Harris Calls Trump a Fascist: 6 Takeaways From Her CNN Town Hall

Harris Calls Trump a Fascist: 6 Takeaways From Her CNN Town Hall

Entering new rhetorical territory, the vice president turned even unrelated questions into attacks on Donald Trump as she offered long, winding answers to questions from voters.

• Share full article
• 0

By Reid J. Epstein and Lisa Lerer

Kamala Harris called Donald J. Trump a fascist on Wednesday evening, elevating what until recently had been an argument made only in the lower ranks of a Democratic Party that has spent years attacking him as anti-democratic, unfit to serve and a criminal.

Early in a CNN town hall in Pennsylvania, she readily agreed with the host, Anderson Cooper, when he asked whether she believed Mr. Trump met the definition of a fascist. “Yes, I do,” she quickly shot back. “Yes, I do.”

Later, when asked about the plight of Palestinians in Gaza, she jumped into a loaded critique of her rival.

“For many people who care about this issue, they also care about bringing down the price of groceries,” she said. “They also care about our democracy and not having a president of the United States who admires dictators and is a fascist.”

Her comments — which went a step beyond her previous agreement that Mr. Trump was a fascist — were intended to amplify the news this week that John Kelly, Mr. Trump’s former White House chief of staff, said he thought the former president met the definition of the word and worried deeply about the threat a second Trump administration posed to democratic institutions.

Ms. Harris’s attacks on Wednesday evening went largely unanswered: Mr. Trump declined both a second debate and an invitation from CNN to participate in a similar forum.

Here are six takeaways from the town hall in Chester Township, Pa.

Her default answer: Trump is far worse.

Over the course of the 80-minute town hall, Ms. Harris was asked about a wide range of policy issues. Her answers often stuck to the same theme.

Would she expand the Supreme Court? Would people who make $500,000 see their taxes increase? Would Americans pay for benefits for migrants crossing the border? How would she codify Roe v. Wade into federal law? And what about Gaza?

Her answers boiled down to: Donald Trump would be worse.

It was a strategy aimed at traditional Democrats who might be wavering on her, such as progressives who are unhappy with American support for Israel or Jewish voters worried that Harris wouldn’t be supportive enough.

Her goal was to refocus Democrats on something they can all agree on: the dangers they see in Mr. Trump and his divisive, at times antidemocratic language.

Voters asked direct questions. Harris gave circular answers.

Ms. Harris got one fairly straightforward question from a self-described Jewish independent voter about how she would deal with antisemitism on college campuses.

In an answer that stretched for more than five minutes, she briefly touched on hate crimes but then jumped into a discursive tangent that addressed Mr. Trump’s reported invocations of Hitler, his relationships with Kim Jong-un and Vladimir V. Putin and his actions during the coronavirus pandemic.

It was illustrative of a pivot Ms. Harris made throughout the night from the short, sharp and pointed questions that were asked of her to the long, winding answers she preferred to give.

She got a moment she wanted by showing up.

Ms. Harris’s campaign wanted voters to hear her strongest case against Mr. Trump early in the town hall, before they flipped the channel back to “Survivor.” Her aides got their wish when she quickly agreed that Mr. Trump was a fascist.

Mr. Trump was content to gripe on social media from the sidelines. Unlike the former president, who has largely stuck to conservative safe spaces and friendly podcast interviews, Ms. Harris has sat for a series of big-audience interviews with independent and — last week on Fox News — combative news outlets.

She has managed to drive news cycles in most of her appearances, and probably did so again Wednesday night. Whether voters give her credit for her willingness to be questioned remains to be seen, but there’s little question that she has answered the critique that she was hiding from media scrutiny.

Still, she might have been better off in a debate.

Attacking Mr. Trump, it turns out, is more effective when he’s standing right there.

Ms. Harris’s strong performance in her first — and only — presidential debate against her rival demonstrated her ability to bait him into a misstep. But without him standing nearby, her attacks on him appeared more like dodges of questions about her own plans than crisp responses about what she would do as president.

Mr. Trump has repeatedly refused to participate in another debate, unwilling to risk another opportunity for American voters to make a side-by-side comparison. While that decision may not be the best for voters eager to size up the candidates, her performance Wednesday night showed why it might benefit Mr. Trump.

She has an answer for her reversals from 2019.

One of Ms. Harris’s strongest moments came when she was asked about her policy reversals on issues like fracking — a topic particularly important in Pennsylvania. She has shifted her positions on numerous issues since her 2019 run for president, including funding for the police, her support for a single-payer health-care system, and decriminalizing crossing the border illegally.

When asked about her flip-flops, Ms. Harris repositioned what has long been considered a weakness for her into a strong character trait and subtle attack on the egoism of her opponent.

“Our country deserves to have a president of the United States who is not afraid of good ideas and does not stand on pride,” she said. “I’m never going to shy away from good ideas. And I’m not going to feel the need to have pride associate with a position that I’ve taken, when the important thing is to build consensus to fix problems.”

Under two weeks out, she’s still defining herself.

With less than two weeks left in the race, and after nearly four years as vice president, it remains striking how Ms. Harris is still laying out basic details of her personal history to American voters.

She’s from a middle-class family. She prays every day and is close with her pastor. She’s still grieving the death of her mother. Most of her career was spent outside Washington.

The broad unfamiliarity with her biography strikes a sharp contrast with her opponent. Mr. Trump’s life is not only the stuff of political lore, it has also played on television screens for decades, been the topic of best-selling books and has dominated American politics for nearly a decade.

A candidate typically explains her or his personal history during a long primary fight, and then again to a broader general-election audience in the spring and summer. Ms. Harris was forced into an unusually short timeline this year — and the fact that she is still telling her story underscores the challenge and how far she still has to go to tell voters who she is.