Harris/Walz interview … puff and platitudes trump policies
Heading into the first sit-down interview in the campaign, the onus was on CNN’s host Dana Bash. Would she ask tough questions … or go soft? Would she be a journalist or a media flunky?
Those questions were fairly raised when she was selected to moderate the Biden/Trump debate for several reasons. To the surprise of many, Bash did not give favor to Biden in the Biden/Trump debate– and even Team Trump praised Bash for her fairness. She performed like a real journalist.
So, what about the Harris/Walz interview? Sad to say, Bash crashed.
Unlike her debate performance, Bash and CNN put on a show that could have been a Harris/Walz infomercial. Yes, she did ask Harris about a couple of her flip-flops – but mostly to allow Harris to provide the boilerplate response. There were no serious follow- up questions. No challenge when Harris said she is not going to ban fracking and has been consistent in that. No video of Harris when she said she would end all fracking … period. No challenge when she said proof of her position was the fact that “we (the Biden administration) did not ban fracking” Hmmmm. I seem to recall that Biden issued an Executive Order banning fracking on federal lands.
You could see the direction that this so-called interview was heading with the first question. What would Harris do on day one of her presidency? She said she would look after the middle class with jobs and business investment. Platitudes … no policies.
Most of the interview dealt with positive fuzzy stuff. Walz’ son expressing a loving and emotional reaction to his dad’s speech (which should never have been mocked). Very touching, but not policy. Then there was the photo of Harris’ grandniece watching the Vice President giving her acceptance speech – a photo that is being hyped by the left as akin to the image of the raising of Old Glory at Iwo Jima in terms of symbolism. Nice pic, but nothing to do with policy.
Harris was asked what she was doing when she got THE call from President Biden. Her initial response is that she should not give out too much information – TMI, if you will. Well, she was cooking pancakes and bacon for the family. And that is Harris definition of TMI?
(If Harris was talking about “makin’ bacon” in the colloquial or slang sense, THAT would be TMI. But I digress.)
When Walz was asked if he misspoke when he said he carried a gun “in war,” the governor went on about gun violence in schools without answering the questions. Bash did not press the issue. We got the same deflection when asked about past lies dealing with his 1999 drunk and reckless driving charge. He deflected into “my students love me.” No direct answer. No policy.
When Harris bragged about bringing down inflation, Bash took a pass on the obvious — noting that inflation rose to record heights under the Biden/Harris watch. Harris was not asked about the excessive spending that fueled the inflation – and Harris’ role in casting the tie breaking vote on the massive spending bill.
As revealing and soft as the questions were, what was never asked was more shocking. Nothing about Ukraine … China … Iran … or Afghanistan. Nothing about tax policy. Just a lot off platitudes about cutting prices … lower medical costs … lowering housing costs. No question as to how Harris would do all that. Bash did not even pursue Harris on her proposed price and rent controls proposals.
Harris was not asked about crime – specifically her history of soft on crime polices. Decriminalizing illegal border crossing … ending cash bail … calling for a cut in the enforcement activities by ICE … and raising bail money for rioters in Minnesota.
As if the questioning was not bad enough, the CNN program was structured like a campaign ad. There was that warm fuzzy video opening. In conjunction with breaks, CNN showed videos of Harris and Walz in positive settings, including a restaurant. The pertinent question was … what did they order? She had a burger, and he had a brisket. (Is that another example of TMI – as in “too meaningless information”?)
When they did use Trump in the videos, they cherry picked his most unpopular statements – setting Harris up for her well established responses. The entire interview was never intended to elicit policy information from Harris as opposed to making her look as good as possible.
As the New York Times wrote:
“In a setting arranged by the Harris campaign to appear friendly — just three people sitting together at a neighborhood coffee shop in Savannah — it was going to be difficult for Ms. Bash to extract much news out of the vice president.”
And indeed, she did not. That is especially true when you consider that the questions were the result of groupthink at the station. The questions were no more impromptu than the carefully scripted answers.
Harris spent a lot of time peddling her alleged “values” over policies. Even where she did a 180-degree turnabout on fracking – and fibbing in the process (according to the CNN fact checker). Harris illogically claimed that all her substantial flip flops reflected no change in values – Bash let her get away with it.
If not exactly fawning, Bash’s interview was too friendly to be viewed as a true interview conducted by a real journalist. The entire show was heavy on the puff and poop – virtually devoid — of issues. Viewers would not know much more about Harris after the interview than they did before. The Harris strategy is all about selling a marketing image while ignoring the tough questions.
Interestingly, at the start of the show – and following each commercial break – Bash would say “live from Savannah, Georgia.” Actually, the interview was taped and edited in advance. Only Bash’s introductions were live. That qualifies as disinformation and is not how a journalist or a news network conducts real interviews.
Despite the highly favorable treatment by CNN, I tend to agree with political strategist David Axelrod and many others. He gave Harris a good review but concluded his critique with “I don’t think she moved the needle.”
Others – from Fox to the New York Times – were not praising Harris performance. She was dull … boring … and again displayed her word salad approach to impromptu oratory. The Times wrote, “She still struggles to be punchy off the cuff.”
In consenting to an exclusive single interview, the Harris campaign is keeping with its strategy of limiting exposure to the press and the public to the bare minimum. Bringing along her affable teammate is further evidence of that. Walz was there to minimize the time Harris was exposed to direct questions. He was there to pick up the ball if she fumbled. As the Wall Street Journal noted, he was there as a crutch – as one observer called it, “her ESA (Emotional Support Animal).” For most of the interview, Walz just smiled and nodded.
Walz succeeded in his mission. He took airtime that could have been used for more important questions for Harris – and it is Harris who sets the policy. The fact that he is in lockstep to her very liberal agenda is at the same time notable and inconsequential.
Some have suggested that after the convention Harris would open up to a more traditional relationship with the press and the public – more interviews, press conferences and off-the-cuff responses. At the time of this writing, she has nothing on her schedule – and still no policy page on her website. It looks like Team Harris is going to run the Biden bunker campaign strategy on a single theme – “I am not Donald Trump.”
The interview made Harris’ cheerleaders cheer and her opponents pounce but did nothing to inform those voters who are seeking for more information on the issues before making a voting decision. Despite the pass from Bash and CNN, Harris’ performance was not informative and not reassuring to voters. She comes out of the inning with no hits, no runs and no (existential) errors.
So, there ‘tis.
Larry, I did not watch the interview, so I will move forward and allow your statements about this interview to stand. However, one has to ask, what about trump? Has anyone really interviewed him aggressively? Has he ever given any real policy-related statements? If you are being fair-the answer is no. He should be asked things like-you made a lot of campaign promises prior to your election in 2016-the only one that actually became law was a tax cut that primarily benefited the wealthy and corporations-why should we believe any of your campaign promises? Or-we use a lot of undocumented immigrants to do menial tasks that citizens are unwilling to perform-how Will these jobs be taken care of if you deport all the undocumented people in the US? Or-Will you allow your minions to support the bipartisan border reform bill that you prevented from passing due to the fact that you needed this to be a campaign issue for your reelection? Another example in this tome of pointing fingers at democrats and ignoring the fact that republicans are just as guilty….
Mike f, as an Independent / Unaffiliated, I agree with you!! Great questions! Maybe you have missed your calling!
By the way, Larry himself does the same kind of dodging questions. Larry is strong anti-abortion. Larry is strong pro Israel. I have asked Larry and supplied the data and the Israeli government website when I asked Larry how he could support a country that is the second easiest to get an abortion!!??? He has never answered this question, always chickening out. Thus, I conclude that Larry is a hypocrite!
The inter view was “soft”, Harris and Bash would have been taken up a few notches. Those of us who prefer she would win know she will answer with good reasoning and those like Larry who are drooling in anticipation that she may say something they find delight in their pouncing on, They should be left with nothing. But, that didn’t happen. Horist and those of hi kind went away unhappy and made to wait until The Debate.
Truth be told, this election cycle has not offered any real meat of intelligent proposals for solutions to this nation’s socio-political ills which have become endemic like in proportion and a threat to the Republic and the well being of a majority and a boon to the most wealthy 2-5% of the population.
Trump is a very much known personality. He is more celebrity in his want for more and more attention, vanity celebration. and commercializing his notoriety.
Only those admirers who have to justify their adulation by repeating his false claims and and abundant falsehoods If he has an above average IQ, he is very adept at keeping it under wraps and completely hidden under his clown’s performances wearing its mask and cloak. Intelligent sufficient for the presidency’s daily demands every day for
48 month happens to be over his head in tempestuous waters. He is no swimmer in a calm swimming pool. The Ocean hurricane blows through every one of POTUS’ days and nights. 2017-2020 were Trump’s trial by fire testing his intelligence, personality. and moral character. History of Trump’s presidency gives more than ample proof that he possesses not nearly enough intelligence, quality personality, and moral integrity. If he had a great intelligent mind maybe his cringe worthy personality and his alley cat in heat morality could be temporarily overlooked. In his case, intellect is not his forte
Harris, on the other hand, has not fully become known well enough to us the electorate so that we know she will score high marks in at least the three categories mentioned. The jury is out in Harris’ case.
However.as Donald Trump’s qualifications present a very low bar, Harris will easily pass that test. We need to see and know she finishes with earning top marks in all three. The coming debate between Harris and Trump will reveal if she has the right stuff and if Trump has better stuff than previously shown.
Big news day for Horist and company.
Great anticipation of positive gains made by Harris.
G
Well said and very true!
HARRIS/WALZ ARE COMMUNIST AND IF YOU VOTE FOR THEM THAT IS WHAT YOU WILL GET. IF THEY WIN OUR COUNTRY IS DONE WITH/ GONE DEAD!!!
If they win, we will avoid the brutal dictatorship that Trump and his lapdog Vance and Project 2025 folks intend.
What are you scared of? People making a living wage? People having health insurance? Kids being able to eat at school instead of being hungry in class? Wealthy paying their fair share? Repeal of wealthy and corp tax cuts? Capital gains taxes being commensurate with W-2 taxes? Afraid of lower crime? Afraid of women having contraception and access to an abortion to save their life / health? Afraid of immigration reform? Afraid of immigrants taking jobs American citizens do not want?
What exactly do you mean when you say they are “communists”?
I am not going to rate this article on its accuracy and truthfulness/spin/lies because I did not see the Trump or Harris/Walz interviews. But I will give this article a Stop The BS rating of 5+ for the ideas within the article. This article will make excellent fish wrap!!!
Here is why:
1) Harris is doing the Biden bunker strategy? Gee, where was Trump for three weeks after the debate? It is well known and acknowledged by his campaign that he does better when he stays out of the public!! They are saying he is pursuing a bunker strategy!!
2) It is widely known in speech theory that the one asking the questions is controlling the conversation. So who was Larry really pissed at more? The person answering the questions that did not satisfy Larry’s thirst for policy so he can write another article? Or the person asking the questions who did not press Harris for more details so Larry could write about it? Larry seems to diffuse his anger between Harris and Bash when the reality is his anger should squarely be on CNN and Bash. CNN and Bash were the ones in the driver’s seat.
3) In 2016, Trump’s first run, did not do much on policy either. It was mostly grievance and promises that many of us knew he could not keep such as Mexico paying for the Trump wall, repeal and replace the ACA, pull out of Afghanistan (which he stuck Biden with), etc. Trump only won that election because more folks despised Clinton, and Trump was given a lot of passes for policy deficits in his speeches. But Larry will not give Harris the same benefit he gives Trump all of the time. Nor does he give the Harris/Walz team the same behavioral passes he gives the Trump/Vance team.
4) Larry makes a backhanded sexual slur at Harris with the “makin bacon” joke that did not come off well at all. Actually it was rather pathetic. And it shows his disrespect for women! Just like his chicken and watermelon joke backfired and showed his disrespect for African Americans. Very poor of you Larry!!
5) As an Independent, I just do not think that a 1999 DUI charge compares at all to a rape conviction and a 34 fraud convictions!! But again, Larry is desperately searching for some little mole hill to make a mountain out of while ignoring the mountain already in his face!!
6) Larry is right to call out Harris fibbing in her answer but seems to always give a pass to the voluminous outright lying by Trump in everything he says!
7) Larry does a deep dive into the trivial (as he often does) that nobody cares about when he says, ” Actually, the interview was taped and edited in advance. Only Bash’s introductions were live. That qualifies as disinformation and is not how a journalist or a news network conducts real interviews. Trump has exercised disinformation many times and Larry says nothing. HEY LARRY, during the Trump Manhattan Election Fraud Trial Trump staged a supporter rally at the bodega which was really the black lady who worked for him arranging GOP folks to stage the rally. He also faked bringing pizza’s to a fire station – the pizzas were already there and he asked to have one so he could get a video of him carrying in one pizza to the fire fighters!!! Seems like I do not remember Larry saying anything about these examples of obvious disinformation!!!
8) Larry must be having cognitive issues because even I as an independent do know more than Larry on her policy. Larry claims the following, “Nothing about Ukraine … China … Iran … or Afghanistan. Nothing about tax policy. Just a lot off platitudes about cutting prices … lower medical costs … lowering housing costs. No question as to how Harris would do all that. ” Ok Larry, let me fill in the blanks for you dear ole son!!! Here we go:
Ukraine: She supports Ukraine and does not want to see another democracy fall to authoritarianism. She will provide weapons.
China: She will continue the Biden policy and get tougher on intellectual property theft. She will continue Freedom of the Seas operations.
Iran: She will continue the Biden policy.
Afghanistan: She will do about the same as Biden. Afghanistan is involved in wars with all of its neighbors. She will stay away from it.
Tax Policy: She will require wealthy and corporations to pay their fair share – which Biden failed on. She will also raise capital gains taxes to be more on par with W-2 taxes while using tax code/tables to lower middle class tax rates. She will also probably plug some loop holes.
Lowering Medical Costs: She will lower the costs of drugs by allowing Medicare to negotiate deals like the VA, stop gouging on certain drugs, and lowering deductible limits. Also, starting 2025 she will maintain the Biden lower Medicare cap limits on out of pocket for drugs.
Lowering Housing Costs and Rents: She intends on starting a construction program to build 2 million starter homes in her term which will end the housing shortage that is driving up prices of housing and rental costs. She said this multiple times Larry!!! She also intends to incentivize first time home owners. She has also said this before.
OK Larry, now I have updated you with her policies.
And there ’tis.
Tom … You are automatically ascribing Biden’s policies to Harris — or you are just assuming policy based on her platitudes. We have not heard her. That seems to be the consensus. You do not address her flip flops. Your opinions about her policies is just that .. one (old) man’s opinion. And you fail to test the credibility of her platitude claims. If you look at what she says generally it is massive spending … lower taxes … and reduced prices (price controls). Not even possible. But that is your character weakness –arrogantly believing your personal opinions and spin are gospel truth. In case you have not noticed, you obsessive desire to counter everything I write and you mendacious serial insults are making you sound rather … unintelligent.
Google
What is communism and why is it bad?
Communist party rule has been criticized as authoritarian or totalitarian for suppressing and killing political dissidents and social classes (so-called “enemies of the people”), religious persecution, ethnic cleansing, forced collectivization, and use of forced labor in concentration camps.
I wonder what the job of some on this site will be.
Being good little communist’s that you are?
Darren,
There are many definitions of “Communism” and some, like the one you posted, are more harsh because they are written by capitalists. And that’s ok by me. I accept your definition as one of many. But it conflates the true nature of communism with the concepts of authoritarianism and totalitarianism.
A simpler definition of communism is: “Communism is an economic ideology that advocates for a classless society in which all property and wealth are communally owned instead of being owned by individuals.”
Early Christianity from the time of Christ’s death until about 200 AD was very much a communal society of sharing the wealth and where stature did not matter. As it says in the Old Testament, “God is not a respecter of stature.” Check out Acts 10:34 and 1 Samual 16:7. In God’s view, we are all in a classless society – and will be judged individually based on what we say and do.
The Apostle Paul worked a job as a tent maker for the Roman Army. In Acts it states that he only kept enough money to support himself and his ministry and gave the remainder of what he earned to other Christians who were in need. Throughout his third missionary journey, Paul was collecting money from the Gentile churches in Macedonia and Greece for the Jewish church in Jerusalem. This was to bring practical assistance to the believers in Jerusalem who were very poor because they had suffered a severe famine. And yet, the Christian church thrived!!!
Jesus told the rich man who had followed all of the laws and did all of Judaism correctly, to “Go and sell all that you have and give it to the poor, then follow me.” If you are a Christian, then you follow Jesus who was liberal in his forgiveness of others, harsh on sin, and definitely espoused communism, and a living wage when he said, “The worker is worth his meat.” See Matthew 10:10 where he says, “Workers deserve their food. Nor scrip for your journey, nor two coats, nor shoes, nor a staff; for the workman is worthy of his meat.” He is advocating a “living wage” and the worthiness of work – he is not advocating capitalism.
Jesus said in Matthew 6:24, ” Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money. ” Isn’t capitalism all about making the most money? Jesus seems to be speaking against capitalism.
So in conclusion, if you profess to be a practicing Christian, you are practicing a model that is much more in alignment with Communism than Capitalism.
I cannot speak for anyone but myself and for Frank. I am a capitalist who believes in the tenants of Christianity. My job is to keep Horist straight and proclaim the truth while feeding and helping others. Frank has often stated he is a capitalist, and I believe him. Like me though, he appears to have a more Christian philosophy of capitalism.
So what are you Darren? Oh and by the way, you and all of us have purchased cheap products from those countries that force cheap labor, and our 401K’s are much better because of their suffering. And by the way, outsourcing which is done by many of our companies to many countries is specifically for the purpose of finding cheaper labor – and often those products come from China, Vietnam, etc. Communist countries with cheap forced labor.
Tom, I think what Darren is alluding to is IF the Democrats win, communism comes to town with all it’s trappings.
People said the same thing for Obama.
Darren seems to claim that if Harris wins, we will incarcerate, enslave, or kill, kill, kill them all. And that’s the point.
If we don’t figure out how to come together, talk like this will tear us apart. Is that what Darren wants —- all out war between the parties? Don’t laugh, we’ve split in two before and it was a very bloody affair.
And somehow, I do not see the Darren’s of the world changing when Trump loses or offering an olive branch if Trump wins.
I just don’t know how to restore decency and decorum to our democracy. I think being called a communist who will take a job to incarcerate, enslave or kill the Darrens of the world is a complete lack of decency without a shred of decorum and he really wants to end all liberals to make his little world perfect.
Note to Darren: won’t change a thing. Your frustrations are on you. Remember, if it’s to be, it’s up to me. So quit blaming me for your mistakes and losses. You will remain the same whether Trump or Harris wins or loses.
And yes, the guy who just place a big bet on big oil in a shaky market laughs at being thought of as a communist. FYI Tom —- went back to fixed assets; my better half rules today! And I want to assure I finish the Q at my all time high total wealth, under Biden the communist Plus while making $600 on day one, am in the hole for over a grand during today’s festivities. If I was uber capitalist, I would day trade on guns given folks like Darren who must be gathering as many as they can before Harris takes over.
And no Tom, pretty capitalist in investing, very little Christian. My better half and I had a big too-doo over big oil and my statement that any screens on investments just restrict choice so increase risk and therefore, mighty capitalist says: anything legal goes —- and for the most part, it has. Only a rare occasion causes a moral financial decision for me. Of course, that’s when I stopped further equities and pulled back to fixed….. Given the market, made sense for other reasons plus Chevron seemed a better value that anything else right now. Even better today, ouch.
Yes I agree that Darren is definitely saying if Harris wins the nation will become communist. Not true but it is the way he feels. He is gobbling up the far right fringe disinformation. We know differently.
Darren has also taken a very far right definition of Communism which in addition to being harsh hard right, also conflates the economic/social status/property ownership tenants of communism with the political ideology and realities of authoritarianism and totalitarianism (which are not always Communist) such as displayed by Hitler’s Germany (national socialism), Maduro’s Venezuela (authoritarian dictatorship), and Mussolini’s Italy (dictatorship) , Un’s DPRK (Communist dictatorship) , and of course Putin’s Russia (Communist dictatorship). Only two of the aforementioned are Communist. The other three were never Communist.
And I agree, Darren does not exhibit a shred of decency nor decorum in his fears. As a matter of fact, he SHOULD be scared of Trump, Heritage, and their Project 2025 – which comes much closer to the authoritarianism and totalitarianism that he fears!!!
While I am not an advocate of Communism because I believe it wipes out any desire to excel unless you are in the party and want to be the ruler, and they seem to be organized as a meritocracy which encourages corruption, pure communism was practiced by early Christians. So my point is, if he claims to be a Christian (I believe he is a Christian Nationalist Re-constructionist) then he is spiritually and socially involved in a movement that has its roots in the ideals of pure communism, not capitalism which he professes to be.
Also, while I did not say it, there are many social institutions that we all enjoy the benefits of. These institutions are owned by “We The People” and our government takes money from us to support them such as: State colleges, public school system, highway and rest stop lavatories, libraries, state and federal parks, local county parks, churches, Medicare, Social Security, many social services to the poor and elderly, etc. These are all example threads of a social system quilt that works! But the economy is still capitalist – and will remain so. Property ownership will continue to be private. Businesses will still pay stock holder dividends. And the economy is doing better under Biden/Harris than it ever did under Trump/Pense. So his fears are very unfounded!!!
Truth is: I am a Communist because I practice the tenants of Christianity; I am a socialist because I enjoy highway rest stops, libraries, parks, Medicare, and Social Security;, and want living wages/ medical care for all; I am a capitalist because I enjoy the investing game and watching my private ownership portfolio grow. People like me and you are not responsible for Darren’s situation but we do have a duty to call out the truth whenever and wherever we can.
And we all get crickets from the ‘great’ pontificator Larry when we all call him out for his repeated BS….
Mike f….It is just a matter of wasting time. There are not enough hours in the day to shovel all the bullshit you and other pile on this site. And it would do no good because you are not educable — and you are not worth the bother since all you bs and insult have no real impact on the greater world.. Get it?
Wow, and not one comment about what Google wrote?
Darren, I wrote nine small paragraphs of comments on your google definition. I suggest you read them and think about it.
Darren, I think Tom did comment on the google definition and my comment would be equivalent.
It was your second paragraph that added meaning to why you even posted the first paragraph. As I said in the past, you people used to call us Euro socialists. As the trumplicants took over the Republican party, you upped your brand name from socialist to communist because it sounded nastier. And it appears you like nasty, the weirder, the better.
Orange hair, felon, sex, abuser, defamer, spanking sex lover, autocrat lover, tax cheat, business cheat, election cheat, wife cheat, — These are all OK by you, nasty and weird gets your vote. But hey, support Social Security and you’re a hardline communist of the Putin variety. Given your love for Putin, I would expect that you would love us too.
There are about 10,000 Americans in the communist party. No progressive self labels themselves as communist. Progressive socialist perhaps. It is you that needs the nasty nomenclature to feed your hatred as you brand others with your nasty names to make yourself feel better about your own frustrations.
A silly man, once said, how could I lose the election when I got 11 million more votes than the last time. The answer is the other guy got more. As I said, there are about 10,000 registered communists in America and you saying there are 150 million and here’s a definition of the term does not make your final paragraph ring true at all. We are not communist, we are liberals and some independents. Amongst us, we do have some progressive socialist, basically, it’s been that way in America for many decades. You can continue to bay at the moon or maybe, just maybe, you can try working with us to get to a mutually satisfactory solution. Branding us with inaccurate nasty names will never get you there.
Let’s start here, on punching bag post, to have a debate about the issues, fair and balanced debate, with proper decorum and respect for All.
Well said Frank. Good answer to Darren. Yes I am one of those Independents that would gladly join an intelligent discussion. And by the way, I am a bit progressive in my independent vote. I divide progressive into two categories: 1) Smart progressive that will have a return on investment such as expand economy or solve a horrible human problem;, or make government more efficient while not harming people. Infrastructure, better Medicare negotiations, school lunch programs for kids, Social Security, expanding the ACA, are some examples that I have talked about. 2) Stupid progressive that is just wastefully throwing money and people and things with no foreseeable return on the investment. Such examples might be some social programs and safety nets such as welfare, increased regulations, bureaucracy waste, or other what is called “pork projects”.