Moderators, Pundits and Critics: The Media Winners and Losers of the ABC Presidential Debate

AP Photo/Elise Amendola

Objective viewers hold pretty universally that Vice President Kamala Harris beat former President Donald Trump in their debate on Tuesday night. When it comes to media figures, however, the winners and losers run the political gamut.

ABC News drew mixed reviews for the impossible-to-please-everyone debate, with primarily conservative critics calling out what they deemed unfair treatment of the Republican candidate. Some of that criticism was over the top, but part of it was based on what seemed a different standard by which they held the two candidates.

Ultimately, the major night in politics brought out the extremes in everyone. Reactions and performances ranged from reasonable to hyperbolic to just plain nutty. Some emerged with higher reputational standing, while others were left bruised for unsound reasoning. Following are the winners and losers of the ABC presidential debate:

WINNERS: Dana Bash and Jake Tapper

Before the first debate (which featured then-Democratic candidate President Joe Biden ), Trump and his media surrogates tried hard to game to refs with preemptive complaints. It didn’t work, and CNN’s moderators opted not to insert themselves into the proceedings, by not fact-checking or interfering on Biden’s behalf, whose performance was so bad he eventually bowed out of the race. The ABC debate stood in stark difference, and while some progressive voices preferred the approach of calling out Trump’s false claims, much of the post-debate discussion centered around the moderators. In sports, the best referees go unnoticed. Due to how ABC moderated Tuesday night’s affair, Tapper and Bash’s standing across the partisan spectrum is now higher.

LOSERS: David Muir and Linsey Davis

David Muir and Linsey Davis did a mostly fine job. I honestly have zero problems with their quick fact-checks on provably false — and potentially dangerous — assertions made by Trump regarding infanticide and immigrants eating pets. Where they erred, however, is in failing to hold the two candidates to the same standard when both Harris and Trump altogether avoided questions and instead opted for pre-planned talking points. Yes, politicians do that all the time, but it seemed like only Trump was pressed to answer the topic that was asked of him.

For example, Muir asked the vice president why it took until the fourth year of the Biden-Harris administration to address the problems at the border meaningfully. Harris ignored the question and simply blamed Trump for directing his GOP Congressional surrogates to kill the bipartisan bill — a reasonable answer for the Democratic candidate, but instead of challenging Harris to answer the question asked, Muir took Harris’s bait and effectively asked Trump why that was the case. It was a fascinating discussion that gave credence to conservative criticism — however overblown — that it was an unfair fight. And again, while much of the reaction from the right was over the top, the reputation of ABC News suffered in the eyes of conservatives.

WINNER: Brit Hume

Because of their outsized influence, the reactions from pundits on Fox News following any big political event are fascinating to view as a means to predict how many will follow suit. Hume is something of the elder statesmen on the most visible Fox News panels, and he did not mince words after the debate, saying it was a “ bad night ” for Trump.  He gets the “winner” laurel not for saying Trump’s performance was bad but for plainly speaking truth to power and not simply giving a mostly pro-Trump audience of viewers the feedback they want to hear.

LOSER: Megyn Kelly

Sorry Megyn. I’m happy for your recent success in preaching to outraged conservatives, but your live-tweeting of the Trump-Harris debate not only verged on unhinged but also served to parade just how far you’ve gone to the fringe. If someone didn’t watch the debate and only got their information about how it went down from Kelly’s feed, they’d be left thinking VP Harris was a puddled mess of nerves and awkward facial expressions — that she was not only the clear loser, but that Trump did next to nothing wrong. That’s not at all what happened. To her credit, Kelly was among the first to call out how the moderators tilted toward Harris, but even that critique was so over the top it belabored credibility. Kelly took her defense of Trump to an absurd level when she appeared on NewsNation Wednesday and defended the former president for his ludicrous claim immigrants are eating America’s pets. Kelly is a whip-smart cultural and political observer, but as is always the case, if one is dedicated only to calling out one political side? One’s overall judgment itself comes into question.

WINNER: Bill O’Reilly and Geraldo Rivera

O’Reilly and Rivera are very different media figures but have much in common: They are former Fox News employees who have long enjoyed friendship with Trump and now find themselves on NewsNation (where I am also a contributor). But while their media analysis is not always in tune, they each are willing to call balls and strikes as they see it, even if it means calling out their old pal, effectively risking a relationship with a current or former friend. Bill O’Reilly was unafraid to see the debate for what it was, openly saying that Trump had a bad night while offering other nuanced analysis. Geraldo was much tougher on his old NYC heyday pal, saying his performance was creepy and cringey. Again, it is not their criticism of Trump that gets them the “winner” title — it’s their willingness to call it as they see it and value their truthful opinion over any friendly alliance.

LOSER: Chris Hayes

MSNBC’s post-debate panel was absolutely LIT with excitement following the debate and for entirely understandable reasons. Their candidate just performed as well as anyone could reasonably expect, and Trump went full Archie Bunker by openly sharing absurd and dangerous conspiracy theories. It’s in these instances that partisan exuberance is best kept in check, but this was not an abiding principle followed by Hayes, who could not contain his joyous hyperbole saying that Kamala Harris’s debate performance rose to the greatest debate performance of all time . I mean, sure, MSNBC viewers delighted in hearing that, but any accolade at that level typically comes with the wisdom of time and distance. That sort of over-the-top reaction attracts monetizable viewers but does little to secure Hayes’s standing as a sober and reasonable observer.

WINNER: John Dickerson

The political media LOVES presidential debates for a variety of reasons, not least of which is that it’s an enormous tentpole event that throws off a ton of content but, more importantly, draws the very viewers that help the bottom line and draw revenue. During an appearance on The Late Show with Stephen Colbert , the CBS contributor said the thing that almost no one is brave enough to say out loud, that the presidential debates effectively “have no clothes” when he admitted that presidential debates probably don’t matter that much . It was a brave and astute observation that not many in the political media racket are willing to admit politically and a cautionary tale for Kamala Harris stans anticipating some significant bounce in the post-debate polls that might not happen at all.

LOSER: Mollie Hemingway and Sean Davis

Both the Federalist Editor-in-Chief and CEO were so apoplectic at ABC News debate moderators’ apparent bias that they literally called for criminal charges against the network. Davis shared via social media, “Remove ABC’s broadcast license and criminally charge the moderators and executives for campaign finance fraud,” which Hemingway (a Fox News contributor) then amplified on X. The irony here is that each of these fools have long warned against crackdowns on free speech and baselessly alleged that “Big Tech” is out to get conservatives, but their reaction to a couple of tough questions of the former president is so laughably insane its hard to take them, or any Fox News show that features them, seriously at all.

WINNER: Yamiche Alcindor

The NBC contributor produced probably the best moment from the post-debate spin room when she confronted Senator JD Vance on his baseless claim that Haitian immigrants were eating domesticated pets, an absurd charge amplified during the debate by former President Trump. Seeing as she is also of Haitian descent, this dangerous and race-baiting trope was very personal to Alcindor, but she grilled Vance with just the right mixture of dispassionate questioning and impassioned anger for a story that many of us still cannot believe is being covered.

WINNER and LOSER: Bret Baier and Martha MacCallum

The two Fox News anchors called it as they saw it in the moments that followed the end of the debate, with Baier noting how confident and well-prepared Kamala Harris was in her performance. For her part, MacCallum was among the very first on-air talent to complain about what she saw as unfair treatment by ABC News moderators, which was a voicey bit of analysis from someone who is ostensibly a straight news anchor, but the brave and astute thing to say. So on that front, they came out winners.

During a next morning call into Fox & Friends, however, former President Trump threw both of them under the bus , saying he’d only do a Fox News-hosted debate if one of the more friendly voices on the network — Sean Hannity , Laura Ingraham, or Jesse Watters — were to moderate. It was awkward and left the Fox & Friends curvy couch somewhat gobsmacked that Trump was talking smack about Fox’s top anchor on Fox’s airwaves. Credit to Brian Kilmeade for defending his colleagues to Trump, but rest assured, Baier and MacCallum’s standing with Trump world took a hit due to this moment, which each should wear as a badge of courage.