Tuesday night’s presidential debate did not turn out the way I had hoped. I went to bed with a heavy heart. But the next day, it occurred to me that the outcome is not as gloomy as I initially thought.

I think we all expected Kamala Harris’s performance would be delivered in her usual “word salad” style. Her persistent avoidance of being interviewed for over a month after being boosted to the top of the Democratic election ticket also cast a shadow on her. But she exceeded expectation, surviving the debate by feigning confidence with aggression. This unexpected difference created a strong psychological effect, shaking us a bit.

However, after the dust settled, it appears that may not reflect truth. During the debate, she answered only a few of the questions she was asked. Most of the time she simply recited the talking points she had committed to memory. She is a good rote learner and a gifted actress. Unfortunately, these qualities don’t make a competent world leader. Her words sounded high-minded, yet they had no substance. They were only a paper tiger.

Unsurprisingly, according to a CNN poll, the majority of undecided voters – the most decisive group in the election – were leaning toward Trump after the debate because they are looking for real solutions instead of empty words. Trump won the undecideds 60% to 30%, with 10% still undecided. That’s an impressive victory.

A Backfiring Strategy

ABC’s moderators, David Muir and Linsey Davis, did not remotely live up to journalistic standards, conspicuously showing favor toward Harris but treating Trump antagonistically. They fact-checked him, but repeatedly and knowingly let Harris get away with false statements. They asked Trump questions with the intention of cornering him. For instance, Davis pressed Trump hard to say whether he would veto a national abortion ban. She knew—and Trump repeatedly said—that this scenario will never take place because the power to decide the issue is now in the hands of individual states, not the executive branch. However, she also knew that either a definitive answer would cast Trump in an unfavorable light either way.

The moderators’ blatant violation of the common professional standards will eventually damage Harris’s campaign. Though it helped boost Harris’s confidence, their unfair handling of the debate does not win the heart of the audience — in fact, quite the opposite. Americans do not respond well to unfairness and aggression; they have a tendency to stick up for the underdog against bullies. Had the ABC moderators applied some emotional intelligence, they would never have executed this strategy. However, when Trump hatred is so potent, there is no room for rationality. Like all the lawfare that Trump has endured so far, ABC’s maltreatment of him will only increase his popularity with voters.

In addition, Harris’s shameless lies will backfire on her. I was shocked to hear her lie repeatedly with such a confidence and ease. It’s frightening to realize that a person with such contempt for the truth could potentially become the most powerful person in the world. What couldn’t she do with that power?

What Lies Ahead

However, as appalling as that was, it could turn to Trump’s advantage. Harris’s positions on vital issues, such as abortion, immigration, fracking, the Second Amendment and the economy, have all been caught on video in the past. Now, after putting them side by side with her own words during the debate, we can show the world who she really is. All her false debate claims can be easily demolished. That would be a compelling ad for Trump’s campaign to release.

Many have said that Trump may have underestimated his opponent, and thus, missed a few opportunities to emphasize the difference between the prosperous life under his administration and all the economic difficulties Americans are currently experiencing, only mentioning this in his closing statement. However, I think that Trump, being Trump, did a fine job in the hostile environment, fighting on three fronts.

Did the outcome of the debate, especially Harris’s seeming “win,” make our job as conservatives more challenging? Perhaps. However, this could be a blessing in disguise. Should Trump have won the debate markedly or Harris had a devastating performance, we might relax our vigilance. It’s tough to keep your guard up when you believe victory is within reach, after fighting for four years an administration swept into power by fraud. We are at the most vulnerable moment and could easily make that costly mistake.

As the situation stands, we know we have to continue to put our foot on the gas, fighting an uphill battle to cross the finish line in 50 some days.

This is good news for our final victory.

Chenyuan Snider was raised in Communist China and majored in Chinese language and literature in college. After immigrating to the U.S. and studying at Assemblies of God Theological Seminary and Duke Divinity School, she became a professor at Christian colleges and seminary. She and her husband live in northern California and have two grown children.