Joe Biden and Donald Trump have faced off in the first debate in the 2024 presidential election campaign.
The format, with each taking turns to speak with their opponent’s microphone muted, was designed to prevent a shouting match with both candidates talking over each other.
In truth, it served to highlight the differences in the performances of the two men.
Image: Joe Biden and Donald Trump during the presidential debate. Pic: Reuters
Mr Trump appeared confident, on the front foot and in command, even if his claims sometimes stretched the truth to breaking point.
Mr Biden on the other hand was hesitant, sometimes stumbling over his words and at one point appearing to freeze, less than 10 minutes into the debate.
The only time the US president appeared to land any blows was when he lost his temper and attacked Mr Trump and his “alley cat morals”.
After the debate, political figures and commentators broached the idea of replacing Mr Biden as the Democratic presidential nominee.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:12
Joe Biden appears to stall during debate
It’s “time to talk about an open convention and a new Democratic nominee,” one Democratic politician told Sky’s US partner network NBC News.
Another said: “This was like a champion boxer who gets in the ring past his prime and needs his corner to throw in the towel.” They added he meant Mr Biden should exit the race.
Advertisement
David Axelrod, a senior aide to former President Barack Obama, told CNN: “There is a sense of shock at how he came out at the beginning of this debate. How his voice sounded. He seemed a little disoriented.
“There are going to be discussions about whether he should continue. Only he can decide if he’s going to continue,” Mr Axelrod added.
Sky’s US correspondent Martha Kelner said some Democrats had described Biden’s debate performance as an “unmitigated disaster”, “a meltdown”, and “a slow-motion car crash”.
Changing candidates at this stage of the campaign would be difficult and unprecedented. Unless Mr Biden chooses to step aside, delegates at the Democratic National Convention would have to revolt – despite being elected on their pledge to nominate the president.
The debate mediators divided the time in to subjects, beginning with the economy.
Mr Trump claimed under his presidency the US had the “greatest economy in the history of our country”, only stalling when COVID struck.
Mr Biden hit back saying he inherited “an economy that was in freefall”.
“The pandemic was so badly handled… the economy collapsed,” he said.
“What we had to do is try to put things back together again. That’s exactly what we began to do.”
Early debate was a gamble Joe Biden may regret
This was an extraordinary evening.
Joe Biden’s debate performance was among the worst by any presidential candidate in history, if not the worst.
It was an “unmitigated disaster”, “a meltdown”, and “a slow-motion car crash”.
Those are not descriptors from Republican voters, they are the words of Democrats. Even former aides of President Biden admit it was a really horrible night for him.
I was literally gripping the sides of my seat at times it was so excruciating. Team Biden hoped to see State of the Union Joe on the stage, when the President gave a slick, impassioned and well-delivered speech.
Right from the start it became apparent this would be an entirely different version of him. His voice was hoarse, he was stumbling and there were long pregnant pauses.
I was struck by how much older he looked than the last time he was in the same room as Donald Trump four years ago.
“We finally beat Medicare,” he said with a misspeak that is sure to go viral, a sentence that does not make sense and was pounced upon by Donald Trump.
Biden was asked by the debate moderator about abortion, one of the strongest issues for the Democratic Party, a subject where he has the opportunity to really nail Donald Trump to the wall.
He somehow managed to ramble his way off-topic to talk about immigration, one of his biggest vulnerabilities. It was an open goal missed in spectacular style.
The debate descended near the end into a row between two senior citizens about who had a lower golf handicap and who could drive the ball further.
It summed up the quality, or lack thereof, of this debate. It might have been funny if it weren’t so depressing for American voters.
It is hard to believe that President Biden fought for this debate at this time, the earliest there has ever been.
His team calculated that, given he was trailing Trump in the polls and there were growing questions about his age and vitality, it was a risk worth taking.
But it was a huge gamble, given that this format is so exposing on the national stage. It could well be a gamble they come to regret.
Watch a special programme with reaction to the US presidential debate on The World with Yalda Hakim on Sky News from 6pm
For much of the debate, Mr Trump was forthright while President Biden, his voice hoarse, came across as hesitant.
On the issue of abortion, Mr Biden appeared to have slightly more success, describing the decision to overturn Roe v Wade as horrendous.
Image: Pic: AP
“It’s been a terrible thing what you’ve done,” he told Trump.
For his part the former president said it was right for individual states to decide policy on abortion.
Next came immigration, previously something of a “trump” card for the former president.
Mr Biden was asked about his record.
“The Border Patrol endorsed me, endorsed my position,” he said, before turning on Mr Trump.
“He was separating babies from mothers, putting them in cages, making sure that the families are separated [when he was in office],” he said.
Mr Trump responded: “We have the largest number of terrorists coming into our country right now.”
Image: Pic: Reuters
“That’s simply not true,” Mr Biden said.
“There’s no data to support what he said, once again, he’s exaggerating. He’s lying.”
Asked what he will do to address the crisis, Mr Trump said “we have to get them out” but didn’t specify any particular policy.
On Ukraine, Mr Trump was the first to answer, taking aim at Mr Biden’s handling of it.
“As far as Russia and Ukraine, if we have a real president, a president that was respected by Putin, then he would have never invaded Ukraine.”
Image: Pic: AP
Asked what he thought of Mr Trump’s comments, Mr Biden replied: “I’ve never heard so much malarkey in my whole life.”
He warned that if Mr Putin wins the war there is a risk he will go after other countries like Poland and Belarus. However, the strength of his argument was undermined by appearing to confuse Mr Trump and President Putin at one point.
The Middle East was next, with Mr Biden saying the US had “saved Israel”, referencing the ongoing support from his government and the organised defence against a massive Iranian air attack.
Image: Pic: AP
Trump however slammed his opponent’s handling of the crisis in the Middle East.
“He’s become like a Palestinian, but they don’t like him because he’s a very bad Palestinian. He’s a weak one,” he said.
Next came topics where Mr Biden genuinely had the chance to land some heavy blows: the Capitol riots and the litany of criminal cases facing Trump.
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
The odd punch did hit home but – as throughout the debate – Mr Trump appeared in charge, confident in his own version of the truth. He repeatedly said he did nothing wrong, claiming any action he encouraged was to be carried out “peacefully and patriotically”.
Mr Biden retorted: “He encouraged his folks up on Capitol Hill.
“Now he says if he loses again, [he’s] such a whiner, it is basically [going to be] a bloodbath.”
Image: Joe Biden embraces first lady Dr. Jill Biden after the conclusion of the presidential debate. Pic: Reuters
The only time Mr Trump appeared even slightly uncomfortable was when Mr Biden pointed out his recent criminal charges and called him a convicted felon.
“The only person on this stage that is a convicted felon is this man I’m looking at right now,” he said of the former president.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:16
The former president denies ‘sex with a porn star’
In one of his most forceful moments of the debate, Mr Biden referred to Mr Trump’s alleged sexual relationship with porn star Stormy Daniels, telling him: “You have the morals of an alley cat.”
The debate continued, covering racial inequality, climate change and the US opioid crisis, but in truth the optics varied little.
Image: People at a watch party for the first presidential debate at Union Pub on Capitol Hill in Washington. Pic: Reuters
Mr Trump – a chin-jutting picture of arrogance and self belief. Mr Biden – often seeming to feel his age, only coming into his own when he lost his temper over what he clearly regarded as his opponent’s lies.
The debate revealed little of substance with regard to policy, with podcaster and analyst Tim Miller tweeting that it was “the worst debate in history”.
X
This content is provided by X, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable X cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to X cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow X cookies for this session only.
Three men and two women died in a road crash involving two cars in Co Louth on Saturday night, Irish police said.
The collision happened on the L3168 in Gibstown, Dundalk, shortly after 9pm.
Police said the five victims were all aged in their 20s and had been in the same vehicle, a Volkswagen Golf.
They were pronounced dead at the scene.
Another man, also in his 20s, was “removed” from the car and taken to Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital in Drogheda, where he was treated for “serious non-life-threatening injuries”, said Superintendent Charlie Armstrong.
The Golf was in a collision with a Toyota Land Cruiser.
A man and a woman in the second vehicle were also taken to the same hospital.
Their injuries are described as “non-life-threatening”.
‘A shocking, devastating event’
Superintendent Armstrong said an investigation into the road crash was under way, as he praised the emergency services.
He said: “The scene was very difficult, in adverse weather conditions, and the professionalism shown by all first responders and the care and respect shown to the five deceased was exemplary.
“This tragedy, with the loss of five young adults, will have a deep impact on families and local communities in Carrickmacross, Dromconrath and in Scotland.
“This is a shocking, devastating event for these families, their communities and the community here in Dundalk.”
He said family liaison officers have been appointed to each of the families and police will keep them updated.
Superintendent Armstrong urged anyone with information about the collision to contact the investigation team.
He said: “I am appealing to any person who was on the L3168 between 8.30pm and 9.15pm, last night Saturday November 15 2025, to contact the Garda investigation team.
“I am appealing to any person who might have any camera footage or images from the L3168, Gibstown area, between 8.30pm and 9.15pm last night, to give that footage or images to the investigation team at Dundalk Garda Station.”
The L3168 was closed between the N52 and the R171 as forensic experts investigated, and traffic diversions were in place.
Brazil was “a bit surprised” Britain hasn’t contributed to a new investment fund to protect tropical forests, despite having helped to design it, a senior official has told Sky News.
The Amazon nation has used its role as host of the COP30 climate talks to tout its new scheme, which it drew up with the help of countries including the UK and Indonesia.
The news came out the day before Brazil was about to launch it.
“The Brazilians were livid” about the timing, one source told Sky News.
Image: Lush rainforest and waterways in the Brazilian Amazon
Image: A waterfall in Kayapo territory in Brazil
Garo Batmanian, director-general of the Brazilian Forestry Service and coordinator of the new scheme, said: “We were expecting [Britain to pay in] because the UK was the very first one to support us.”
The so-called Tropical Forests Forever Facility (TFFF) was drawn up with the help of “very bright people from the UK”, according to Mr Batmanian.
More on Deforestation
Related Topics:
“So we are a bit surprised, but we expect that once internal situations get better, hopefully they will come through,” he added.
The UK’s climate envoy, Rachel Kyte, told Sky News: “The PM agreed the decision was about not doing it now, as opposed to not ever.
“We will look at the TFFF after the budget and are carefully tracking how others are investing.”
Image: Forest growing back from a fire (bottom left) and deforestation alongside healthy sections of Amazon rainforest
The fund has been hailed as a breakthrough – if Brazil can get if off the ground.
Paul Polman, former Unilever boss and now co-vice chair of Planetary Guardians, said it could be the “first forest-finance plan big enough to change the game”.
Why do tropical forests need help?
At their best, tropical forests like the Amazon and the Congo Basin provide food, rainfall and clean air for millions of people around the world.
They soak up carbon dioxide – the main driver of climate change – providing a cooling effect on a heating planet.
But they are being nibbled away at by extractive industries like oil, logging, soy and gold.
Parts of the Amazon rainforest already emit more carbon dioxide than they store.
Other pockets are expected to collapse in the next few decades, meaning they’d no longer be rainforests at all.
Image: Greenpeace says deforested land could be better used, which would save the need for more land to be cleared
Cristiane Mazzetti, senior forest campaigner at Greenpeace Brazil, said: “Science is saying we need to immediately stop deforestation and start restoring what was once lost.
“And in Brazil, we already have enough open land that could be better used for agricultural expansion… There is no need [to open up] new areas.”
Can Brazil’s new investment fund save the world’s rainforests?
For decades, forests have been worth more dead than alive.
Successive attempts to save them have fallen flat because they’ve not been able to flip the economics in favour of conservation, or ensure a long-term stream of cash.
Brazil hopes the TFFF, if it launches, would make forests worth more standing than cut down, and pay out to countries and communities making that happen.
Image: Mining is a lucrative industry in the Amazon. Pic: Reuters
“We don’t pay only for carbon, we are paying for a hectare of standing forest. The more forests you have, the more you are paid,” said Mr Batmanian.
The other “innovation” is to stop relying on aid donations, he said.
“There is a lot of demand for overseas development assistance. It’s normal to have that. We have a lot of crisis, pandemics, epidemics out there.”
Instead, the TFFF is an investment fund that would compete with other commercial propositions.
Mr Polman said: “This isn’t charity, it’s smart economic infrastructure to protect the Amazon and keep our planet safe.”
How does the TFFF raise money?
The idea is to raise a first tranche of cash from governments that can de-risk the fund for private investors.
Every $1 invested by governments could attract a further $4 of private cash.
The TFFF would then be able to take a higher amount of risk to raise above-market returns, Brazil hopes.
That means it could generate enough cash to pay competitive returns to investors and payments to the eligible countries and communities keeping their tropical trees upright.
At least 20% of the payments has been earmarked for indigenous communities, widely regarded as the best stewards of the land. Many, but not all, have welcomed the idea.
Will the TFFF work?
The proposal needs at least $10-25bn of government money to get off the ground.
So far it has raised $5.5bn from the likes of Norway, France, and Indonesia. And the World Bank has agreed to host it, signalling strong credibility.
But it’s a hard task to generate enough money to compete with lucrative industries like gold and oil, many of which governments already invest in.
Image: Dr Andreza Aruska de Souza Santos, director, Brazil Institute, King’s College London
Dr Andreza Aruska de Souza Santos, director of King’s College London’s Brazil Institute, said TFFF has the potential to make it “very financially viable to have a forest as a forest”.
“But the problem is that TFFF would need to compete with these very profitable industries… because you need to capture as much money from governments, from investors.
“And so far it’s not quite balancing the competitiveness of other sectors that are potentially harmful for forests.”
Hot, humid, loud and proud: the climate protest in the city of Belem was the embodiment of the Amazonian rainforest that surrounds it.
Hawkers brought carts selling bananas, mangoes and coconuts – while demonstrators bore umbrellas, hats and fans to shelter from the scorching tropical sun.
After a week of dreary negotiations at the COP30 climate talks, the streets were alive with the drumming of maracatu music and dancing to local carimbo rhythms on Saturday.
It was a carnival atmosphere designed to elevate sober issues.
Image: The climate protest in the city of Belem
Among those out on the streets were Kayapo people, an indigenous community living across the states of Para and Mato Grosso – the latter at the frontier of soy expansion in the Brazilian Amazon.
They are fighting local infrastructure projects like the new Ferrograo railway that will transport soy through their homeland.
The soy industry raises much-needed cash for Brazil’s economy – its second biggest export – but the kayapo say they do not get a slice of the benefit.
Uti, a Kayapo community leader, said: “We do not accept the construction of the Ferrograo and some other projects.
“We Kayapo do not accept any of this being built on indigenous land.”
Many Brazilian indigenous and community groups here want legal recognition of the rights to their land – and on Friday, the Brazilian government agreed to designate two more territories to the Mundurucu people.
It’s a Brazilian lens on global issues – indigenous peoples are widely regarded as the best stewards of the land, but rarely rewarded for their efforts.
In fact, it is often a terrible opposite: grandmother Julia Chunil Catricura had been fighting to stay on Mapuche land in southern Chile, but disappeared earlier this year when she went out for a walk.
Lefimilla Catalina, also Mapuche, said she’s travelled two days to be here in Belem to raise the case of Julia, and to forge alliances with other groups.
Image: The protest in the city of Belem
“At least [COP30] makes it visible” to the world that people are “facing conflicts” on their land, she said.
She added: “COP offers a tiny space [for indigenous people], and we want to be more involved.
“We want to have more influence, and that’s why we believe we have to take ownership of these spaces, we can’t stay out of it.”
They are joined by climate protesters from around the world in an effort to hold governments’ feet to the fire.
Louise Hutchins, convener of Make Polluters Pay Coalition International, said: “We’re here to say to governments they need to make the oil and gas companies pay up for the climate destruction – they’ve made billions in profits every day for the last 50 years.”
After three years of COPs with no protests – the UAE, Egypt, and Azerbaijan do not look kindly on people taking to the streets – this year demonstrators have defined the look, the tone and the soundtrack of the COP30 climate talks – and Saturday was no different.
Whether that will translate into anything more ambitious to come out of COP30 remains to be seen, with another week of negotiations still to go.
For now, the protests in Belem reflect the chaos, the mess and the beauty of Brazil, the COP process, and the rest of the world beyond.