Presidential Debate Preview: How Kamala Should Respond to Trump
David B. Grinberg
Strategic Communications Advisor and Ghostwriter | Featured Writer-Blogger | Former Spokesman for U.S. EEOC | Former White House Political Appointee
Recall Michelle Obama’s strategy when replying to personal attacks and insults…
Welcome to a special edition of "The Pulse of Politics - USA" newsletter previewing Tuesday night's presidential debate. Thank you for taking the time to read and engage with this newsletter. Your valuable feedback is very much appreciated!
We Go High
During the 2016 Democratic National Convention, Michelle Obama shared her strategy for responding to personal attacks and insults by Donald Trump:
“When someone is cruel or acts like a bully, you don’t stoop to their level,” she said. “No, our motto is when they go low, we go high.”
As a narcissist of the highest caliber, Trump knows a thing or two about an inflated ego and seeking revenge. Trump’s strategy is to bait his opponents into getting down and dirty in a political mud wrestling match on his terms.
This is a losing proposition.
Here’s a prediction: Trump will replay his same old political playbook of personally demeaning Harris with salacious smears, insidious insults and blatant lies.
Trump Knows No Bottom
Harris’ debate strategy should focus on telling her personal story and explaining her position on the main public policy issues which voters care about most.
She should correct Trump on his lies, misstatements, and half-truths on policy issues when necessary and appropriate. She should also expect Trump to promote his crazy conspiracy theories.
But Harris should refrain from falling into Trump’s trap of baiting her into arguments based on race, gender and other personal issues.
As everyone knows by now, Trump is a serial liar. He told over 30,000 lies during his presidency, according to The Washington Post. Moreover, Trump has likely told over 100,000 lies since his first presidential run in the 2016 election.
Put simply, Trump is immune to truth telling.
Trump knows no bottom. He fights dirty and hits below the belt. It’s a well calculated strategy to engage his opponent in a back-and-forth spiral into the abyss of political discourse.
Kamala should leverage her formidable prosecutorial skills in laying out the case of how a second Trump presidency would land America in a deep ditch.
She should also remind viewers that Trump is a convicted felon with three criminal trials pending.
Below are some of the anticipated verbal assaults Trump will level against Harris…
What Trump May Say
Expect the former president to say some or most of the following, based on his dubious discourse and reprehensible remarks at various times during the campaign…
Political Ideology
Race
Intelligence
Immigration
领英推荐
Threat to Democracy
Healthcare
Guns
Abortion
Religion
Gender Identity
Supreme Court
Hate, Chaos, Fear
It’s no secret that Trump has the political persona of a junkyard dog. His campaign is based on fear and retribution.
Hillary Clinton, at times, tried to stay above the fray with Trump during their presidential debates. But too often, she engaged with Trump’s mudslinging of personal insults and attacks.
Kamala should rely on her vast experience as a prosecutor to not only challenge Trump on policy issues, but also remind viewers of the points her campaign made in a July statement:
“Donald Trump wants to take America backward, to a politics of hate, chaos, and fear.” — Harris campaign
The Takeaway
Kamala Harris should remind voters of Trump’s nefarious nature and ignominious intentions, while ignoring the slew of anticipated personal insults and attacks.
Kamala Harris must not step on the verbal landmines which Trump will lay for her during the presidential debate.
Rather, she should abide by Michelle Obama’s smart strategy: “When they go low, we go high.”
Put simply, Kamala should not take the bait.
__________
ABOUT THE AUTHOR: I’m an independent voter who is unaffiliated with any political campaign. My experience in government and politics spans 25 years, including work at The White House, the Presidential Transition Office, two winning presidential campaigns, the U.S. Congress, and two federal agencies.
AUTHOR'S NOTE: The individuals listed below are copied due to their exemplary engagement with prior editions of this newsletter, which is very much appreciated...
cc: Alex Kouskolekas Cyndi Wilkins Stephen Plourde PHIL FRIEDMAN? Ray Mills MBA, MS Bill Stankiewicz Louise Smith KATHY POWERS Frank Feather Thomas Jackson Jed Elderkin Grandmother Towut Brian Pearson Gary Brummet Louise Smith Heidi A. Chapman Mark Hovda John Marrett Mutsa Mambo Ph.D Helene Abrams Catherine Teevan Jerry Hubach Ellery Kuhn Adrian Batts Herbert Jank Dr. Mehmet Yildiz Kevin T. McGrath Bonnie Weissman Stephane Metral Stewart Banner
Member of Camara Internacional da Indústria de Transportes (CIT) at The International Transportation Industry Chamber
6 个月When they go low you go high David B. Grinberg
Eng.
6 个月The prospect of this event being of any value is debateable ….
Keynote Speaker, Author, Neuroscience Geek
6 个月As always, grateful for your perspective, David B. Grinberg! It will be interesting to watch and I look forward to your post debate analysis. My question (to no one in particular) is this: should the debate host be responsible to fact check? If not the debate host, are they not responsible for spreading misinformation (in the event it occurs)?
Certified Bodywork Professional, Author/Blogger at All Things Wellness, Featured Contributor at BIZCATALYST 360 Global Media Digest
6 个月Someone with thirty-four felonies under his belt wouldn't even pass a background check at the post office. ?? It's mind boggling how far the Republican party has fallen. It wasn't always that way There was a time we could all get along and work together.
Writer and Creator of Safeguard. Know me through my work.
6 个月You make good observations – I was especially impressed with your piece regarding the Harris CNN interview. I would like to add that it’s not only a matter of how Harris handles the debate – it’s also a question of whether the media rectifies the errors it has been making in covering Trumpism, and what we in the public must look for in the debate and in the coverage of Trumpism beyond that. This short article explains what Trump hasn’t been asked, and why getting answers to such questions instead of allowing ourselves to be distracted by trivia is vital to preserving our personal and political rights as Americans: “Which Will Prevail: Trumpism or a Free Press?” https://lnkd.in/gcetbfz3