After the presidential debate between former President Donald Trump and Vice-President Kamala Harris on Tuesday, CNN political commentator Scott Jennings pointed out that many of the voters Trump still needed to win over likely did not watch.

Former President George W. Bush appointed Jennings as special assistant to the president and deputy director of political affairs in February 2006.

“I think if you want to hang your hat on something for Trump, it’s the economic numbers,” Jennings started. “I’ve said I thought he won the first 15 minutes; it was largely about the economy. And so there’s still a built-in belief by most voters that it’s been mismanaged by Biden and Harris.”

Jennings’ claim gains more credence in light of the fact that a CNN poll taken after the debate found that the percentage of voters who thought Trump was more trustworthy on the economy rose; before the debate, he led Harris by 16 points, 53-37%, but after the debate, the difference increased to 20%, 55-35%.

Tickets for “Am I Racist?” are on sale NOW! Buy here for a theater near you.

“And so if you’re Trump, and you’re trying to take something positive out of this, it’s that built-in vibe of ‘they just didn’t do a good job on it,’” Jennings stated. “He had to understand that and not get away from it.”

Then he turned to the prospective voters Trump needed to win over, saying, “Number two, obviously, millions of people watched this. A lot of people didn‘t watch it, and a lot of those people who didn‘t watch it and may see nothing about it are some of the people that Donald Trump‘s campaign needs to turn out. The disengagers, they‘re not going to be persuaded by this. That‘s still a big part of the Trump strategy, and I don‘t think they‘ll be moved.”

During the debate, Trump stated, “We’ve had a terrible economy because inflation has — which is really known as a country buster. It breaks up countries. We have inflation like very few people have ever seen before. Probably the worst in our nation’s history. … Everybody knows I’m an open book. Everybody knows what I’m going to do. Cut taxes very substantially. And create a great economy like I did before. We had the greatest economy.”

RELATED: CNN Poll: After Debate, Even More Voters Trust Trump On Economy

On Tuesday, the Missouri Supreme Court ruled that a proposed constitutional amendment that would strip pro-life protections in the state would appear on the ballot in November. 

The court overturned a decision from a circuit court judge that had said that Missourians for Constitutional Freedom, the pro-abortion group backing the amendment, did not follow state law in the language it used for the ballot initiative. The amendment would ban the state government from passing laws that “infringe upon a person’s fundamental right to reproductive freedom.”

“Today’s decision is a victory for both direct democracy and reproductive freedom in Missouri,” said Rachel Sweet, campaign manager for Missourians for Constitutional Freedom. “The Missouri Supreme Court’s ruling ensures that Amendment 3, the Right to Reproductive Freedom Initiative, will appear on the November ballot, giving voters — not politicians — the power to decide on this critical issue.”

The initiative would prohibit the government from passing any laws that ban abortion before “fetal viability.” 

Pro-life advocates have expressed concerns that the amendment’s use of “fetal viability” leaves the door open for effectively all abortions because it allows viability to be defined by the “good faith judgment of a treating health care professional and based on the particular facts of the case.” 

Lawyers with the Thomas More Society had challenged the ballot language on behalf of Missouri State Senator Mary Elizabeth Coleman, pro-life advocate Kathy Forck, state Rep. Hannah Kelly, and Our Lady’s Inn President and CEO Peggy Forrest.

Last week, Missouri Circuit Court Judge Christopher Kirby Limbaugh, a cousin of the late conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh, ruled in their favor, saying that the ballot organizers violated state law by not including language in the initiative that would make clear what current Missouri law would be repealed by adopting the amendment. 

Tickets for “Am I Racist?” are on sale NOW! Buy here for a theater near you.

“It is deeply unfortunate the court decided to ignore laws that protect voters in order to satisfy pro-abortion activists who intentionally omitted critical information from the initiative petition,” Thomas More Society lawyer Mary Catherine Martin said. “This ruling takes away important protections from all Missouri citizens to serve the well-funded political goals of a few. Missouri’s Amendment 3 will have far-reaching implications on the state’s abortion laws and well beyond, repealing dozens of laws that protect the unborn, pregnant women, parents, and children—a reality that the initiative campaign intentionally hid from voters.”

At least 10 states will vote on abortion in November, including Florida, Nebraska, Montana, South Dakota, and Arizona. 

Democrats have made abortion a key campaign topic for the 2024 elections, with Vice President Kamala Harris repeatedly attacking former President Donald Trump over the issue during the debate on Tuesday. Harris promised to sign a bill that would create a federal right to abortion, while Trump said the issue should be decided at the state level.