The U.S. presidential election is intense, and Harris's performance exceeds expectations.

Recently, the presidential candidate debate in the United States has attracted widespread attention. As the first direct confrontation, this debate may be the only opportunity before the election. The market generally considers Harris's performance to be impressive, exceeding external expectations, while her opponent's response was relatively mediocre.

After the debate, the betting market reacted swiftly. Within just two hours, the contract price for Harris's election rose from $53 to $57, while her opponent's contract price dropped from $52 to $47, further widening the gap. This change reflects an increased optimism among more people regarding Harris's victory, confirming that her debate performance exceeded market expectations.

In the debate, Harris excelled on multiple issues. She confronted women's concerns directly on the abortion issue, demonstrating strong empathy; in the discussion on racial issues, she showed a deep understanding and support for minorities by sharing personal experiences; at the same time, she emphasized future development plans, conveying a sense of hope infused with fresh energy and the drive for change. In contrast, her opponent's performance was relatively lackluster, mainly focusing on issues such as illegal immigration, tariff policies, and fossil fuel supply, with a lack of innovation in the discourse that may struggle to attract moderate voters.

After the debate, Harris invited his opponent for another televised debate on social media, attracting considerable attention and trying to win more votes for himself through another round.

However, Harris's campaign trail has not been smooth sailing. On September 24, the police reported that her campaign office in Arizona was shot at, leaving four bullet holes in the office's glass door and windows. At the time of the incident, the office was unoccupied, and there were no casualties. The police initially believe this to be a potential property crime.

There are two interpretations of this incident in the market: one believes it could be a retaliatory action by opponents' supporters; the other thinks it might be a self-directed act intended to divert public attention and confuse the narrative. Regardless, this incident has raised public concern about election security.

In terms of campaign funding, Harris has performed exceptionally well. The latest federal filing documents show that Harris and her team have far exceeded their opponents in daily spending with the Democratic National Committee. In August, Harris's team had an average daily expenditure of up to 7.5 million dollars, while her opponents' camp had an average daily spending of 2.6 million dollars. In fundraising, Harris also leads by a wide margin, raising a total of 361 million dollars in August, bringing her total to 404 million dollars. In contrast, her opponents raised only 130 million dollars in the same period, plus 25 million dollars from political action committee donations, totaling 295 million dollars by the end of August.

Sufficient funding has boosted Harris's campaign. This funding will help expand the campaign team nationwide, hire more political talent, establish offices, and directly engage with voters; it will also increase the scale of advertising, including multi-channel promotions such as television, newspapers, radio, and social media; it can also be used to conduct more polls and research, support rallies and door-to-door visits, and enhance voter goodwill and impressions.

Despite having multiple advantages such as being from a minority background, coming from an immigrant family, being a woman, graduating from prestigious schools, being a professional lawyer, and being the first female district attorney of California, Harris's resume also contains controversies. During her time as a prosecutor, she was accused of obstructing the review of certain cases and faced criticism for some bills. Her campaign behavior has also sparked controversy, such as adopting a Chinese name to attract voters and being accused of being ungrateful towards certain politicians.

Currently, Harris is slightly leading in the polls, but the election situation remains intense. She has secured about 226 electoral votes from confirmed camps, while her opponent has about 219. To win, Harris needs an additional 44 electoral votes, while her opponent needs 51.

Comparing the policy positions of the two candidates, Harris's "moderate" policies may have a smaller impact on the market. Her fiscal expansion to subsidize residents could lead to an increase in bond issuance in the short term, which is unfavorable for bond assets, but may support the dollar. Additionally, her tax increase policy puts pressure on the stock market. In contrast, her opponent's policies may be beneficial for the stock market, cyclical commodities, and digital currencies, but could have an intervention effect on the dollar.

In the next two months, the election situation still has uncertainties. The U.S. presidential election uses the "Electoral College system," meaning that the candidate with the most popular votes may not necessarily be elected. According to the current polling support rates in various states, the election situation in swing states is more intense than ever. The final result of this presidential election remains full of suspense and is worth continued attention.