in

Harris’s High-Stakes Debate: Biden’s Mistakes Set to Repeat?

U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris delivers remarks during the Sigma Gamma Rho Sorority Inc.'s 60th International Biennial Boule event in Houston, Texas, U.S., July 31, 2024. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque

The impending debate between Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump is surrounded by a cloud of unease, a result of Harris’s mishandlings that echo the blunders of President Joe Biden, which, unfortunately for him, led to the collapse of his reelection ambitions. Over three weeks have passed since her nomination, yet Harris hasn’t given a solo interview, has taken a very laconic approach towards press inquiries, and not once has she effectively communicated with the public without the aid of crib notes.

Another striking parallel between Harris and Biden lies in their inadequate expression of their current positions on a plethora of issues. Interestingly, these are topics they previously approached from a more leftist perspective. Just like Biden, Harris has maneuvered herself into a high-stakes situation where her debate performance will receive an exaggerated degree of scrutiny due to her limited prior public engagement.

Check out our Trump 2025 Calendars!

Moreover, much like the Biden campaign, Harris’s team has unwisely drawn attention to the debate’s rules and exaggerated her preparation techniques, a strategy that might shine an unflattering spotlight on her potential deficiencies during the debate. As the 2024 election looms, it’s conspicuous how Harris has avoided the standard scrutiny usually faced by a presidential candidate before their first debate – a striking departure from the norm.

The truncated campaign period has naturally left only two channels to provide the kind of extensive scrutiny usually conducted during a full campaign year: debates and media interviews. As she reels under mounting pressure, Harris has deferred committing to a media interview until the month’s end. It’s noteworthy that her campaign disclosed plans for a joint interview with her running mate, Gov. Tim Walz on CNN this week.

However, she’s been reluctant to agree to a customary one-on-one interview, thus perpetuating a cautious narrative that has unfairly burdened the upcoming interview and the September 10 debate on ABC News. In stark contrast to Trump, whose constant public presence and media interaction lessens the impact of any individual appearance, Harris’s scarcity appears to significantly heighten the significance of her forthcoming appearance, leaving no room for mishaps.

To have avoided minimising the debate pressure by not orchestrating an unexpected outing for Harris reveals quite a bit about their strategies. They seem to be hinting that the prospect of Harris messing up a response during public questioning is so daunting that they’d rather avoid any possible public exposure.

This cautious approach implies that Harris’s effort is now directed towards training for the debate, where her coaching team, comprised of media experts, is likely to meticulously refine her responses. The precedent of Biden’s unfavorable showdown with Trump back on June 27 put a harsh spotlight on him, prompting relentless calls for him to conduct interviews and press conferences to dispel the cloud of doubt hovering over him due to his unfit condition.

This scrutiny was heightened by Biden’s reliance on scripted text, leaving his unprepared performances open to severe criticism. The limited timeframe he had to heal his tarnished reputation further intensified the pressure. In a similar vein, Harris will be left with almost no time to recuperate if the forthcoming debate unearths any inadequacies she has tried to hide, as early voting commences shortly after in a number of states.

The apprehension towards Harris and Biden’s rhetoric styles is distinct on many levels, but interestingly identical in genesis. In Biden’s case, the broader public expressed uncertainty about his age and cognitive abilities, however, their primary concern before the debate was his off-teleprompter performance. There seems to be a reasonable expectation that Harris might face a similar predicament.

Even though some viewers are anticipated to follow Harris’s upcoming debate with the same level of scrutiny, it would be prudent to question whether placing such significant importance on a single public appearance is a rational strategy or simply a ticking time-bomb. The approach followed by Biden, which irrefutably proved to be unsuccessful, seems to be shared by Harris, one of carefully orchestrated public appearances designed to mitigate risk.

Yet there must be a careful consideration of the pros and cons. The strategy, while it affords a degree of control over the narrative, also leaves space for a potential blow-up – if a single event proves problematic, the whole strategy falters. By playing it safe, Harris is unwittingly creating a situation where the pressure rests entirely on her appearance at the debate stage.

Perhaps it would be beneficial for Harris to review Biden’s past experiences and lessons. The tendency to lean heavily on a rehearsed approach, avoiding uncontrolled platforms for response, might seem attractive to compose a specific narrative. Yet, as we learned from Biden’s unsuccessful venture, the risk of spontaneous stumble, when it eventually happens, is too great in these high stakes situations.

Choosing to limit her public appearances, Harris, like Biden, has placed a heavy burden on the debate and the proposed interview with CNN. However, this strategy inherently amplifies any blunders she might make during these appearances, mockingly diminishing the cautious approach, they aimed to follow.

Overall, it appears Harris’s campaign is walking a thin line of risk management, a strategy eerily reminiscent of Biden’s. While carefully limiting spontaneous appearances to reduce chances of uncontrolled mistakes, the campaign is simultaneously increasing the weight placed on planned appearances like the upcoming debate and future interviews.

The decision to avoid soft-launching Harris into unscripted public situations might ultimately reveal to be a miss in the grand scheme. The risk she is working so hard to avoid may just be building up in the wings, waiting to detract in potentially one of the most important events of the campaign—the first debate.

The complex dynamic of the situation places the spotlight squarely on Harris’s forthcoming debate performance. As we move forward towards the election, all eyes will be on whether Harris can break the unfortunate chain of faulty performances that have previously marred Joe Biden’s campaign trajectory.