Staff Reports
Former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris engaged in what many anticipated to be the most exhilarating debate of the season, streamed on ABC. While the question of who “won” can only lead to subjective opinion polls that are about as reliable as the weather forecast in a hurricane, some observers, particularly Sen. Rick Scott, pointed to a strategy that could’ve made Trump’s victory a sure thing. The secret? Let Harris do most of the talking.
According to Sen. Scott, the more voters get to hear Harris’s views, the more they’ll turn against her. It’s not hard to see why. Harris has a track record of progressive policies that not only test the limits of common sense but also leave many scratching their heads in bewilderment. Thus, the suggestion is clear: give her the mic and watch her sink her ship with every left-leaning slogan that escapes her lips.
WATCH: Senator Tim Scott just eviscerated the ABC hosts for colluding with Kamala Harris to RIG the debate against Trump
"We need moderators that are not an extension of the Kamala Harris for president campaign." pic.twitter.com/9iStb26CDE
— George (@BehizyTweets) September 11, 2024
The real intrigue of the night was which Kamala Harris would grace the stage. Would it be the hardline progressive who has been a puppet in the failed Biden administration, responsible for an open border and an economy reminiscent of a third-world country? Or would voters see a newly reinvented version of Harris, one that claims to want secure borders, economic responsibility, and support for allies like Israel? Sen. Scott argued that this alternate, supposedly moderate Harris is merely a mask to hide her radical policies while courting voters during the campaign season.
In the pre-debate hype, Scott laid out a strategy for Trump that was as straightforward as it was effective: keep the spotlight on Harris and let her ideology speak for itself. Asking her about everything from the border crisis to inflation could expose her bewildering logic if there is any, to begin with. Scott pointed out that her previous proposals—like price controls—only lead to less grocery on the shelves and more pain at the pump, reiterating that it’s time for Harris to take accountability for her position and policies.
Polling suggests that Scott’s insights on Harris’s appeal hold water. According to reports, her approval ratings have been tanking since the chaotic Afghanistan withdrawal, resembling a rollercoaster ride that’s veered off the track. While Harris’s ratings had been propped up slightly thanks to President Biden’s struggles, the people continue to show disapproval of her radical leanings. In a contest against Trump, any advantage Harris may have held appears tenuous at best, as reports indicate the two are locked in a statistical tie—further illustrating the rejection of her leadership among everyday Americans.
Whether or not Trump utilized Sen. Scott’s strategy effectively remains open to debate, but the premise was undeniably sound. The more voters hear from Harris, the more they seem to recoil from her ideas. In a political landscape filled with empty promises and radical agendas, Trump’s challenge might be to let Harris do the heavy lifting of her messaging, one mind-numbing soundbite at a time.
