In a high-stakes presidential debate on September 10, 2024, former President Donald Trump faced off against Democratic candidate Vice President Kamala Harris at The National Constitution Center in Philadelphia.
Eight years ago, Donald Trump claimed he had put to rest the controversy surrounding President Obama’s country of origin, crediting himself for resolving any doubts stemming from statements by Hillary Clinton in earlier years. This assertion shocked many aware of the facts behind the birther conspiracy, a theory long propagated by Trump’s critics to question Obama’s legitimacy as president.
Some believe Trump’s rise from television celebrity to political contender was accelerated by his involvement with the birther myth. In September 2016, what Trump really communicated was a decision to stop addressing a non-issue he had helped perpetuate, while simultaneously portraying himself as the hero of the narrative.
Nearly a decade into Trump’s political career, his reliance on untruths has become commonplace. The blatant nature of his shift on the birther issue came to the forefront back in 2016. Many assumed it would dent his appeal, yet he stunned the nation by winning the Electoral College shortly after.
During the initial Trump years, the media often attempted to take him literally but not seriously. However, supporters of Trump were seen leaning the opposite way—taking him seriously without the necessity of literal interpretation. This dichotomy remains pertinent as we head into 2024, echoing sentiments from his previous campaigns.
As expectations shift in media coverage, Trump’s tendency to make unfounded claims continues to present a challenge for journalists and the political establishment alike. He has a track record of making exaggerated states about economic performance and inflation, often dismissing criticism and maintaining the resilience of these claims despite considerable evidence to the contrary.
Trump’s Own Version of Reality
Following his recent debate with Vice President Harris, Trump boldly declared he had no need for further debates, claiming victory in both the previous encounters, including a June 27 debate against President Biden. Surprising many, Trump insisted he won both, despite polls indicating that viewers found Harris more compelling in their recent debate face-off.
While Trump boasted about winning various polls, many were self-selected online surveys rather than scientifically valid samples, leading to skepticism about the legitimacy of his claims. Actual polling from reputable organizations like YouGov showed Harris garnering significant support, underscoring the divergent views on the debate’s outcome.
Trump’s tendency to present inflated figures about immigration underscores his strategy of relying on hyperbole over factual accuracy. His assertions about illegal immigration numbers lack credible evidence, reflecting a broader pattern where shock value takes precedence over genuine statistical accuracy.
The June 27 debate with Biden showcased similar patterns, where misstatements often overshadowed his performance. Trump claimed illegal immigrants had taken “110%” of the jobs created, highlighting his lack of engagement with factual discussions. Public opinion indicates a significant number of voters still plan to support him, despite his frequent misrepresentations.
The Evolving Landscape of Fact-Checking
Fact-checking has evolved significantly over recent decades, with journalists prioritizing accurate reporting over the traditional “he said, she said” narratives. As news outlets strive for factual clarity, the advent of fact-checking organizations has become a vital part of election reporting.
However, the latest debates and subsequent corrections made by moderators sparked allegations of bias from Trump’s supporters, a reflection of the contentious and polarized media landscape. Trump’s own remarks, including claims about dramatic shifts in policies relating to immigration and health care, prompt further scrutiny from fact-checkers and journalists alike.
Trump’s interactions with the press have created an atmosphere where fact-checking itself is now viewed as contentious, blurring the lines of truth and perception in political discourse. As we navigate this polarized environment, the challenges for media outlets only seem to grow.
