Staff Reports
With a high-stakes debate looming, Kamala Harris is set to face off against Donald Trump, marking a potentially crucial moment in the campaign. To prepare for this daunting encounter, Harris is receiving counsel from a political figure with quite a history: Hillary Clinton, the only person to have ever faced Trump and come up short in a presidential race.
This scenario unfolds like a comedy skit. Harris, known for her questionable debate performances, now leans on Clinton’s wisdom. One has to wonder how much solid advice Clinton could provide when her debates had viewers scratching their heads, wondering if her strategy was simply to rely on theatrics rather than substance. Clinton’s attempted pep talk about how Harris can be a competent debater is dripping with irony, especially when her track record is often overlooked.
Once Again, the Only Person in U.S. History to Ever Lose to Donald Trump Has Advice on How to Beat Him https://t.co/XYnWwTFbTK
— Andrew Malcolm (@AHMalcolm) September 10, 2024
While assuring that Harris can hold her own, Clinton's advice centers around Trump's anticipated scorched-earth strategy. This seems to suggest that the Biden administration’s approach has conditioned them to expect direct and incisive attacks. Harris, who has been more accustomed to talking points than real engagement, might not be ready for the blunt force of Trump’s debate style. The need for preparation is paramount, but then again, the Biden administration, in general, seems chronically unprepared for facing anything other than their narrative.
In an earlier engagement with Biden, Clinton they are essentially worried that he would fumble through a debate by getting lost in his word salad. The irony is thick, given that the Democrats are staking their future on leaders whose eloquence often resembles a confusing array of nonsensical rhetoric. Clinton’s comments hint at the low bar set for performance; as long as Joe doesn’t literally combust on stage, he’ll be deemed a success.
The fact that Clinton is front and center offering pointers begs the question of the Democratic Party’s current state. With her track record of neglecting the very voters that could swing the election and favoring the ever-volatile progressive agenda, one has to track the absurdity of the situation. It does nothing but highlight the disarray within the left. The caricature of the Democratic Party being led by political figures who represent the past rather than innovators for the future risks pushing them into another embarrassing defeat against Trump.
One can’t help but feel a twinge of sympathy for Harris. As she prepares to face Trump, she might recognize that Clinton’s advice will only take her so far when her actual record is virtually non-existent. In this political theater, Harris will need all the help she can muster. Perhaps if she leans into the disruption and unpredictability of Trump, she might defy expectations, but that seems like a long shot. The upcoming night promises to be a spectacle worth watching, if only to witness precisely how this precarious balancing act plays out on stage.
