[CHEERS AND APPLAUSE]
>> Stephen: RIGHT THERE. WE ARE BACK WITH THE ANCHOR OF
"THE DAILY REPORT WITH JOHN DICKERSON" CBS NEWS.
MR. JOHN DICKERSON. JOHN DICKERSON, WE LEARNED A LOT
ABOUT KAMALA HARRIS TONIGHT, AS YOU SAID.
THERE WAS A LOT THE AUDIENCE DIDN'T KNOW.
20% OF AMERICANS WANTED TO LEARN MORE.
WE HAVE BEEN WITH DONALD TRUMP PRETTY CONSISTENTLY FOR NINE
YEARS NOW. IS THERE MORE WE LEARNED
TONIGHT? WHAT IS THERE LEFT FOR US TO
HAVE LEARNED ABOUT DONALD TRUMP? >> John: THAT'S THE RIGHT
QUESTION. WHAT ARE DEBATES FOR?
>> Stephen: YOU CAN STOP RIGHT THERE AND JUST SAY THAT WAS THE
RIGHT QUESTION, THAT'S ALL I WANTED WAS APPROVAL.
>> John: I CALL HIM ON THE SHOW AND TELL YOU HOW GREAT YOUR
QUESTIONS ARE. IT'S A VERY GOOD RELATIONSHIP.
[LAUGHTER] WHAT ARE DEBATES FOR?
THEY ARE AN APPROXIMATION OF WHAT THE JOB MIGHT BE LIKE.
IT'S A SERIOUS MOMENT WHEN THEY'RE ASKED GOOD QUESTIONS
ABOUT WHAT THEY WOULD DO IN THE JOB AND YOU GET SOME IDEA.
WE KNOW WHAT DONALD TRUMP WOULD BE LIKE IN THE JOB BECAUSE HE
HAS BEEN IN THE JOB. SECONDARILY UNLIKE PREVIOUS
PRESIDENTS WHO HAVE RUN AS INCUMBENTS, YOU HAVE PEOPLE FROM
WITHIN THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION, MANY OF WHOM SPOKE UNDER OATH
ABOUT HOW HE PERFORMED IN THAT JOB.
SO IN HIS HANDS, YOU DON'T NEED A DEBATE TO KNOW HOW HE WILL
BEHAVE IN OFFICE BECAUSE YOU HAVE ALL THE TIME HE BEHAVED IN
OFFICE. WHAT WAS DISPLAYED IN THAT
DEBATE I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS COMPARED TO HIS PREVIOUS DEBATE
PERFORMANCES, FIRST OF ALL, HE CANNOT GET PAST THE CROWD SIZE
THING. IF YOU ARE ALWAYS TRYING TO
THINK, WHAT IS YOU LEARN IN THE DEBATE THAT GOES TO THE
PRESIDENCY? IF YOU CANNOT WITHSTAND BEING
TAUNTED ABOUT CROWD SIZE, IF YOU ARE INCAPABLE OF NOT TAKING THE
BAIT, YOU LACK SOME ABILITY TO CONTROL YOUR PASSIONS.
THAT'S NOT SOMETHING YOU WANT IN A PRESIDENCY WHICH IS ALL ABOUT
BASICALLY ACTING BOTH WITH DISPATCH BUT ALSO A LOT OF TIMES
WITH RESTRAINT. SPOON THE HARRIS CAMPAIGN KNEW
HE COULDN'T RESIST IT. THEY HAD BILLBOARDS UP AROUND
PHILLY AND ADDS SHOWING TO PRETZELS.
A HARRIS PRETZEL ANTI-TRUMP PRETZEL SAYING "CROWD SIZE
MATTERS." WITH A FAIRLY SOFT PRETZEL.
>> John: AND THIS IS JUVENILE EXCEPT THAT HE SHOWED AGAIN THAT
HE'S OBSESSED WITH THAT SO I THINK THEY'RE JUST REINFORCED --
CROWD SIZE DOESN'T MATTER PERSON EXCEPT THAT IT'S A THING THAT
WOULD'VE BEEN IN HIS ADVANTAGE TO BLOW OFF AND MOVE ON AND SAY
WHAT HE SAID AT HIS VERY END OF THE REMARKS, HIS CLOSING
STATEMENT WHERE HE SAID YOU'VE GOT ALL THESE PLANS.
WHY DIDN'T YOU DO IT WHEN YOU WERE IN OFFICE.
HE WAITED UNTIL THE END OF THE DEBATE TO SAY THAT WHEN HE
DEBATED HILLARY CLINTON HE SAID THAT FIRST AND HE WAS RELENTLESS
MAKING THAT CASE. YOU'VE BEEN IN POLITICS, HE SAID
TO HILLARY CLINTON, 30 YEARS. WHY HAVEN'T YOU DONE ALL THESE
THINGS? IT GETS TO PHONINESS.
IT DEFLATES WHATEVER PLANS. BUT IN THIS CASE HE LEFT IT AT
THE END AND SPENT ALL THIS TIME TALKING ABOUT CROWD SIZES AND
PETS AND SOME OF THESE OTHER DIVERSIONS.
THE ONLY HAVE A MINUTE BEFORE OUR NEXT BREAK.
HOW DO YOU THINK SHE DEALT WITH THE OTHER PROBLEM OF
DONALD TRUMP, THE GATLING GUN OF LIES.
HOW DO YOU THINK SHE DID AGAINST THE ONSLAUGHT OF THE FALSEHOODS.
>> John: SHE WAS JUDICIOUS. THE PROBLEM WITH THE GATLING GUN
AS YOU TRY TO KNOCK OFF EACH ONE IN YOUR TIME IS UP AND HE DIDN'T
GET TO SAY WHAT SHE WANTED TO SAY.
SHE WAS JUDICIOUS IN WHAT SHE FACT-CHECKED.
THE MODERATORS FACT-CHECKED JUDICIOUSLY THEMSELVES WHICH
WERE BLOOMERS, JUST LIES. OFTENTIMES SHE IGNORED THE
QUESTION AND SAID WHAT SHE WANTED TO SAY WHICH IS A WAY OF
GETTING ACROSS WHAT SHE ONE DAY THE CROSS SHE IGNORED THE
DIVERSE QUESTION OF THE DEBATE WHICH WAS, ARE PEOPLE
BETTER OFF THAN THEY WERE FOUR YEARS AGO.
SHE JUST WENT RIGHT TO HER POLICIES.
WE WILL SEE IF VOTERS BOTHER ABOUT THAT.
I THINK THAT WAS SORT OF THE THREE-PRONGED WAY SHE GOT AROUND
THIS PROBLEM OF BEING KIND OF PINNED DOWN BY LIES.
>> Stephen: WE HAVE TO TAKE ONE MORE BREAK.
WE'LL BE RIGHT BACK WITH MORE JOHN DICKERSON, EVERYBODY.