Kamala Harris, the Vice President, is set to go head-to-head with former President Donald Trump in a debate scheduled for Tuesday, September 10. According to radio host Charlamagne tha God, he believes Harris will have the upper hand. It’s interesting to note how he seems to believe in the supposed prowess of Harris, who is not Joe Biden.
Charlamagne voiced his surprise on his radio show, The Breakfast Club, about Trump agreeing to the debate rules. One can’t help but wonder why he is under the impression that Trump wouldn’t agree to a fair and square debate setup. He seemed to focus on the Republicans wanting a ‘hot mic’ scenario even though the Democrats were the ones pushing for an unmuted mic situation.
It’s a curious stance as it seems Harris, through her campaign team, was keen on having the microphones unmuted throughout the debate. This is a new direction compared to the wishes of President Joe Biden, who advocated for a muted mic in June. The irony of this disparity isn’t lost when considering their supposedly unified front.
Charlamagne assumed that Trump would favor a ‘hot mic’ for the opportunity to outtalk Harris, which is a common tactic used by the Democrats. His lack of faith in the former President’s ability to win simply based on a policy discussion is clear evidence of his bias. His claim that Harris would ‘dog walk’ Trump in a debate on policy only serves to highlight his shallow interpretation.
Furthermore, Charlamagne insists that Trump, with a hot mic, would try to bulldoze Harris, constantly interrupting and insulting her. However, we’ve seen time and time again that it is Biden and Harris who refuse to adhere to basic debate decorum, frequently talking over opponents and using demeaning language.
A co-host mentioned the strong likelihood of Harris also interrupting throughout the debate. This seemed to be dismissed by Charlamagne who, with unfounded certainty, claimed that she would maintain respectful decorum, insisting she is a proper debater. One must wonder on what basis he believes this. Simply because Harris knows good debate manners doesn’t mean she would choose to use them.
In his view, even if Trump did over-talk and insult Harris, she would still emerge victorious because, according to Charlamagne, Trump would appear crazy. This assumption clearly illustrates his deep-seated bias against Trump, while failing to recognize the possibility of Harris behaving disrespectfully during the debate.
All this speculation comes just two months after that regretful evening of June 27 when Biden’s lackluster performance at the presidential debate almost put an end to his career, indicating how debates can drastically sway the race. Yet, Charlamagne seems to overlook Biden’s obvious failures, all the while preparing to propel Harris to an undeserved victory against Trump.
The upcoming debate, with the forecasted election results showing Harris and Trump neck to neck, is definitely of high stakes. It’s strange how the belief continues to circulate that Harris, as a weaker candidate than Biden, could triumph over Trump’s successful track record in office.
Notably, numerous Democrats have been projecting an unrealistic image of Harris as the potential victor in the debate, just like Charlamagne Tha God. It appears they are desperately trying to paint a rosy picture for Harris, who has yet to prove her ability to withstand a heated debate, let alone lead the nation.
Amidst all this conjecture, one must remember that the election is not merely about well-rehearsed speeches and sound bites, but about actual policy and leadership. It’s yet to be seen if Harris can handle this high pressure encounter with the former president, who has already demonstrated his competence in both governance and debating.
Nevertheless, the liberal media, echo chambered by pundits like Charlamagne, continue to push their narrative of Harris’ supposed superiority during the upcoming debate. What they often fail to consider, however, is the lack of proven track record and the massive gulf in experience between Trump and Harris. They’re essentially betting on a horse that has yet to run a serious race.
With the debate fast approaching, voters will soon witness the difference between experienced leadership and mere rhetoric. And regardless of how the liberal media attempts to spin the story, the truth of each candidate’s capacity will undoubtedly emerge.