Staff Reports
Kamala Harris and Minnesota Governor Tim Walz have taken “hiding from the press” to new heights, managing to squeeze out a meager eight interviews since launching their campaigns this past July. According to Axios, this may very well be the most jaw-dropping display of media avoidance by a major party’s presidential candidates in modern U.S. history—hard to believe, considering some previous contenders have shown equal enthusiasm for putting their foot in their mouth.
In their brief moments in the limelight, both Harris and Walz found themselves averaging an astounding total of four interviews apiece. The statistics are as shocking as a snowstorm in July: 62 days into her candidacy for Harris, and just 48 for Walz, yet neither seems eager to engage with the electorate. It’s almost like they’ve gone into witness protection, albeit for no apparent crime except perhaps failing to articulate a coherent platform.
Harris and Walz run from interviews because their values are scary
Source: WashingtonExaminer https://t.co/aH5Pv6dXf3— Millen1861 (@Millen1861) September 24, 2024
Harris, in particular, has perfected the art of Evading Questions 101. When she does occasionally have the courage to face the press, she often treats queries as if they were hot potatoes, opting instead to serve up a heaping plate of vague platitudes. For instance, during her latest tête-à-tête with Oprah, she was asked to explain her plan for curbing the sky-high costs that have been gnawing at Americans’ wallets. The response was a woeful 90-word ramble that began with flowery language about the “American Dream,” but only acknowledged what most of America already knows: under the current administration, dreams are increasingly becoming nightmares.
While grappling with the question of addressing the chaos at the southern border, Harris took the opportunity to showcase her impressive ability to talk a lot without saying much of anything. Her three-minute monologue stretched a staggering 441 words, mainly managing to drift past any semblance of an answer until Oprah had to step in and redirect the conversation, presumably fearing the situation might turn into a never-ending word salad buffet.
Despite this evident lack of tangible policy details, there’s talk within the Harris camp of ramping up the interview game in the future. However, they seem to prefer venues where the questions won’t ruffle any feathers or prompt a deeper dive into her legislative record. It seems they’re aiming for softballs instead of the hard-hitting questions that might expose the lack of substance in their proposals.
The establishment media isn’t remaining oblivious to Harris’s perplexing failure to deliver concrete policies or plans. Outlets like CNN have noted she appears “either unwilling or unable” to provide a coherent blueprint for her vision as a potential future president. Meanwhile, Politico took its turn roasting Harris for sticking too closely to her script, hardly straying from the familiar and well-trodden talking points. It’s almost comical—who needs a credible candidate when they can have a carefully cultivated image that keeps bobbing and weaving?
