Tom Minear: Relying on Trump to lose is not a plan for Harris to win

Kamala Harris may have defeated Donald Trump in last week’s debate, but so did Hillary Clinton three times in 2016. Tom Minear has questions about her strategy.

Kamala Harris’s wildly successful bid to bait Donald Trump during their debate was framed by someone who knew exactly what being on that stage was like: Hillary Clinton.

It is easy to forget she won all three of their debates in 2016, because that did not stop her losing the election. But it is a timely reminder that defeating Mr Trump takes more than showing Americans he is an unstable and conspiratorial egomaniac.

That strategy is perhaps even less useful for Ms Harris than it was for Ms Clinton.

Donald Trump listens to Hillary Clinton during a debate in 2016. Picture: Paul Richards (AFP)

This is the thing about Mr Trump many Australians watching this election struggle to grasp – that Americans made up their minds about the man’s character years ago. After all, they elected him days after hearing him brag about sexually assaulting women.

Millions of Americans love the Republican. But the voters who held his fate in their hands in 2016 – as they do now – are the ones who don’t like him and support him anyway.

They do so for countless reasons, most notably because in a two-horse race, they trust him more to handle the issues that matter to them. That required a leap of faith in 2016, when he was an outsider up against an incredibly experienced politician. It’s a different story now.

Mr Trump’s record on inflation and immigration – two of the most important issues for ordinary Americans – compares favourably to President Joe Biden’s failures. And unlike Ms Clinton, Ms Harris remains something of an unknown quantity to many, other than the fact that she shares the blame for Mr Biden’s mistakes as his Vice President.

Vice President Kamala Harris speaks at a campaign rally after last week’s debate. Picture: Win McNamee (Getty Images via AFP)

The most memorable moment of their debate was when Ms Harris taunted Mr Trump about his crowds, prompting a narcissistic retort and his claim that immigrants were eating pets. Watch the exchange again, however, and you will see it unfolded because she was avoiding explaining why it took the administration years to curb the record influx of illegal immigrants.

This taught Americans nothing new about Mr Trump, but nor did it help reassure those with doubts about Ms Harris.

What the debate did prove is that after weeks of avoiding scrutiny, Ms Harris is more than capable of performing under pressure. She was sharp, engaging and presidential, whatever that term means in the Trump era. Now, she needs to use that confidence to take on the questions that matter to voters, because relying on Mr Trump to lose is not a plan to win.

Originally published as Tom Minear: Relying on Trump to lose is not a plan for Harris to win