By Reid J. Epstein and Lisa Lerer
On Wednesday evening, Kamala Harris labeled Donald Trump as a fascist, taking a stance that until now had only been voiced modestly within certain circles of a Democratic Party that has long accused him of being anti-democratic, unqualified for office, and criminal.
During an early moment at a CNN town hall in Pennsylvania, she readily concurred with the host, Anderson Cooper, when he queried if she believed Trump fit the definition of a fascist. “Yes, absolutely,” she replied without hesitation. “Yes, absolutely.”
Later on, when asked about the situation of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, she launched into a pointed critique of her adversary.
“For many concerned individuals, they also care about lowering grocery prices,” she stated. “They care about our democracy and ensuring we do not have a U.S. president who admires dictators and embodies fascism.”
Her remarks — which went further than her earlier affirmation that Trump was a fascist — aimed to amplify recent news that John Kelly, Trump’s former chief of staff, indicated he believed the former president fit that label and expressed significant concern about the threat posed to democratic institutions by a potential second Trump term.
Harris’ criticisms on Wednesday evening largely went without response: Trump declined both an invitation to a second debate and a CNN invitation to engage in a similar forum.
Here are six key points from the town hall in Chester Township, Pennsylvania.
Her recurring message: Trump is significantly worse.
Throughout the 80-minute town hall, Harris was queried about various policy topics. Her responses consistently echoed the same theme.
Would she consider expanding the Supreme Court? Would individuals earning $500,000 face tax hikes? Would Americans fund benefits for migrants crossing the border? How would she enshrine Roe v. Wade in federal law? And what are her views on Gaza?
Her responses distilled to: Donald Trump would be worse.
This approach targeted traditional Democrats who may be hesitant about her, including progressives dissatisfied with U.S. support for Israel and Jewish voters concerned about her level of support.
Her intention was to redirect Democrats’ focus on a unifying concern: the threats they perceive in Trump and his inflammatory, at times anti-democratic rhetoric.
Participants posed straightforward questions. Harris provided evasive answers.
A self-identified Jewish independent voter posed a clear question about how she would confront antisemitism at colleges.
In a response that extended over five minutes, she briefly mentioned hate crimes but then veered into a lengthy discourse touching on Trump’s alleged references to Hitler, his dealings with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un and Russian President Vladimir Putin, as well as his actions during the COVID-19 pandemic.
This demonstrated a shift Harris made throughout the evening from concise, pointed inquiries to lengthy, meandering responses she seemed to prefer.
She seized a desired moment by participating.
Harris’ campaign aimed for voters to hear her most compelling argument against Trump early in the town hall, before they switched back to “Survivor.” Her aides got their wish when she promptly affirmed that Trump was a fascist.
Trump has opted to voice complaints on social media from the sidelines. Unlike the former president, who has mainly remained in conservative circles and friendlier podcast discussions, Harris has engaged in several high-profile interviews with independent outlets and — last week on Fox News — confrontational media organizations.
She has effectively driven news narratives in most of her appearances, likely doing so once more on Wednesday night. Whether voters recognize her for her willingness to face scrutiny remains uncertain, but it is clear that she has addressed the criticism regarding her avoidance of media engagement.
However, she may have fared better in a debate setting.
Confronting Trump appears to be more impactful when he is physically present.
Harris’ robust showing in her initial — and only — presidential debate against her rival showcased her skill in provoking him into a blunder. Yet without him beside her, her criticisms came off as evasive responses to inquiries regarding her own policies rather than clear statements about her intentions as president.
Trump has consistently rebuffed the idea of participating in another debate, wary of providing an opportunity for voters to observe a direct comparison between the candidates. While this decision might not serve voters keen to evaluate the contenders, her performance on Wednesday night highlighted why it could advantage Trump.
She has a response for her policy shifts from 2019.
One of Harris’ notable moments occurred when she was questioned about her policy changes on topics such as fracking — an issue particularly relevant in Pennsylvania. She has altered her stance on several matters since her 2019 presidential campaign, including funding for law enforcement, her backing of a single-payer healthcare system, and decriminalizing unauthorized border crossing.
When confronted about her inconsistencies, Harris reframed what has often been seen as a vulnerability into a strong character trait and a subtle critique of her opponent’s arrogance.
“Our nation deserves a president who is open to good ideas and not driven by pride,” she stated. “I will never shy away from embracing positive solutions. I’m not going to let pride dictate a stance I have taken when the priority is to unify and address challenges.”
With less than two weeks to go, she’s still shaping her identity.
With under two weeks remaining in the election, and after nearly four years in the vice presidency, it remains notable how Harris continues to communicate fundamental aspects of her personal narrative to the American electorate.
She hails from a middle-class background. She engages in daily prayer and maintains a close relationship with her pastor. She is still mourning her mother’s passing. Most of her career has unfolded outside of Washington.
The widespread unfamiliarity with her life story stands in stark contrast to that of her opponent. Trump’s life narrative is not only entrenched in political folklore but has also been featured on television for decades, the subject of bestselling publications, and has significantly influenced American politics for nearly ten years.
A candidate typically outlines their personal background during an extensive primary campaign, followed by a reintroduction to a broader general election audience in the spring and summer. Harris faced an unusually compressed timeline this year — and the necessity of still sharing her story underscores the challenges she encounters and the distance she must cover to effectively tell voters who she is.
