despite the advice he got consistently from his advisors and his strategist, Donald Trump continues to be focused on the past. He was most animated when he was, for instance, defending his debunked argument that he won the 2020 election and it was stolen from him.

He defended the January 6 rioters on the Capitol. He defended his rallies as being the biggest ever and one that people didn't leave because they were bored. That may have been the initial charge that most got under his skin. It was not only plan versus no plan. I think more fundamentally, it was the future versus the past.

Brian Lehrer: I think it was, from Trump's standpoint, credibility, trying to sow doubt in the things that Harris says she's for because she has changed her positions on things over time. The moderators pushed her on that a little bit, but Trump was saying, as in the response that we played to her talking about some of her economic plans and subsidies, if you let the Democrats take power, they're really going to take away your guns, defund the police, and shut down the fossil fuel economy. I think, don't believe her was the subtext of so much of what Trump said.

Susan Page: Yes, I think that's right. I thought she got off actually pretty easy on the issue of flip-flops in her position. She did address fracking and said that she no longer supported a ban on fracking. She supports fracking. That just may be because the most critical battleground state has fracking as a big issue. That would be Pennsylvania. On other issues on which she has changed her position, she wasn't really pressed to explain why. That is not an issue that's going away. We've got, what, eight more weeks in this election. We're going to be hearing more of that in one form or another.

Brian Lehrer: Yes, I'm surprised, with all his emphasis on immigration, that Trump didn't bring up what Dana Bash did in the CNN interview with Harris the other day, and did not really get an answer in that case, her 2019 position raising her hand when a moderator asked in a debate that year, should the border be decriminalized. Do you know what that means?

Susan Page: Decriminalized. Well, I think it means that just crossing the border without proper papers doesn't end up getting you arrested, and prosecuted. She has another issue that is emerging, which is a questionnaire she filled out for the ACLU in 2019 during that campaign. This was a time when she was moving left because that seemed to be the direction of the party. In that questionnaire, she said that she wanted to eventually end immigrant detention for those who have crossed the border without documentation.

She also expressed a willingness to support gender-affirming care for undocumented people who are in prison, who are in jail. These are policies that I think she certainly no longer chooses to talk about. They're ones on which she may have changed her position. We don't know because that is not a case that either Trump or the moderators effectively pressed last night.

Brian Lehrer: Before we go to some phone calls and texts from listeners, there's been so much emphasis since the debate on this dynamic of Harris baiting Trump and Trump taking the debate of how Harris tried and succeeded at getting under Trump's skin, as many people put it, and of him scowling a lot while she smiled a lot and him looking angry a lot while she projected a much sunnier, optimistic disposition. I think relevant to all of that in your article in USA Today, you singled out this exchange from the debate.

Kamala Harris: I'm going to tell you that I have traveled the world as vice president of the United States, and world leaders are laughing at Donald Trump. I have talked with military leaders, some of whom worked with you, and they say you're a disgrace. When you then talk in this way in a presidential debate and deny what over and over again are court cases, you have lost because you did, in fact, lose that election, it leads one to believe that perhaps we do not have in the candidate to my right the temperament or the ability to not be confused about fact. That's deeply troubling. The American people deserve better.

David Muir: I'll give you one minute to respond, Mr. President.

Donald Trump: Let me just say about world leaders. Victor Orbán, one of the most respected men, they call him a strong man. He's a tough person, smart, prime minister of Hungary, they said, "Why is the whole world blowing up? Three years ago it wasn't. Why is it blowing up?" He said, "Because you need Trump back as president. They were afraid of him."

Brian Lehrer: Susan, why did you highlight that exchange from the debate? Was it because the only world leader who Trump could think of to cite who likes him is the authoritarian Victor Orbán?

Susan Page: Well, first of all, in 60 seconds, Kamala Harris struck on a half dozen issues that drive Trump crazy. If you want to talk about getting under his skin, that was really quite the litany. The other reason I think this was important is because it was part of Harris's effort to make the point at how different this debate is from the last one. At the last one, Joe Biden was frail and faltering. It cost him the nomination, his performance in that debate.

In this debate, Donald Trump was the old guy on stage. She's almost 20 years younger than Donald Trump. He's 78. He's now the oldest person to be nominated for the presidency by a major party. I think she was raising some of the questions that have been raised about Biden with her comment about his temperament and ability to distinguish fact from fiction. I also thought Trump's response was not as compelling as her attack if you're counting on Victor Orbán to make your case.

Brian Lehrer: Is it possible, though, as a matter of political analysis, when we talk about she smiling and he scowling and his angry demeanor, which a lot of people are saying was not good for him, that maybe many swing voters or alienated potential non-voters are angry and relate as much to his vibe as to hers? I don't know how people measure that.

Susan Page: When you think about the impact of this debate, nobody should think this determines the election. In terms of Trump's core supporters, they've stuck with him through thick and thin. I don't think this will have any effect on them. That narrow slice of swing voters, of voters who are not firmly in either camp, yes, I think that there is--

We've got, we've been working on a project at USA Today talking to voters in six different places about this issue of hope versus fear. What we found is that there's a real hunger for more hope, less fear. A lot of Americans are not finding that in their politics. I think that's an effective message, but not sufficient. Her performance last night was necessary to win the election, not sufficient to win the election.

Brian Lehrer: Robert in Manhattan, you're on WNYC with Susan Page, Washington Bureau Chief of USA Today. Hi, Robert.

Robert: Oh, hi. How are you? Great show. I love you. I'm a longtime listener.

Brian Lehrer: Thank you.

Robert: basically, I heard even from the commentators right after that people on the right would have thought that the moderators were being too critical of Trump's responses, which I think you can't very well let a statement like cats and dogs, God forbid that [crosstalk]--

Brian Lehrer: That people are eating your cats and dogs. Immigrants are eating your cats and dogs. Yes.

Robert: Keep their dogs and cats indoors because immigrants are going to eat them. Obviously, you can't expect them not to comment on that, or not to point out that that the facts don't point that way.

On the other hand, people on the left could also say, well, why did the moderators allow Trump to take up so much time and give him so much extra time and so many additional responses without interrupting him? The point of my call is that I thought that the moderators finally did a great job and that anyone who criticizes on the right or the left, the other can point to things that they didn't like. Overall, I thought it was very fair and it was about time that the media stepped up and did what they're supposed to do. They're supposed to point out falsehoods. That's all I have to say about it.

Brian Lehrer: Robert, thank you very much. Susan, you've moderated debates at the presidential or vice presidential level. ABC seemed to come ready to correct Trump on several of his most outrageous lies, like the caller was mentioning, CNN did not try to do that in their debate, Trump versus Biden, but as the caller says, ABC risks looking biased to people on the right because they didn't correct Harris in any way like that when she said things that might have been deemed false.

Maybe there would be a false equivalency, considering the magnitude of Trump's lying and about making up really wild things to do that, but they did let him interrupt. We played the first clip on the economy where they let him do that when it wasn't his turn. CNN and their debate did not let him do that. As someone who has moderated debates, how do you understand what ABC was trying to do, and your take on how it came out?

Susan Page: Brian, I actually think this was the best moderation we've seen of a Trump debate. It's so difficult to know as a moderator when you should fact-check and when you should keep your mouth shut, because there is a theory that fact-checking is up to the other person on the stage, that it's up to Harris to fact-check Trump or Trump to fact-check Harris. I think that has not been very satisfying.

I think there are times, like the eating cats and dogs thing, which I just find hilarious and outlandish and I don't understand why it's taken off, but on an issue like that, it seemed totally appropriate for me for the moderator to interject himself and say, the city manager said there's no evidence that that's true, or on the issue of executing newborns after birth, to say that's not legal in any state in this country, just to put to rest in an authoritative way a statement that's clearly wrong.

I thought they were pretty restrained, and I thought the times when they did it were appropriate ones. I didn't think they had a particularly heavy hand with either of the candidates. When Harris didn't ask answer their first question about are Americans better off than they were four years ago, they didn't get back to it. There were times when they let things with Trump slide too.

On the issue of correcting, fact-checking Trump but not Harris, I didn't hear Harris say something that warranted the kind of fact-checking, the two examples I just gave. If another viewer heard something she said that should have been fact-checked, I'd to hear that because I didn't hear that.

Brian Lehrer: For people who haven't heard it, or it's just so bizarre, you want to hear it again, here's the eating your pets thing. The context was Trump talking about what immigrants are doing to destroy our country. He cited this from, allegedly, Springfield, Ohio.

Donald Trump: In Springfield, they're eating the dogs. The people that came in, they're eating the cats. They're eating the pets of the people that live there. This is what's happening in our country. It's a shame. As far as rallies are concerned, as far as the reason they go is they like what I say. They want to bring our country back. They want to make America great again. It's a very simple phrase, make America great again. She's destroying this country. If she becomes president, this country doesn't have a chance of success. Not only success, will end up being Venezuela on steroids.

David Muir: I just want to clarify here. You bring up Springfield, Ohio. ABC News did reach out to the city manager there. He told us there have been no credible reports of specific claims of pets being harmed, injured, or abused by individuals within the immigrant community [crosstalk]--

Donald Trump: Well, I've seen people on television.

David Muir: Let me just say here, this is the--

Donald Trump: The people on television say my dog was taken and used for food. Maybe he said that, and maybe that's a good thing to say for a city manager.

David Muir: I'm not taking this from television. O'm taking it from the city manager.

Donald Trump: The people on television say their dog was eaten by the people that went there.

David Muir: Again Springfield city manager says there's no evidence of that.

Brian Lehrer: David Muir from ABC with Trump. Trump's argument, you would have to believe that the city manager of Springfield had a reason to cover up the fact that this was actually happening when what he says is there are no credible reports of it happening.

Susan Page: Yes, and yet it's taken off. Why is that? Why is that, Brian?

Brian Lehrer: Why is that? Because xenophobia is contagious. Human beings have a tendency to believe scary things about the other. Maybe that's why.

Susan Page: I understand that when he talks about migrant crime, which, by the way, the statistics all also don't justify, but the idea of stealing cats and dogs and eating them, it just seems unlikely.

Brian Lehrer: It's just so out there, but obviously, he thinks it hits with a certain percentage of voters. I think the migrant crime is so important, and they lingered on it less than on the cats and dogs. If you think about the peak of recent crime in New York in particular, in the United States in general, it was around the beginning of the pandemic when so many things were going wrong; inflation was peaking with the supply chain problems, crime was going up, all of that stuff.

When did the real asylum-seeker wave start? It was about two years ago. In that period, crime has been coming gradually back down to pre-pandemic levels. We were talking earlier in the show about the Mayor of New York boasting that crime in many categories, including shootings and robberies on the subway, are down to the lowest levels in recorded history in New York City. Well, the mayor is boasting this at the same time as this huge number of asylum seekers is coming to New York, and yet this idea about a migrant crime wave sticks as a legitimate argument.

Susan Page: Yes. The statistics do not bear this out. The statistics show that migrants are less likely to commit crimes than people who are not migrants. What Donald Trump and others have done is taken several celebrated cases in which illegal immigrants have killed Americans. These are, of course, heartbreaking cases, and they fuel this idea that's-

Brian Lehrer: Horrible. Criminal.

Susan Page: -a dangerous thing.

Brian Lehrer: Yes, but, there are certain media outlets, some of them very big in New York, and I won't name any names, that when there is such a crime, when there's any crime attached to a migrant, they'll say a migrant was arrested for doing such and such. Do they ever say a person born in the United States was arrested for committing such and such when that's the vast majority of the crimes? Just saying media help lead that false impression. We'll continue in a minute with Susan Page. More clips, more of your reactions to last night's debate. Stay with us.

[MUSIC - Marden Hill: Hijack]

Brian Lehrer: Brian Lehrer on WNYC with excerpts from, analysis of, and your reactions to last night's Trump-Harris debate. 212-433-WNYC. Call or text with Susan Page, Washington Bureau Chief for USA Today. Here's a text, by the way, trying to correct me, but I think the listener is wrong, about crime at the beginning of COVID. Listener writes, "Remember, crime was low at the beginning of the pandemic during lockdown. You forgot how quiet and peaceful it was."

That is true at the very, very beginning, but then crime exploded all over the country for other underlying causes there. Now it's been coming down. There was that moment when really everybody was home, but then it went up. I excluded that one very short period at the very beginning of the pandemic, but the basic, I think, fact and curve remains the same. Jill in Duluth, Minnesota, you're on WNYC. Hi, Jill.

Jill: Hi, there. Hi, all you New Yorkers. I was interested in people saying there was a low bar for Kamala Harris. For me as a strong supporter, there was a very high bar, high expectation. I think she really exceeded it. It started from the very beginning where after all this talk about, oh, is there going to be a handshake between the two of them, how she handled that and going over and showing how confident and in control she was, I thought that was fabulous.

The other thing I thought she handled very well was the whole thing about Ukraine and Trump's lack of support, his cozying up to dictators, and the whole NATO, how important NATO was, I think that is what showed she can be Commander-in-chief, which I think many independents would be very concerned about. That's how I saw-- Those were the highlights. I watched every minute.

Brian Lehrer: Jill, thank you. Thank you very much. Yes, which actually brings us back to policy. There were two moments I thought were important last night at the policy level that we haven't mentioned yet. One of them was related to what Jill was just mentioning when moderator David Muir asked Trump if he wants Ukraine to win the war there. You'll hear the response. Trump does not say yes.

David Muir: You have said you would solve this war in 24 hours. You said so just before the break tonight. How exactly would you do that? I want to ask you a very simple question tonight. Do you want Ukraine to win this war?

Donald Trump: I want the war to stop. I want to save lives that are being uselessly- people being killed by the millions.

Brian Lehrer: Susan, Trump doesn't say how he would end the war. Presumably, if he won't say he wants Ukraine to win, he would use the leverage of the US to force Ukraine to give up at least some of its territory to Russia and put his stamp of approval on the invasion in that way. How do you hear that answer?

Susan Page: The only way he could bring the war to a close quickly is to pressure Ukraine to make concessions to accept current lines ceding to Russia, land that they now occupy. He may not have said, no, I don't want Ukraine to win, but I think that was the import of the response that he gave. One of the issues that Kamala Harris raised was his relationship with dictators and strongmen, including Putin, and his willingness to negotiate with them, make deals with them, praise them for being strong men.

To just make one point about what Jill was talking about, about Kamala Harris as Commander-in-chief. I think it's interesting that there's a-- I see a big contrast between now and 2016 when Hillary Clinton was the first woman nominated by a major party for president. This was an issue she faced a lot. She had to make the case that she was tough enough to be commander-in-chief.

I think that that issue is not entirely settled, but it seems to me, it's been largely settled. It's more settled now than it was eight years ago. Hillary Clinton, of course, lost the electoral college, didn't win the White House, but there are ways in which her candidacy has been helpful to Kamala Harris in getting us past an endless debate about can a woman be Commander-in-chief. Can a woman look a president?

Brian Lehrer: Listener writes, "I'm glad the moderators didn't cut Trump's mic and let him interrupt Harris." He did get five more total minutes with all that interrupting that they let him do, that CNN didn't let him do in the debate against Biden. He wound up in the count that I saw reported with 42 minutes overall. She had 37. This listener writes, "I'm glad the moderators didn't cut Trump's mic and let him interrupt Harris. The more he talked, the more unhinged and unpresidential he seemed." That person's opinion. I think Namina in Brooklyn is going to set up the other policy clip I wanted to play. Namina, you're on WNYC. Hello.

Namina: Hi, Brian. I love you. I love this show. Thank you. Good morning to you and your host. Thanks for your staff. I'm a bit confused. I've heard one of the top- the concern I wanted to bring about the cats and the dogs, some people eating them. I was so confused. My daughter was watching it and she was twisting her face. I go, why are you twisting her face? She was in pain. I go, cats and dogs eating. I don't understand. I have to call somebody. I'm so glad. I just need to understand that.

Then other thing is they ask him for Obama's healthcare. The gentleman and the lady that were asking the question, they did fabulous, in my opinion, and ask him, do you have a plan? He says, I don't have a plan yet. I'm not president yet. To me, I'm saying, when do you have a plan? Do you have a plan to tell us now or do you want to have a plan when you become president? That's why I'm confused. I'm going to put the phone and you guys going to explain to me as I am. Thank you. You have a fantastic day, both of you.

Brian Lehrer: Namina, thank you very much. Yes, she teed up the same thing that I was thinking, Trump admitting after eight years of him running for or being president, he's still against Obamacare but still has no alternative to it. Here's that.

Donald Trump: If we can come up with a plan that's going to cost our people, our population less money and be better healthcare than Obamacare, then I would absolutely do it, but until then, I'd run it as good as it can be run.

Susan Page: Just a yes or no, you still do not have a plan?

Donald Trump: I have concepts of a plan. I'm not president right now, but if we come up with something, I would only change it if we come up with something that's better and less expensive.

Brian Lehrer: ABC's Lindsey Davis inserting the follow-up question there. Susan, I'm sorry, but Kamala Harris comes with, let's talk about our plans. She lays out some of the things she has to fight inflation that she says would be better than what Trump has. Trump says Obamacare isn't working. We need better plans. Isn't it the job of a presidential candidate to say what his better plan would be?

Susan Page: Well, I guess that'd be the traditionalist view, Brian. What I heard in that exchange is the establishment of the Affordable Care Act as a popular feature of American policy and a program that, after a rocky start, is now increasingly well established. Realistic Republicans, elected Republicans, after years of running against Obamacare, are no longer focused on any major change or any repeal or revision of the Affordable Care Act because it has-- Again, there was a rocky start to it. After some time, it's really become something that helps- has made health care coverage rates in the United States the highest they have ever been in our history.

Brian Lehrer: You said earlier that Trump missed an opportunity to do throughout the debate what he did in his closing statement, which was on any of Kamala Harris's plans, to say, well, you've been in office for three and a half years. Why didn't you enact these plans? A listener writes, "She's not president yet. That's why her policies have not yet been enacted. How many of Mike Pence's policies were enacted? This is a nothing burger. Why are you making an issue of it?" What's your response to that, listener?

Susan Page: Because if you're going to take credit for all of the Biden administration's achievements and you're going to run away from the things that did not go so well, like the withdrawal from Afghanistan, and you're going to portray yourself as qualified for president because you've been an influential vice president who, as she has often said, is the last person in the room when the president is seeking to make a big decision, it seems to me it's not unfair to say, okay, if you've got a way that would bring down inflation, which, why don't we do it right away?

I acknowledge that vice presidents are less powerful than their job may sound, but it doesn't seem to be unfair to raise that.

Brian Lehrer: Let's see. We've got a minute and a half left. Let me touch the abortion issue very briefly. I thought it was very important last night, so we're underplaying it. We did a whole separate section segment recently on Trump's flip-flops on abortion in Florida, but he was asked why he would vote against Florida's abortion rights referendum. His no vote would uphold Florida's six-week ban, which Trump claims to oppose. This is where he made the other crazy tunes argument that the moderators felt compelled to correct, falsely citing Harris's running mate, Tim Walz.

Donald Trump: But her vice presidential pick says abortion in the ninth month is absolutely fine. He also says execution after birth-- it's execution no longer abortion because the baby is born-- is okay, and that's not okay with me. Hence the vote.

Brian Lehrer: Just after that, ABC moderator Lindsey Davis states a fact check.

Susan Page: There is no state in this country where it is legal to kill a baby after it's born. Madam Vice President, I want to get your response to President Trump.

Kamala Harris: Well, as I said, you're going to hear a bunch--

Brian Lehrer: She says you're going to hear a bunch of lies, but it was the moderator who jumped in. We have 15 seconds left. Does any of this matter to swing voters, to undecided voters? How do we know?

Susan Page: Absolutely. No better issue for Democrats this year than access to abortion, and no riskier issue for Donald Trump than that one. Both campaigns understand that, Brian.

[MUSIC -- Soulive: Solid]

Brian Lehrer: Susan Page, USA Today Washington Bureau of Chief and author recently of The Rulebreaker: The Life and Times of Barbara Walters. Susan, thank you for this time.

Susan Page: Hey, thank you, Brian.

 

Copyright © 2024 New York Public Radio. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use at www.wnyc.org for further information.

New York Public Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline, often by contractors. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of New York Public Radio’s programming is the audio record.