Now that the Democrats have “inserted” Kamala Harris as their presidential nominee, she will be forced to do more than simply cackle and hide behind her enablers. For example, she will likely have to hold press conferences, which she has yet to do, and debate Donald Trump. According to Fox News, Trump recently announced that he has agreed to Fox News' proposal for a debate against Harris on September 4 in Pennsylvania. If Harris refuses to debate Trump, she will confirm what many Americans suspect, which is that she is a paper tiger who is afraid to defend her abysmal record.
It goes without saying that Democrats installed Harris into her current position as “nominee.” There was no formal vote. Instead, when Democrats saw that Trump was obliterating Joe Biden and that Biden had no path to reelection, they panicked, forced Biden out, and installed Harris.
Since “installation day,” Harris has not fielded any tough questions. She has not held one press conference, has not discussed her record, and has hidden behind her enablers. In essence, Democrats and the various left-wing media mouthpieces have done their best to bolster her reputation within the party and among voters while simultaneously shielding her from scrutiny.
While this effort has somewhat succeeded, this bump will likely be short-lived once Americans learn more about Harris and her radical and extreme record. A debate provides the perfect forum for Harris to explain and defend her radical and dangerous policies in front of the entire country and without the help of her “handlers.”
During a debate, Harris should be forced to explain why, when she was a presidential candidate in 2019, she argued that any states that had a history of restricting the abortion rights protected by Roe v. Wade would require federal approval before implementing new abortion laws. She should explain why she opposed the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, a piece of legislation meant to protect babies that were born alive after a failed abortion.
Harris should also specifically explain her position on the Second Amendment and why, on more than one occasion, she has called for a ban on assault weapons. She must also explain why she is in favor of banning fracking (despite her recent “miraculous” change of opinion on this issue) and where she stands on the Green New Deal. Harris must explain why she supports student debt forgiveness, why she played a significant role in Biden’s ultimate decision to cancel/wipe out student debt notwithstanding negative Supreme Court precedent on this issue, who she thinks will pay for such debt forgiveness, and how/why such forgiveness is fair to those who have already paid off their debt or have not attended school/university.
Harris clearly does not want to speak about immigration and the border, as her policies are indefensible. However, she must face questions about her approach to the border and her role as border Czar. Harris should explain why she favored Biden’s decision to roll back the various Trump-era border policies despite their effectiveness in reducing illegal border crossings, why she expressed an intent to expand the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrival (DACA), to provide additional protections to illegal immigrants by executive order, and what additional protections she would provide. She must explain how she will handle the influx of people illegally entering the country every day, what she will do with those who are already in the country illegally, and how she will make the country safer.
During a debate, Harris must explain her policies relating to taxation and why, according to some reports, corporate tax rates could reach as high as 35 percent with her in charge. She must explain her position regarding the American-Israeli relationship, whether she would eliminate Trump-like tariffs, and where she stands on the issue of voting and election integrity given her support of H.R.1 (the “For the People Act”) and the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, both of which sought to federalize the election process and to take away the powers from the individual states. Finally, Harris must explain why she recently opposed a piece of legislation known as the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act, which would have further bolstered the current law by permitting only U.S. citizens to vote in federal elections.
While many Democrats claim that Trump is afraid to debate Harris, this argument is nonsensical and meritless. For example, Trump previously participated in a CNN town hall with a Trump-hating moderator who attacked him from the first minute. He debated Biden with two “anti-Trumpers” serving as moderators. Trump spoke in Manhattan during his ridiculous and politicized criminal trial in New York and has spoken in many "hostile" venues throughout the years. Finally, Democrats have put Trump through hell for over seven years, yet he continues to push back and win.
Given what Trump has endured to date, including the recent and terrible assassination attempt, he is clearly not afraid to debate someone who hides behind her handlers and has yet to give a press conference for fear of having to defend her abysmal record. To the contrary, if Harris refuses to debate Trump on September 4, she will confirm what many Americans already suspect, which is that Harris lacks a working knowledge of the critical issues and is afraid and unable to defend her terrible and extremely radical record in front of her opponent and the American people.
Mr. Hakim is an attorney and columnist. His articles have been published in The Washington Examiner, The Daily Caller, The Federalist, American Thinker, and other online publications. He has also appeared on OANN’s Tipping Point, Newsmax, Steadfast and Loyal Podcast with Allen West, The Dave Weinbaum Show, and Real America’s Voice. The views expressed herein are the author’s own and do not constitute legal advice.