Kamala Harris’ Debate Performance: Key Strategic Misses and What It Means for Her Campaign
Kamala Harris’s performance in her first debate with Donald Trump showcased her strong debating skills and preparation, surpassing the low expectations set for her. However, she missed four crucial strategic objectives needed to sway independent and undecided voters.
1. Distancing from the Biden Administration: Harris needed to clearly separate herself from the Biden administration’s track record, particularly on economic and immigration issues. With Trump leading her by 10 points on the economy and 7 points on immigration, Harris failed to make significant inroads. Her full endorsement of Biden’s policies, including green energy initiatives and social justice reforms, hindered her ability to address current inflation and economic concerns effectively.
2. Addressing Policy Shifts: Harris’s numerous shifts on key policy issues required a thorough explanation. While it’s normal to evolve on policy, her strategy to avoid media scrutiny prevented her from developing a compelling narrative around these changes. This lack of a coherent story made it difficult for her to present herself as a “moderate” candidate, undermining her credibility in the debate.
3. Establishing Herself as a Change Candidate: To position herself as the candidate of change, Harris needed to distance herself from Biden and present herself as a reformist. This task was complicated by her role as the incumbent vice president, which made it challenging to advocate for change while being associated with the current administration. A New York Times-Sienna poll revealed that 53% of voters viewed Trump as the candidate of change, compared to only 25% for Harris, highlighting her struggle to redefine her role and appeal to voters seeking a departure from Biden’s policies.
4. Articulating a Clear Vision: Harris’s vision for an “opportunity economy” lacked specificity. In her speech in Raleigh, N.C., she promised to focus on creating opportunities for the middle class, but her vision remained vague and fragmented. Without concrete details, voters found her proposals unconvincing, leading to concerns about her ability to implement her vision effectively.
Conclusion: Harris’s debate performance excelled in style but fell short strategically. Her focus on solidifying her base rather than addressing broader strategic goals resulted in a missed opportunity to connect with undecided voters. To advance her candidacy, Harris needs to refine her approach and present a more coherent and detailed strategy.
About the Author: Dennis M. Powell, a strategic management consultant at Massey Powell and author of “Leading from the Top: Presidential Lessons in Issues Management,” offers insights into effective political debate strategies.
