Kamala Harris's elusiveness problem

Kamala Harris supposedly crushed Donald Trump in Tuesday night's debate. Kim Strassel's latest article disputes that. Actually, voters dispute that opinion. According to Strassel's article, "Tuesday’s debate postmortem is the best example yet. The press is fist-pumping over Kamala Harris’s “win,” how she went about “eviscerating [Donald] Trump,” how she turned in (no joke) “one of the more resounding debate performances in recent decades.” Republicans are still stewing over biased moderators, even as they grudgingly admit Mr. Trump blew it. Social media is mixed on whether Taylor Swift’s endorsement seals victory for the vice president."

For the record, I thought that Harris earned a B- while Trump earned a C+ for their performances. Harris was too prepared. Trump was too agitated. Both candidates failed to connect with the people. The closest anyone got was Trump's closing statement:

Back in the real world, this is all ridiculous. There was no winner in this televised scrum; only a nation of hardworking losers. Millions of Americans came home after a long day of work and tuned in hoping for answers to their daily struggles with inflation, migrants, crime. They instead got moderators obsessed with Beltway-bubble issues, and candidates who relitigated old disputes.
Any reporter who is in touch with voters (Salena Zito comes to mind) knows that voters are looking for solutions. They aren't looking for a Beltway mouthpiece who spouts meaningless platitudes all day long. (That's what VP Harris does.)
Reuters interviewed 10 swing voters after the event and gave the story an intriguing headline: “Some undecided voters not convinced by Harris after debate with Trump.” That’s one way to put it. “Six said afterward they would now either vote for Trump or were leaning toward backing him,” the piece explains. One remained undecided. Three backed Ms. Harris.
In other words, the moderators weren't the only inside-the-Beltway idiots that got Tuesday's presidential debate wrong. Apparently, the pundits got things wrong, too. I don't think that the debate moved people much. Then again, that likely helps Trump because he's in better position in the battleground states at this point. People haven't been happy with VP Harris because she's been secretive.

Apparently, this is the people's way of telling VP Harris that that they won't vote for her if she won't open up to them. A 4-line issues page doens't qualify as a legitimate issues page. Kamala Harris is stuck on the same old answers:

During a rare interview, Harris was asked if people were better off than they were 4 years ago. Instead of replying yes or no, she again replied that she grew up in a middle class neighborhood. Some people never learn.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Tim Walz's Confederate Flag Fiasco

Image
After Minnesota's Democrats shoved the most controversial progressive legislation down Minnesotans' throats, gossip started popping up about Gov. Walz being interested in running for president . That's died off but Gov. Walz is still making headlines, this time for all the wrong reasons. First, Gov. Walz isn't the brightest bulb in the chandelier. Still, Gov. Walz is fighting against Minnesota's history. This Alpha News article quotes David Hann, the chairman of Minnesota's Republican Party, as saying " The flag the DFL has eliminated was a version of the historic flag our regiments fought under during the Civil War. Minnesota was the first state to offer troops to the Union cause in 1861 , beginning a long tradition of leading the nation in confronting injustice. The DFL quest to erase our history is repugnant and should be rejected." Gov. Walz, though, sees things differently. He's quoted as saying "Minnesota is a diverse state, it continue
Read more

What is Kamala Harris afraid of?

Image
Apparently, Kamala Harris suddenly loves debating. Let me rephrase that. Harris loves debating as long as the moderators are partisan hacks. She wants nothing to do with a debate moderated by Fox's Bret Baier and Martha MacCallum. She's afraid of Bret and Martha because a) they'll either fact-check both her and Trump or they won't fact-check either of them and b) Bret and Martha aren't afraid of asking follow-up questions. To a candidate whose answers are scripted and who isn't quick on her feet, the last thing you want is a follow-up question. Kamala fears follow-up questions like vampires hate wooden stakes, sunlight and holy water. Why has Kamala Harris avoided Fox News like the plague? The moderators/propagandists fact-checked Donald Trump aggressively but didn't fact-check Harris . Why didn't David Muir and Linsey Davis fact-check both candidates equally? Is it because Harris doesn't like fair fights? Perhaps she's just afraid of getting exp
Read more

Why is Joe Biden letting Hamas off the hook?

Image
It isn't disputable whether Joe Biden's administration is letting Hamas off the hook. That issue was settled months ago, when a spineless Joe Biden caved to activists interested in saving Hamas and thwarting the Israelis' attempt to defend themselves. Gerard Baker's op-ed highlights what's at stake for the U.S. if the terrorists are permitted to survive. In his op-ed, Baker wrote "If, under the pressure of internal Democratic politics and global public opinion, the Biden administration forces a 'cease-fire' that leaves our closest ally in the region short of victory over an enemy that seeks to destroy it, sooner or later we shall all pay the price." It's time to revisit George W. Bush's speech to a joint session of Congress on Sept. 20, 2001. It's required that we remind ourselves of one of its most important paragraphs. In talking about who committed the atrocities of 9/11, President Bush identified al-Qa'ida as "a collectio
Read more