Thursday’s televised debate between President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump is finally mere hours away, and I am left to ponder wearily, whether the postdebate analysis will go on (and on) longer than the pre-debate analysis has gone on (and on).
All of which is to say, pay no attention to the pundit industry, which will feel compelled to declare a winner.
Who wins is up to you, of course, and this is the point.
When you watch the debate tonight, look for you.
See if either candidate speaks meaningfully, genuinely and, yes, authoritatively, about what matters to you.
The debate should be — despite the analysis — and, ultimately, will be about whether either of these guys connects with you on a level that has anything to do with your day-to-day reality. Whether either of them will demonstrate a coherent understanding of the urgent need to safeguard the economy, the country, the planet and our democracy and the ways those things manifest themselves — your job, the cost of living, keeping your family safe and healthy, and so on.
In their debates, Barack Obama and Ronald Reagan imbued the campaign with a distinctive style of hope. Bill Clinton convinced voters that he truly cared about making a better America for each of us. George H.W. Bush conveyed a confidence borne of experience. We can wrangle through all the other baggage each brought to their candidacies or their presidencies. But they used moments such as tonight’s to connect on the urgent matters that affect our daily lives.
You know what is important to you. No one needs to tell you what it is, including me.
So, look for those moments in tonight’s debate that speak to you, and be not bothered or distracted by the “expert analysis.”
In a recent and cogent essay, veteran pollster Frank Luntz said he is looking for a moment that will “crystallize the stakes of the race and the choice in November with a single memorable line that speaks to the feelings, instincts and perhaps even the fears of so many voters about America today.”
In other words, are they talking to you, and about you?
Recommended for you
SEND MONEY: The Biden campaign keeps pestering me for $1 or $3 or $5 that apparently will make all the difference in the campaign. The rhetoric of the email pitches has taken a weird turn.
One from Biden said he was “not mad, just disappointed.”
Mom? Is that you?
LOCAL, LOCAL: The switch to district elections demonstrated it is easier for an insurgent (and often progressive) newcomer to take out a previously entrenched incumbent. Now, the question is whether the newcomer, now an incumbent, is just as vulnerable.
A couple of cities appear likely to put that question to the test, notably South San Francisco, where challengers are being recruited to take on incumbents James Coleman and Mark Nagales. The formidable Karyl Matsumoto is said to be behind the ouster effort.
The opening of the candidate filing period is still more than two weeks away, and it closes on Aug. 9. We will see who ends up running in South City and whether such challenges will turn up elsewhere.
Long-established incumbents are stepping aside in San Carlos and Burlingame, setting up a scramble in these two usually sedate cities. Ron Collins is retiring from the San Carlos City Council after 12 years; Emily Beach is leaving the Burlingame City Council to take a position as chief communications officer at SamTrans, which has proven to be a fruitful career path for at least one person I know.
And we all know Amourence Lee is not seeking reelection to the San Mateo City Council because she keeps telling us on social media. Leading to this gem: “Reflecting on my legacy of leadership, I have decided to step aside and support Charles Hansen for San Mateo City Council because I will not deprive our city of true leadership.”
In the race to replace Anna Eshoo in the 16th Congressional District, not nearly as interesting now that there are only two candidates, former San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo scooped up some key endorsements in San Mateo County, including Supervisor Ray Mueller, incoming Supervisor Jackie Speier and former state Sen. Jerry Hill. Liccardo also announced endorsements from Pacifica Mayor Sue Vaterlaus and Half Moon Bay Councilmembers Robert Brownstone, Debbie Ruddock and Harvey Rarback. Assemblymember Evan Low, Liccardo’s opponent, appears off to a slow start in the county. Speaking of which, the endorsement news release said, “Liccardo is the candidate who will fight for San Mateo.” Not quite. San Mateo County, maybe. The city of San Mateo is not in the district.
Mark Simon is a veteran journalist, whose career included 15 years as an executive at SamTrans and Caltrain. He can be reached at marksimon@smdailyjournal.com.

(5) comments
This is for Ray, considering his thoughtful piece. I sent it in as an LTE but there is usually quite a time lag so....here's a preview
***************
The domestic Punch and Judy show just on television, sorely reminded me of that children's puppet show where, two small figures would argue and ultimately resort to whacking each other over the head to the delight of those watching. I'm referring to our recent presidential “debate”, where barely intelligible phrases and occasional full sentences were full of confusing and contradictory statements leaving very few people laughing. Especially as it represented the prospective top level decision makers who hoped to lead a nation. I believe the takeaway from it all was to impress upon the watcher that we do need a multi-national approach to world governance. For, to behold the top nation reduced to presenting this sorry spectacle should impress upon us all that we are in a very sorry state as to the viability of a planetary future for our species. Feel free to pray to your preferred deity.
Mike Caggiano
hello, Mike
Looks like your preview captures how a lot of people feel about Thursday's debate. I saw a political cartoon that showed Joe and The Donald as two kids squaring off in a schoolyard ringed by other school kids. It was a classic Pee Wee vs. Frances... "I know you are but what am I?" standoff. Of course, because it's 2024, most of the kids were recording the back-and-forth taunting on their smartphones. Hmmm... there are too many schoolyard bullies out there to think about multi-national world governance. With Shemp, Moe and Larry... otherwise known as Vlad, Xi and Ali... in the schoolyard, it's not likely world governance would work well for us.
Thanks for your LTE preview, Mr. Caggiano. I’m not familiar with Punch and Judy as I’ve never seen this puppet show so I’ll offer an alternative on the recent presidential “debate.” Wile E. Coyote Biden vs. Road Runner Trump. Every time Biden offered up one of his widely debunked lies and fake news, Trump deftly blew Biden’s traps in Biden’s face. To wit, Biden claiming Trump did nothing when Iran-backed militia attacked troops in Iraq. I guess Biden conveniently forgot about the drone strike on Soleimani. Biden claiming he is the only president this century with no troop deaths. I guess Biden conveniently forgot about the troops killed when Biden took two knees and gifted the Taliban with Afghanistan. Biden claiming Trump called military men and women “suckers” and “losers.” I guess Biden conveniently forgot about the Atlantic debunking those claims. Biden claiming Trump referred to neo-Nazis as very “fine people.” I guess Biden completely forgot that’s been debunked. And the list goes on. As I said, Road Runner Trump blowing up Wile E. Coyote Biden’s traps in Biden’s face.
As for a multi-national approach to world governance, methinks the USA might be on the losing end as the forces against the USA are amassing more against us now, thanks to bumbling Biden and his incompetence. The bigger question now is whether Hamas sympathizers in American government will cause Israel to ally with Russia and North Korea. If the rubber hits the road, I’m betting China may join that same alliance.
Hey, Mark
I chat online with a couple of buddies who have widely diverging political viewpoints. We email each other about all manner of things including what’s posted in the DJ by other readers. Our exchanges are honest… and fun… and without the ad hominem that appears too frequently in the DJ’s comments section. Concerning last night’s debate, I emailed the following:
I followed Mark Simon's advice... I didn't tune into pundits before or after the debate.
I gave the edge to Trump. However, that's not saying much. I have been saying in the DJ that I do not like either candidate as their party's choice, and last night's debate solidified that POV for me.
I was ready to overlook an occasional gaffe or mumble by Joe, but there was just too much. It was sad. Yes, The Donald toned down the bombast, but that was not enough. Where I think he may have edged out Biden was saying OK to the abortion drug, and while he opposes late term abortion, The Donald reeled off a list of abortion exceptions. Biden made some unforced errors like mentioning the murder of women by illegal immigrants... Joe really has no answer for his policies that have allowed millions and millions of undocumented border crossings except to say he plans to reduce those numbers. As an aside, that's kinda like the exchanges we see in the DJ. When the folks on the right side of the aisle criticize the current administration on its border policies, the folks on the left essentially go silent.
The next debate is September 10. For Joe, it will be two outs in the bottom of the ninth and he needs to knock it out of the park. I don't think he can do it.
Thanks, Mr. Simon, for your guidance on who to vote for. Although a debate isn’t required to determine who speaks to you. Our great President Trump has already proven to Make America Great Again while treasonous Biden has shown he promotes America Last. The fact that Biden desperately attempts to take credit, and implement, some of Trump’s America First policies tells you all you need to know about bumbling Biden. Again, a debate isn’t required. The reality of our current situation tells everyone all they need to know. Act appropriately and vote for Trump to Take America Back.
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.