Anti-Trump columnist argues that Harris hasn't earned his support yet due to a 'widespread perception of unseriousness.'

Bret Stephens, a New York Times columnist, is strongly against Trump but has not yet decided to vote for Vice President Kamala Harris, as she can no longer evade giving direct responses to media questions.

"Would the president use force to stop Iran from assembling a nuclear weapon if she had intelligence about it? Are there limits to American support for Ukraine, and what are they? These are some of the difficult questions that Stephens posed in an opinion piece from Tuesday, along with others about the creation of a "Palestinian state," the housing crisis, and the possible role of "nuclear power in her energy and climate plans.""

In an article titled "What Harris must do to win over skeptics (like me)," Stephens criticized Harris for her "lighter than air" answers to questions in interviews with CNN reporter Dana Bash and 6ABC's Brian Taff.

"If Harris has thoughtful answers to these questions, she isn't revealing them."

After 59 days as the presumptive Democratic nominee for president, Harris has finally held an official press conference. She has started to increase her interviews, sitting with the National Association of Black Journalists on Tuesday in Philadelphia.

"Despite policy differences, I never felt uneasy about voting for Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden, but I am uncomfortable with the idea of voting for Kamala Harris. If she can address the questions I raised, she should do so to dispel the perception of unseriousness. If not, what was she doing as a senator and vice president for nearly eight years?"

"Does Harris offer anything to disaffected voters or merely embody the elitist perspective they despise?"

The columnist argued that Harris cannot use the "all-purpose response" that Trump is an "existential threat" to democratic institutions as her campaign has frequently done.

"However, many voters dismiss any doubts about Harris's qualifications with the response, "But: Trump.""

"It should not be difficult for Harris to show that she can provide comprehensive answers to pressing policy issues, convey a nuanced understanding of the American interest in a rapidly changing world, articulate a politics of genuine inclusion that resonates with millions of skeptical voters, or demonstrate that she is more than just another factory-produced liberal Democrat whose greatest strength and weakness is adhering to conventional wisdom."

Planet Chronicle Digital did not receive an immediate response from the Harris campaign when requested for a comment.

Planet Chronicle' Brian Flood and David Rutz contributed to this report.