I think it would depend on the topic, which is up to you.
Danish's strength seems to be in explaining social and political phenomena through economics, at least from what I've seen. My strength, in my opinion, is mostly in 20th century history and military history and explaining them through social conditions and philosophical trends. I think if we found a way to intersect the ideas we have about politics centered around a specific phenomena or event, that'd be the best way to come up with a topic that we are both strong in but which we come at from different angles.
I was sort of challenged to this anyway, though, so have at it.

I also don't know how seriously Danish intends to take the debate, and therefore don't know how weighty the topic should be. I can go either way.