This first presidential debate was awaited by everyone as a way to give some sort of judgment on either Donald Trump or Hilary Clinton. As expected they didn’t disappoint us. There were grimaces, nodding, feisty side comments against each other. However, since this time is the perfect moment to assess our view on the process of this election, it is also a good timing to pay closer attention to other details which make the particularity of this race. Having a woman against a man is already unorthodox for the US, but having Trump against Clinton is even more usual. Their interaction during this first debate revealed a lot of how body language, language, and camera angle gave one candidate the upper hand on the other.

First of all, it is fair to say that both candidates speak with their hands and this made the whole debate very theatrical. Trump, does is out of habit which adds to his charming mannerism, and Hilary to get her point across and appear more assertive. In addition, as most of the news outlets have commented on, Hilary appeared composed, warm, and genuine in her remarks. For instance, when she invited viewers to join the debate and contribute by saying even more “crazy things”. From my view it seemed almost condescending, as if she were a mother looking at her child, embarrassing himself, and thinking to herself “it’s not his fault”. SMH. As much as Hilary was relaxed, the same can’t be said about Trump. He kept drinking water a lot as a sign of nervousness. Grimaces and interruptions were really a pattern for Trump. We can assume that he felt so frustrated to the point that he needed to interrupt her more than 50 times in only 90 minutes. This might be his way to keep control of the discussion and make up for his lack of preparation and facts. Trump’s anxiety was also transparent within the first seconds of his speech by speaking nervously (and quickly) and calling Clinton “Senator Clinton”. This was already a faux pas for him by starting off with some provocation (which Hilary didn’t respond to). Hilary’s choice of clothing also spoke volumes about the kind of message she wanted to pass on as a woman running for president. This made her look strong and flamboyant compare to Trump’s classic/dull suit which matched his responses.

Adding to this, language itself served on Hilary’s side, because was she not only very well informed she was also staying (mostly) on time the question schedule and didn’t make direct accusations on Trump. For example, when she mentioned the issue of the tax return report, she merely stated “hypothesis” on why he hadn’t issued his report. Trump, on the other hand, used vague terms like “a large number, millions trillions” which are all exaggerations of “his reality”. My favorite one was the use of “bigly”. He also made explicit accusations to Hilary’s choices and appearance: “You have no plan”, she is a bad experience, and disgraceful (for the email incident). He also kept including Clinton’s personal choices into the debate which was responding to the question: for example, with NAFTA, Iran deal, and the email scandal (which had been advised by former secretary Collin Powel).

In addition to his empty remarks, Trump also used simplistic language to evoke unequal media coverage, Trump described her as “not nice” for promoting counter-publicity. The first publicity which comes to my mind is the one about young girls where Trump uses the words “pig” and abasing them to commodities of enjoyment. In any case, he was justified to call her out on this, but even for a comment which didn’t require much data, his language was restricted to the vocabulary a 5-year-old could have used. Honestly, he didn’t add much to his previous debates or speeches and this was disappointing.

Finally, what I thought made Hilary appear in a favorable light was the environment. For example, has anyone noticed how her screen seemed bigger (or zoomed in) compare to Trumps’? Hilary also got a downward facing camera angle which made her look more “presidential” on screen while Trump had a direct angle. She also had a full-screen side view of the talking during the third section of the debate on race inequalities. In the end, I thought it was very ironic how he patted Hilary twice on the back as if saying “you did the best you could”. Well, she has done the best she could against him and she has won this first debate. It is undeniable that despite the hard facts and substance of the debate, what showed the power dynamic between them were the body language, language used and switch from formal to informal, and camera angles.

It will be interesting to see how they plan to address those issues in the next 12 days before he second debate.