Staff Reports
In yet another twist from the liberal media elite, MSNBC host Stephanie Ruhle recently declared that the American voter doesn’t actually need to know what Vice President Kamala Harris has in store—especially since she’s running against the towering figure of former President Donald Trump. Apparently, to the openly liberal hosts of MSNBC, details and election plans are secondary when facing off against a man who galvanized a movement and shattered political norms.
Ruhle’s dismissive comment raises eyebrows. Did voters not need to know the plans of Mitt Romney when he faced Obama? Or how about Joe Biden’s supposed infrastructure plans? It seems that transparency only matters when it suits the narrative of the liberal left. With Harris positioned as the heir apparent should President Biden falter, one would think learning about her agenda would be quite important—or at least that’s how it works in the realm of righteousness and common sense.
Political ignorance seems to be the preferred strategy for the Democrats, as they would like folks to coast through elections on name recognition and not on policy. It’s as if Ruhle believes American voters would simply choose a candidate based on who is less troublesome to the media elite. Perhaps they are banking on some nostalgic fondness for the days when Obama and his administration treated the American people like children, spoon-feeding carefully curated soundbites.
The week in whoppers: MSNBC’s Stephanie Ruhle covers for Kamala, AOC openly seeks government censorship and more https://t.co/va1excQHWw pic.twitter.com/jpLtrAOjt3
— NY Post Opinion (@NYPostOpinion) September 26, 2024
The conservative base, on the other hand, revels in knowing exactly who they’re voting for. Details, policies, and accountability are the oxygen of democracy, not a hindrance to it. Voters want to understand the finer points of understanding a candidate’s vision—especially when the opposition is bringing forth a politician like Harris, who brings a mix of rhetoric and political platitudes rather than substantive change.
In the end, Ruhle’s comments may serve as another reminder of the disconnect between the liberal media and everyday Americans. While she and her ilk dismiss the importance of voters knowing candidates’ platforms, the conservative movement places immense value on informed choices. Voters deserve better than feigned ignorance wrapped in a nice bow of media elitism. In the high-stakes game of American politics, knowing what’s at stake is vital—the last thing Americans need is for the media to play parent to their voting decisions.
