Last week, I squeezed into a crowded bar on Capitol Hill in Washington D.C. Though the room was packed, there wasn’t much chatter, and everyone’s eyes were glued to the television. There were no tables to seat my friends and I, but that did not matter because we were not there for food. We joined 67 million people across the nation and eagerly watched the Harris-Trump debate.
While last week’s debate was not as disastrous as the one in June that pushed President Biden out of the race, Vice President Kamala Harris still fell into the same traps that plagued Biden. If she wants to improve her chances in November, she needs to change course.
Ironically, the debate and the ensuing fallout both seem to revolve around former president Donald Trump – for all the worst reasons. Onstage, he came across as angry and childish, spouting ridiculous false claims and falling for obvious baits laid out by Harris, which had him stumbling over himself to defend his rally crowd sizes or the overturning of Roe v. Wade. Most viewers agree that Donald Trump emerged the loser of the night. But I am not so sure that means Harris won.
The problem for the Harris campaign is that while attacking Trump on his personality produces great sound bites, he has been running for president for almost a decade at this point. The American people already know Trump, they know all about his character flaws and oddities. No amount of telling people that he is a liar or a narcissist is going to significantly move the needle because we have heard it all before.
On the other hand, Harris entered this race with many Americans unfamiliar with her policies. This debate was her biggest opportunity so far to define herself for the electorate. Before the debate, political analysts, such as Axios founders Mike Allen and Jim VandeHei argued that the most important thing Harris would need to do would be to demonstrate substantial distance between herself and Biden.
There were warning signs that Harris did not take this advice seriously. When the Harris campaign finally added a policy agenda page onto their website on Sept. 8, it didn’t take long for people to realize that it was copied from Biden’s old website – literally. It still had metadata calling for Biden’s re-election.
Then, Harris got on stage and confirmed my worst fears. In between admittedly effective personal attacks on Trump, Harris’ messaging doesn’t seem to be much different from what we were getting from Biden. That is a huge missed opportunity. She needs to run on something different from a continuation of Biden’s administration.
It is not just me who thinks this. According to a New York Times/Sienna poll from earlier this month, 55% of likely voters believe Harris represents “more of the same” for this country. By contrast, 53% said Trump represents a major change. An August Gallup poll revealed that only 25% of Americans are happy with the current state of the country. People want change, so would it not be better to have a candidate promising real tangible change, rather than just more of the status quo?
I have sympathy for the awkward position Harris finds herself in. It can not be easy to try to distance yourself from the administration you are actively in second-in-command for. But she has to find some way to define herself beyond “younger Biden.”
It is not like she doesn’t have options for policy areas to draw contrast with the President. The Biden-Harris platform left a lot to be desired. One popular policy Harris’ vice presidential pick, Tim Walz, is particularly well known for is implementing universal free meals in schools. She could run on nationalizing that policy. Alternatively, prospective voters consistently rank the economy as their top concern, so instead of answering the economic question with tax cuts, why not take the time to talk up a federal $12 minimum wage which has over 80% support? Is that not way more exciting and easy to campaign on?
Let us not forget that polls have shown that pledging to implement an arms embargo on Israel, aside from being the moral and legal thing to do, would also be politically advantageous in key swing states, according to a YouGov poll.
I never liked Trump. I think he is an existential threat to this country, a bigoted lawmaker, and a corrupt, morally repugnant person. But I did not like Biden either, and it was not just because of his age. I have said before that I preferred to stay home rather than vote for either of them. So if Harris can not or will not prove to be distinct from the President, then she can count me out.
Harris claims that her presidency will mean “we’re not going back” as a country. But in terms of actual policy, all she is offering are the same old visions of America. If she wants to mobilize me, and voters like me, she needs to campaign on more than just preserving the status quo.
Editor-in-Chief: Jordan Premmer, Chief Copy Editor: Sophia McCrackin, Managing Editor: Jordan DelFiugo, Opinion Editor: Dakota Duran, Scene Editor: Elina Graham
