The Right Resistance: Trump must debate Harris to expose her as the leftist fraud that she is

“Stupid question.”

It’s a typical reaction when a member of the establishment media takes precious time asking

2024 Republican presidential nominee Donald J. Trump something obvious and self-explanatory. As a case in point, someone recently inquired whether Trump hoped to debate the new presumptive Democrat nominee-to-be, vice president cackling Kamala Harris, before November’s election.

Of course Trump wants to appear on the same stage with cackling Kamala, knowing full well he could wipe the proverbial floor with the ethically corrupted senile Joe Biden affirmative action leftist-to-the-core fill-in who the Democrats have selected (not voted on, mind you) to run opposite Trump in November’s quadrennial presidential election.

Donald Trump would debate senile Joe or cackling Kamala every day of the week and twice on Sunday if he had the opportunity and could find suitable forums to do so, the difficulty being locating “official” moderators or unbiased journalists who won’t massively slant the proverbial playing field towards Harris, knowing full well that she’d need a large allowance – or handicap – to compete with Trump when discussing real issues.

The question of whether Trump wanted more debates this cycle was (at least temporarily) thrown into limbo last weekend when Biden not-so-suddenly announced he was stepping down as presumptive Democrat nominee, a move that was widely anticipated and sought after by Democrats at all levels. Senile Joe had indicated, over and over, that he believed he was the best candidate to confront Trump and surmised he would end up the eventual winner in November if he stayed on the campaign trail, figuring this despite sinking poll numbers and reliable surveys indicating that Americans considered him too old and senile to think straight any longer.

For at least a day or two after Joe’s swift demise, it wasn’t evident that cackling Kamala would be the new Democrat nominee, so Trump initially shied away from the “Will you debate?” question, figuring that any undue haste would guarantee him a poorly thought-out debate scenario where he’d be battling establishment media moderators as well as Harris herself.

Now, Trump confirmed that he wants to get into the ring with Harris. In an article titled “Trump Says He’s Willing to Debate Harris More Than Once”, Austin Alonzo reported at The Epoch Times the other day:

“Former President Donald Trump says he is willing to debate Vice President Kamala Harris more than once… [T]he former president told reporters on a press call he would ‘absolutely’ agree to a second presidential debate, his first against Ms. Harris, were she to receive the Democratic Party’s nomination. Moreover, he said he'd be willing to commit to multiple debates.

“’I agreed to a debate with Joe Biden. But, I want to debate her, and she'll be no different because they have the same policies,’ the former president said. ‘I think debating is important for a presidential race.’

“He added that he has not yet ‘agreed to anything’ regarding a debate with the vice president.”

Trump shouldn’t be in a rush to plan dates on the upcoming political forums. Harris still has to go through the process of being officially nominated at the Democrat convention in Chicago, which doesn’t even commence for another three and a half weeks. A second Trump/Biden debate was set for September 10th, to be hosted by ABC News.

Trump added that he isn’t “thrilled” with ABC and would seek to move the program to another host. Who knows? The Republican nominee may have figured he could handle senile Joe Biden on CNN and ABC but desires a more “neutral” sponsor for the Kamala matches. Senile Joe would look and sound awful no matter who manned the cameras or directed the feeds. Harris being younger and sharper, on the other hand, could conceivably benefit from overt bias.

Don’t forget that Harris initially drew kudos from debate raters for her successful pinning of senile (even back then) Joe Biden to the mat in the first Democrat presidential primary debate of the nominating cycle (ironically having taken place on June 27, 2019, five years to the day before Trump destroyed Biden’s 2024 candidacy). That night, Harris, looking directly at Biden two lecterns away, gave her “That little girl was me” prepared mini-speech when accusing the Delawarean dolt of catering to racists in his senate career.

Democrat pundits gushed at the woman’s audacity, anointing her the symbolic title of “winner” of the debate and predicting that she’d suddenly vault into the upper tier of leftist party contenders, which she did.

Kamala’s subsequent debate performances fell flat, however, and her podium position on the debate stages moved further and further from the center where senile Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders were positioned based on poll standing. Who can forget Harris’s entire candidacy unraveled when then Democrat presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard singled out Kamala for her abusive treatment of accused criminals in The Golden State, affixing the “hypocrite” label to the Californian and leaving the senator bolting from the party race over a month before Iowa voted in 2020.

Can you fathom what Kamala Harris would do as president to January 6 prisoners or innocent abortion clinic protesters – or anyone who exercises their First Amendment speech or assembly rights? The federal government would need to build additional Gulags to hold all of the innocent people that Kamala would lock up just for speaking out against one of her leftist policies. It would be ugly.

No wonder Trump is anxious to debate Kamala Harris before the nation votes. On the surface, the leftist Democrat is somewhat polished and impressive, but after her prepared material is expended, she stumbles and whines, kind of like senile Joe Biden himself. Trump can and should crave to get Kamala in a one-on-one scenario where people actually pay attention to what she has to say – and to the facts about her horrible record.

That being said, here’s hoping that Trump will have learned a few things from his first go-round with senile Joe Biden last month. As I wrote a few weeks ago, Trump’s debate performance was solid but it wasn’t perfect. Many of the most glaring issues can be solved by Trump changing the way he describes things. Relying on the advice from a concerned onlooker,  I wrote in early July:

Trump falls into the trap of “fact-checking” establishment media idiots tallying “false statements” when he easily could avoid the accusations altogether by prefacing many of his claims with “in my opinion” or “it’s my belief” or “it seems to me”. The fact-checkers would lose their reasons for being – and Democrats would be compelled to turn the glares on themselves.

“In my opinion, he is the worst president in the history of this country and I think a LOT of people are of that same view.”[Next], Trump could’ve suggested, “It’s my belief that the Founding Fathers – if they could ever conceive of the issue of abortion in the first place – would’ve wanted it decided by the states. Indeed, that’s what the Supreme Court decided about Roe, isn’t it? Because “abortion” wasn’t expressly stated in the Constitution, Roe v. Wade was bad law when it was decided and the matter should’ve gone to the individual states to determine for themselves.

[Next], Democrats are always bemoaning about paying “fair shares.” Trump should’ve said, “Well, I believed then and believe now that our NATO allies should pay their fair share. And the president cannot unilaterally pull out of a treaty that’s been approved by Congress, so that scaremongering is false and you know it.”

Additionally, Trump could’ve added, “Yes, I pulled us out of the Paris environmental Accords because it was a bad deal for America. Same as the Iran Nuclear deal.  Because they weren’t true treaties approved by Congress. They were voluntary agreements because there weren’t enough votes to pass the people’s representatives in Congress and for good reason.”

Trump sometimes falls into the exaggeration trap by claiming he had the “greatest economy ever” or the “best border ever” or “we were the safest ever”, etc. All of these are arguable points that invite motivated leftists to prepare so-called “facts” to refute the 45th president and depict him as a liar rather than someone who was proud of what he’d accomplished – and how his policies worked.

No embellishment is needed in that regard.

But Trump is right – the American people deserve to see the major party candidates debate and speak on the most important issues of the times. The American presidency is much more than simply setting an agenda or signing bills, there are leadership qualities involved. Would citizens find Kamala Harris credible when she speaks on foreign policy? Would she perpetuate senile Joe Biden’s war in Ukraine and wishy-washy wavering on Israel?

How would she explain the administration’s failures at the southern border? What would she do to bring down inflation? What’re her thoughts on trade policy? How would she “bring the country together” when her senate record was described as the most liberal in the upper chamber?

Further, how are Democrats defending democracy by elevating her to the top slot on the ticket without any primary votes? Why did she insist that her boss was in good mental condition when she must have known he wasn’t? What role did she play to get him to suddenly reverse himself on whether to bow out?

How would Harris propose to bring down the federal budget deficit? Is Kamala in favor of new laws in certain states that take away a parent’s right to know about a child’s new gender preference? Does Harris back Biden on new changes to Title IX and women’s sports?

These are all questions that an astute debate moderator would ask the “new” Democrat nominee-to-be, Kamala Harris. Liberals appear to love her because she’s a minority woman who would shatter more demographic barriers, but most Americans care a lot more about being governed by policies that help them personally, not being dictated to satisfy “woke” theories and fringe constituencies.

Let the debates commence.

• Joe Biden economy

• inflation

• Biden cognitive decline

• gas prices,

• Nancy Pelosi

• Biden senile

• January 6 Committee

• Liz Cheney

• Build Back Better

• Joe Manchin

• RINOs

• Marjorie Taylor Green

• Kevin McCarthy

• Mitch McConnell

• 2022 elections

• Donald Trump

• 2024 presidential election