Two Visions of National Security at the Harris-Trump Debate

In between former President Trump’s false claim of Haitian migrants eating cats in Springfield, Ohio, and another false claim that Vice President Harris was promising to perform transgender operations on illegal aliens in prison, a Trumpian conception of national security did emerge from Tuesday evening’s presidential debate. It is a vision in which the primary threat to America is migration across our southern border, in which foreign trade partners and allies alike are fleecing and taking advantage of America and weak American leaders are unable or unwilling to protect our interests, and in which we face the possibility of a nuclear war with Russia over the Biden administration’s support for Ukraine.

Just across the stage—when she wasn’t raising her eyebrows in a show of disbelief, shaking her head incredulously, or laughing to herself at her opponent’s words—Harris offered her own vision of national security. In the Harris vision, the southern border is a manageable problem, Trump himself—not immigration—presents the major threat to the rule of law, America needs to stand by our allies and benefits from its network of alliances around the world, and America’s position in the world is menaced by Trump’s own solicitude for dictators.

At times, these visions overlapped. China as a major strategic competitor is a significant thread in both. But the national security visions that emerged from the debate are starkly different. Politics stopped stopping at the water’s edge long before these presidential candidates took the stage in Philadelphia last night, and the debate was a far cry from the old bipartisan consensus on national security and foreign policy.

What follows is a selection of the candidates’ claims across seven national security themes: democracy versus authoritarianism, the rule of law, immigration, NATO and Europe, the Middle East, trade, and climate change. We also offer analysis of what these statements suggest about the respective positions and priorities of the two candidates. The roundup is meant to provide a descriptive overview of what was said, rather than a comprehensive evaluation of the candidates’ positions or the merits of those positions. 

Democracy Versus Authoritarianism

Moderator David Muir asked Trump about the peaceful transfer of power, which, you’ll remember, was not quite so peaceful on Jan. 6, 2021. As outlined by the House Jan. 6 committee, and as Muir reminded Trump in his question, the former president watched the violent assault on the Capitol for more than two hours before finally sending out tweets telling his supporters to go home. When asked whether he regretted any of his actions on Jan. 6, Trump would not provide a clear “yes” or “no” answer.

Instead, he expressed sympathy for the rioters, and then focused his remarks on immigration and border security. “This group of people ... have been treated so badly,” he said of the almost 1,500 Jan. 6 criminal defendants, “I ask, what about all the people that are pouring into our country and killing people? ... When are they going to be prosecuted?” 

When asked to return his focus to the events of Jan. 6, Trump defended himself, saying, “I had nothing to do with that,” and shifted the blame onto former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Mayor Muriel Bowser of Washington, D.C. Trump claimed that it was Pelosi who was responsible for security that day and that she “didn’t do her job.”

Harris, in turn, reminded the audience that she was present at the Capitol the day of the attack, and that it was Trump who incited the violent mob. Harris, unlike Trump, emphasized the injuries of hundreds and deaths of some Capitol Police officers as a result of the attack. Speaking more broadly to the threat of political violence and Trump’s incitement of hateful rhetoric and violent groups, Harris reminded voters of the Unite the Right Rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, and about his admonition to the Proud Boys to “stand back and stand by” in 2000, and she invited voters to “turn the page,” “stand for our democracy,” and, referring to Trump, “end the approach that is about attacking the foundations of our democracy ‘cause you don’t like the outcome.” 

Muir then narrowed the conversation to the outcome of the 2020 election—a topic that exists in two separate realities for both Harris and Trump. When asked if he would acknowledge his loss in 2020, Trump refused, and repeated the false claims about fraudulent elections that he has been peddling for years. “There’s so much proof” that the election was stolen “and they should have been sent back to the legislatures for approval,” he said. Muir pointed out that judges in 60 cases brought by Trump and his allies determined that there was no widespread fraud. Trump insisted, “I'll show you Georgia and I'll show you Wisconsin and I'll show you Pennsylvania and I'll show you—we have so many facts and statistics.”

Harris, in response, reminded voters that Trump did, in fact, lose the election, and she emphasized the danger that his rhetoric and efforts to overturn the results in 2020 pose to American democracy: “We cannot afford to have a president of the United States who attempts, as he did in the past, to upend the will of the voters in a free and fair election.” The vice president emphasized Trump’s outright refusal to accept the fact of his loss, explaining that this doesn’t just endanger American democracy: “World leaders are laughing at Donald Trump.” Turning to the former president, Harris explained that Trump’s repeated denial of his loss of the election and in court “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.” 

Trump took Harris’s mention of world leaders to point out his endorsement from Viktor Orban, the authoritarian prime minister of Hungary. Orban, according to Trump, characterized the former president as “the most respected, most feared person” among world leaders—including China, Russia, and North Korea—and said that “we had no problems when Trump was president.” Later on in the debate, Harris pushed back on this point, accusing Trump of favoring international enemies, such as Orban and Russian President Vladimir Putin, rather than American allies “because you adore strongmen instead of caring about democracy.”

The Rule of Law

Trump and Harris fiercely debated another cornerstone of American democracy: the preservation of the rule of law.

The vice president and the former president sparred over law enforcement, specifically the funding of hundreds of agents. Trump repeatedly claimed that Harris planned to “defund the police,” which Harris denied. Harris then claimed that Trump called for the defunding of “45,000” federal law enforcement agents.

Trump also called the legitimacy of the FBI into question. In response to one of Trump’s many claims of rising violent crime due to illegal immigration, moderators cited figures from the FBI indicating that overall violent crime in the United States was, in fact, decreasing. Trump accused the law enforcement agency—and then the Biden administration as a whole—of “defrauding statements.”

Harris exclaimed that Trump’s worry about criminals coming into the country was “rich” considering that the former president himself has been “prosecuted for national security crimes, economic crimes, election interference, has been found liable for sexual assault,” was convicted on 34 felony charges, and is awaiting sentencing in New York state. 

Trump, however, insisted that each case Harris mentioned was brought against him by political opponents, and that he was “winning most of them,” or planned to “win the rest on appeal,” citing the presidential immunity decision handed down by the Supreme Court in Trump v. United States. The former president was firm in his stance that each one of the cases was an example of the Biden-Harris administration’s novel strategy to weaponize the Justice Department for partisan lawfare. “It’s weaponization. And they used it. And it’s never happened in this country. They used it to try and win an election. They’re fake cases,” he said. 

Harris pushed back, arguing that it was Trump who posed a direct threat to the preservation of the rule of law and democracy. She emphasized the danger of another Trump administration in the context of the Supreme Court’s immunity ruling, explaining that the Court’s decision ruled that Trump would “essentially be immune from any misconduct if he were to enter the White House again,” and said voters should understand that “this is someone who has openly said he would terminate, I'm quoting, terminate the constitution of the United States.” Harris argued that it would be Trump, not her administration, who would weaponize the Justice Department against political opponents.

Calling back to the efforts of various Trump aides and former Vice President Mike Pence on Jan. 6, 2021, to reject Trump’s attempts to overturn the results of the 2020 election, Harris again warned of the perils of a second Trump term: “Understand what it would mean if Donald Trump were back in the White House with no guardrails. Because certainly, we know now the court won’t stop him. We know JD Vance is not going to stop him. It’s up to the American people to stop him.”

Immigration

Unsurprisingly, immigration was referenced throughout the debate as a defining point of distinction between the candidates. Trump seized the opportunity to bring up immigration within the first few minutes: In response to Muir’s economic question, he suggested that migrants were filling jobs occupied by “African Americans and Hispanics and also unions.” While Muir attempted to steer the topic back to the economy, Trump’s immigration tangents continued throughout, realizing Harris’s prediction that he would mention the topic “even when [it wasn’t] the subject … being raised.” 

The frequency, as much as the substance, of these mentions reiterated Trump’s commitment to anti-immigrant rhetoric as a prominent feature of his campaign, but it also illuminated the degree to which the debate focused less on evaluating the benefits and drawbacks of immigration than it did on assessing the extent to which each candidate had been effective in combating it. In particular, Muir’s immigration question centered on the Biden administration’s record-high border crossings. Here, Harris relied heavily on her support for the Border Act of 2024—which would have imposed restrictions on border crossings and reworked the asylum process—and Trump’s responsibility for “killing” it. The bill, she claimed, would have prevented fentanyl deaths, allowed for the prosecution of transnational criminal organizations, and sent more agents to the border, but she said that Trump’s opposition to it demonstrated he’d “prefer to run on a problem instead of fixing a problem.”

While Trump did not acknowledge his involvement in killing the bill, he reiterated the perceived dangers of illegal immigration—including, he asserted, the eating of dogs and cats by immigrants in Springfield, Ohio—and promised to deport 11 million undocumented immigrants as part of his own proposal. Although Muir was unable to gain clarity on the specifics of this operation, such as whether the National Guard of the U.S. military would be involved and concerns over authorities going “door to door,” Trump justified its draconian scope by suggesting that Venezuela and others are sending criminals to the U.S., enabled by Harris-Biden policies.

NATO and Europe

Muir opened the Ukraine question by referencing Trump’s statement that he would “solve this war in 24 hours” after becoming president, asking for details and a confirmation of Trump’s support for Ukraine against Russia. While he neglected to immediately provide either, he pointed to the discrepancy between the U.S.’s monetary contribution to NATO versus the EU’s, asserting that “they should be forced to equalize.” In explaining his plan to end the war, Trump employed a personalist perspective, pointing to the strong relationships he has with both Zelenskyy and Putin and his ability to demand respect during negotiations—a strength he accused Biden of lacking. Notably, Trump was unwilling to provide an affirmative statement of U.S. support for Ukraine, emphasizing that “it’s in the U.S. best interest to get this war finished and just get it done.”

In contrast, Harris reiterated her commitment to the U.S.-Ukraine partnership, mentioning her own involvement in preparing Zelenskyy and NATO allies for the Russian invasion and asserting the importance of NATO military support in preserving Ukrainian independence. Harris suggested that the alternative—one she charged Trump with supporting, due to his closeness with the Russian president—would be “Putin … sitting in Kyiv with his eyes on the rest of Europe.” Trump responded by criticizing Harris for her lack of pragmatism and her (and NATO’s) failure to demonstrate the strength necessary to deter Putin in the first place, alleging that she met with him only a few days before he invaded. He pointed to Russia’s nuclear weapon stock as a factor that should be considered, suggesting that ​​”eventually maybe he’ll use them ... something we don’t even like to talk about.”

The disagreement over America’s duty in Ukraine highlighted a larger distinction between the two candidates: their view of the U.S.’s role in the international order. What emerged from Harris was a commitment to America’s ability to promote stability and “stand up for our principles and not sell them for the benefit of personal flattery.” Trump, on the other hand, painted his policy in terms of pragmatism and American aggrievement, eschewing notions of democratic ideals while emphasizing his personal ability to force world leaders to “pay up.”

The Middle East

In turning to the Israel-Hamas war “and the hostages who are still being held, Americans among them,” moderator Linsey Davis asked Harris how she would break through the stalemate in negotiations between Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Hamas leaders, something that her boss, President Biden, has been unable to do. Harris began her response with a reminder of “how we got here”—the killing of 1,200 Israelis on Oct. 7 by Hamas, “a terrorist organization”—as well as an affirmation of Israel’s right to defend itself. She then said that “far too many innocent Palestinians have been killed” including children and mothers. The way to achieve a cease-fire deal and release of hostages, according to Harris, is to “work around the clock also understanding that we must chart a course for a two-state solution,” which must include security for the Israeli people, a plan to rebuild Gaza, and an assurance that Palestinians will have “security, self-determination and the dignity they so rightly deserve.” She also doubled down on her promise to “give Israel the ability to defend itself, in particular as it relates to Iran and any threat that Iran and its proxies pose to Israel.”

Trump began his response by claiming that both the war in Gaza and Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine would have never happened if he were president before making the accusation that Harris “hates Israel” and the prediction that, if she becomes president, “Israel will not exist within two years from now.” (Harris responded that Trump’s claim that she hates Israel is “absolutely not true.”) He then broadened the scope of his accusations, claiming that Harris “hates the Arab population because the whole place is going to get blown up,” and blaming the Biden administration for making Iran a “rich nation” by lifting sanctions and then spreading that money around to “spheres of terror,” including Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis.     

At another point in the debate, the moderator asked Harris whether she bears any responsibility in the way that the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan played out. Though she didn’t answer the question directly, she said that she agreed with Biden’s decision to pull out of Afghanistan, claiming that it resulted in savings to the American taxpayer and the removal of all active-duty U.S. military members from all war zones, and criticized Trump for negotiating a “weak, terrible deal” with the Taliban. Trump countered that he “got involved with the Taliban because the Taliban was doing the killing,” before counterattacking Harris and her role in the withdrawal, including leaving “$85 billion worth of brand new beautiful military equipment behind.”

Trade

The topic of tariffs was key to understanding the two candidates’ models for the American economy. Harris initiated the discussion, strategically omitting the word “tariff.” Instead, the vice president framed Trump’s plan of sweeping tariffs on foreign goods as “the Trump sales tax,” tantamount to a “20 percent tax on everyday goods that you rely on to get through the month,” and pointed to economists’ estimations the tariffs would cost middle-class families upward of $4,000 a year.

Trump’s immediate response was to clarify that he would not implement a sales tax and that his plan should strictly be understood as tariffs on other countries. Trump explained that these tariffs would represent other countries finally repaying the United States after 75 years, for “all that we’ve done for the world,” perhaps referencing the Marshall Plan that saw the United States spend tens of billions of dollars to restore the economies of Europe in the aftermath of World War II or perhaps just more generally referring to the U.S. security umbrella in protecting other countries. 

The former president went on to claim that the Biden-Harris administration had retained the tariffs against China because they were especially profitable. Trump suggested that during his presidency, he “took in billions and billions of dollars, as you know, from China,” and that the Biden-Harris administration “never took the tariff off because it was so much money, they can't.”  Trump implied that the Biden-Harris administration’s entire plan relied on the revenue from the tariffs, such that removing them would “totally destroy everything that they’ve set out to do.”

Unlike his successor, however, the former president claimed he was able to retain the tariffs with no inflation. Inflation in the United States, Trump claimed, was currently “probably the worst in our nation’s history.” A rate of 21 percent inflation, at its highest, was not even representative of prices, according to Trump, as “many things are 50, 60, 70, and 80 percent higher than they were just a few years ago.” This, he claimed, was destroying the middle class, as well as the “millions of people pouring into our country from prisons and jails, from mental institutions and insane asylums.” 

Later in the debate, Muir, seeking to return the conversation to tariffs, challenged Trump on the viability of his plan to impose 20 percent tariffs on all foreign imports. Muir pointed out that economists have determined that the tariff would largely be passed on to the consumer, just as Vice President Harris had explained.

Trump again insisted that it was the Chinese, not the American consumer, onto whom the higher prices would be passed and that this was payback for China and other countries “ripping us off for years.” Trump repeated that the tariffs’ effectiveness had already been demonstrated by the Biden-Harris administration retaining them, and reaffirmed that his economy would once again see China paying hundreds of billions, before pointing to polling numbers allegedly showing that “80 and 85 and even 90 percent that the Trump economy was great that their economy was terrible.”

The vice president opted to deflect the question of retaining tariffs against China, pivoting to treating China primarily through the lens of national security. She highlighted several perceived mistakes that Trump had made in dealing with the PRC. Harris pointed to the implementation of tariffs having sparked a trade war with China, and she railed against the willingness of the Trump administration to sell American-designed chips to China, which she suggested had allowed the People’s Liberation Army to improve and modernize. She denounced Trump’s actions as selling the United States out at a critical point for ensuring that the United States “wins the competition for the 21st century.”

Harris continued, emphasizing the importance of cooperation with allies, investment in artificial intelligence (AI) and quantum computing, and supporting America’s workforce. Conversely, she deplored Trump’s Twitter praise of Chinese President Xi Jinping for his actions during the coronavirus pandemic, given consensus indicating that “Xi was responsible for lacking and not giving us transparency about the origins of COVID.”

Trump retorted that the Biden-Harris administration had begun buying chips from Taiwan, and that the United States therefore “hardly make chips anymore because of philosophies like they have and policies like they have.” This marked the end of discussion of China, tariffs, and trade, as Trump promptly began insinuating that the vice president was a Marxist, before pivoting once more back to “bad immigration,” which he deemed “the worst thing that can happen to our economy.”

Climate Change

For the final topic of the night, the hosts turned to questions of climate change. Davis began by pressing Trump on his simple declaration that “we have to have clean air and clean water,” while Harris was prompted on climate change as “an existential threat.” Both candidates were asked what they would do to fight climate change. Harris began with her vision for a climate change plan with an immediate clarification: Unlike Trump, the vice president did not view climate change as a hoax. Rather, she considered it a very real threat to the United States, citing examples of extreme weather occurrences. She also pointed out that climate change had affected many people, both directly, with some losing their homes, and indirectly, with many simply feeling the effects of increasing home insurance costs. 

Harris emphasized the importance of the environment as an issue to young people, while pointing to the efforts of the Biden administration in investing a trillion dollars in a clean energy economy, as well as increasing domestic gas production and creating 800,000 manufacturing jobs. She continued by contrasting the Biden-Harris administration’s success with Trump’s administration, suggesting that further major investment in American manufacturing was necessary, including opening up new auto plants, citing her recent endorsement by the United Auto Workers and Shawn Fain. She criticized Trump for “los[ing] manufacturing jobs” and auto plant closures during his presidency (earlier in the debate, she was deeply critical of Trump inciting a trade war with China and causing a trade deficit).

Trump chose not to answer the question on climate change directly, instead opting to directly challenge Harris’s criticisms. In doing so, he circled back to the subject of tariffs, trade, and China. He pointed out that the U.S. economy had recently lost 10,000 manufacturing jobs—according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, that may even be an understatement. Trump bemoaned the construction of new auto plants in Mexico, which he claims are in many cases owned by China, that would lead to foreign cars being imported cheaply into the United States; a significant concession to China, the former president claimed.

The former president’s antidote to this? Tariffs on automobiles to prevent their importation. Otherwise, Trump warned, the death of UAW and “any auto worker, whether it’s in Detroit or South Carolina or any other place,” would ensue. Trump suggested that business and manufacturing in the United States were already suffering as a result of China’s actions. Trump concluded his answer by repeating his past insinuations that President Biden was corrupt. Trump declared that Biden, having been paid millions by  China, Ukraine, and even the mayor of Moscow’s wife, was intentionally neglecting the state of industry in the United States, presiding over “a crooked administration” that was “selling our country down the tubes.”