Former Democratic Representative Tulsi Gabbard is facing widespread criticism for her involvement in preparing Donald Trump for a highly anticipated debate against Vice President Kamala Harris.
The Independent reported that despite her assurances that Trump was well-prepared, many observers viewed his debate performance as disappointing compared to his previous showing against President Biden, sparking scrutiny of Gabbard.
Trump’s unconventional preparation methods were questioned, especially following his debate remarks, which included baseless claims and erratic statements.
Gabbard, who once had a fiery exchange with Harris during a 2019 Democratic presidential debate, has since shifted her political allegiance to Trump.
In the lead-up to the debate, Gabbard played a role in helping Trump get ready for his face-off against Harris, which took place on September 10. The debate was hosted by ABC News, where both candidates aimed to address the nation's most pressing issues.
While Harris engaged in rigorous preparation sessions in Pittsburgh, Trump opted for a more informal approach.
His preparation largely involved casual discussions, campaign stops, and media appearances, in stark contrast to Harris’ structured mock debates. Gabbard defended their strategy, asserting that they "focused on the issues that matter the most." She also emphasized that Trump treated all opponents, including women, equally in his approach to the debate.
However, during the debate, Trump’s performance was widely criticized, particularly for a bizarre comment he made about migrants allegedly eating pets in Springfield, Ohio. The baseless remark drew attention for its lack of grounding in reality and became a key point of contention for his critics.
Following the debate, social media erupted with criticism of both Trump’s performance and Gabbard’s role in preparing him. Many commentators took to X, formerly known as Twitter, to express their dissatisfaction with how the debate unfolded.
Jackson Peel, the rapid response director for Harris in Florida, sarcastically thanked Gabbard for her contribution to Trump’s performance. Meanwhile, a popular X user known as Angry Staffer quipped that "Tulsi Gabbard’s career as a debate coach didn’t even last a whole Scaramucci," referring to the famously short tenure of former White House communications director Anthony Scaramucci.
Others took aim at the unconventional nature of Trump’s preparation team, which reportedly included figures like Gabbard and Republican Rep. Matt Gaetz. Tommy Vietor, a former Obama White House staffer, suggested that relying on what he called “policy sessions” with such figures was a “fatal mistake.”
He argued that Trump appeared “angry” and was easily baited throughout the debate, citing his odd rants about eating animals and the size of his crowd.
In addition to Gabbard, Trump himself came under fire for his behavior during the debate. Several political commentators criticized his demeanor, stating that he appeared frustrated and off-balance. Vietor noted that Trump’s remarks about crowd sizes and animal consumption only served to undermine his credibility with viewers.
Gabbard, for her part, attempted to counter these criticisms by insisting that the preparation focused on key issues that were important to voters.
She also maintained that Trump’s debate style was consistent with how he addresses all opponents, male or female. "President Trump respects women and doesn’t feel the need to be patronizing or to speak to women in any other way than he would speak to a man," Gabbard stated, defending her role in the process.
Despite Gabbard’s defense, public opinion seemed overwhelmingly critical. One X user, identified as a veteran of the U.S. Marines, mocked the collaboration between Trump and Gabbard, sarcastically thanking Gabbard for her “brilliant debate prep.”
Another user chimed in, praising Gabbard and RFK Jr. in the same breath, implying that their involvement may have contributed to Trump’s less-than-stellar showing during the debate.
Some viewed Trump’s debate performance as a missed opportunity, pointing to Harris’ rigorous preparation as a sharp contrast to Trump’s more off-the-cuff style. Harris’ structured approach to the debate stood in stark contrast to Trump’s improvisation, leading many to argue that Trump was ultimately unprepared for the high-stakes nature of the exchange.
As Trump continues his campaign efforts, the criticism following his debate performance could have lasting impacts on his public image. Whether or not Gabbard remains part of his team in future debates or public appearances is yet to be seen. Her involvement has already sparked significant backlash from both sides of the political spectrum, and her future role in Trump’s campaign remains uncertain.
Meanwhile, Harris has received praise for her preparedness and ability to handle the debate’s challenges with a more measured tone. Her preparation in Pittsburgh, which included extensive mock sessions, likely played a role in her more polished performance on stage.
