Former Opponents of Kamala Harris Share Secrets of Her Debate Style

Forty-two years ago, Lita Rosario-Richardson stood out as the sole woman on Howard University’s debate team. Determined to change the dynamics, she took the initiative to recruit Kamala Harris.

Rosario-Richardson recalled noticing Harris’s sharp analytical abilities and effective argumentation skills. She stated, “I recognized Kamala’s critical thinking capabilities and her talent for articulating her points clearly.”

As the upcoming debate between Harris and former President Donald Trump approaches on September 10, opinions are surfacing from those who witnessed Harris’s debating style in the past. Many former competitors reflect on how her previous performances could shape her strategies in this highly anticipated showdown.

The ABC News presidential debate is scheduled for September 10 at 9 p.m. ET, with coverage available on ABC and streaming via ABC News Live, Disney+, and Hulu.

Looking back to 2010, during her campaign for California Attorney General, Harris faced off against Los Angeles District Attorney Steve Cooley. Initially trailing in polls, she seized a crucial moment when a reporter questioned Cooley about his salary and pension. Cooley explained that his previous experience justified both incomes, stating, “I definitely earned whatever pension rights I have.”

In response, Harris’s team effectively transformed his comment into a campaign ad, despite her initial desire to prioritize her accomplishments over negative campaigning.

Cooley later expressed skepticism about Harris’s capabilities, predicting that she would struggle in the upcoming debate if the format was unfavorable. He remarked, “She needs her teleprompter. She needs her notes that are probably written by someone else in order to do well.” However, both Cooley and Harris’s former aides clarified that neither candidate used a teleprompter during their AG debate.

Former California Assembly Majority Leader Alberto Torrico, who also faced Harris during the primary, warned that underestimating Harris would be a mistake. He noted, “She’s not dumb, and she’s going to prosecute him. She’s not going to debate him… She’s going to treat him like one of the defendants that she prosecuted when she was a rank-and-file DA in Oakland.”

Several months before the general election, Harris was competing against Torrico, Chris Kelly, Congressman Ted Lieu, and others who shared the stage with her during the debate. Congressman Lieu remembered clearly how Harris’s law enforcement background influenced her approach, saying, “She didn’t take any crap. I wouldn’t want to debate her.”

Torrico recounted his experiences during the debates, mentioning the tension as he sought to challenge Harris. He recalled seeking the endorsement of the Service Employees International Union and trying to engage the audience with a response in Spanish, only to feel overshadowed by Harris’s ability to divert attention away from the original question.

Torrico reminisced, “I was just sitting there fuming, saying, ‘She’s not answering the question at all. I just answered the question. I hit a home run… and everyone’s clapping for you.'”

Reflecting on Harris’s time as an opponent, Torrico acknowledged her talent for sidestepping direct questions while effectively communicating her points. He noted how she would craftily insert herself into debates, seizing moments to highlight her perspectives.

During her first run for public office as San Francisco District Attorney, Harris found herself in single digits in the polls. However, that changed when she tackled a challenging audience question regarding her independence from then-Mayor Willie Brown, with whom she had a previous relationship. She skillfully redirected the conversation toward the issues at hand, establishing her credibility.

Rosario-Richardson, who has closely followed Harris’s career, emphasized her resilience during debates, particularly during their time at Howard. She recalled, “Oftentimes, men used their physical prowess and vocal volume to dominate discussions, but Kamala stood her ground and didn’t let that deter her.”

As the September debate draws closer, Rosario-Richardson expressed her anticipation, considering Trump’s unpredictable debating style. “This will be unique due to the uncertainty surrounding how Trump will engage, especially if he chooses personal attacks over substantive issues,” she said.

Despite her long familiarity with Harris’s approach to debates, Rosario-Richardson admitted that like many, she remains uncertain of what to expect. “I’m going to feel some of that anticipation,” she concluded, eager for the showdown.

Source: ABC News