Well, I enjoyed the debate, but the thing that is so strange to me is how often the narrative of the debate is not decided until the punditry/news chime in and tell us what occurred.  In other words, telling us what we just saw.

To me, Harris did exactly (and more) what he needed to do and will please the Dems (though she missed out on a perfect opportunity to throw out the word "weird" when Trump was talking about eating pets that would have certainly been on the highlight reel). Still, her opening handshake was masterful (of course, the Neanderthals will puff out their chest and declare how he made her come to him, but what she did threw a psychological wrench in that fuck's mind).

Trump, was himself, and pleasurable to his MAGA Cult.

And I love all the whine from MAGA about "fact-checking" when, really, what lie did Harris tell that was on par with the claim of doctors of murdering newborn babies or immigrants eating pets? (Here is why I don't want to see the Dems dive down on the eating pets story - because those fuckers will find ONE case of this actually happening and then declare how correct they were - and they will find a case of that somewhere and fuck whether it is a cultural practice or not).

Lastly, ABC let that prick ramble on five minutes more than Harris and interrupt her more often, so where was the mike muting - though, her tactic of letting him talk and dig his own grave was good, too.