A few months into Vice President Kamala Harris’s 2024 presidential run, her handlers faced a dilemma. Should they continue cocooning the candidate or unleash her on the public? Both options came with serious political risks.
Sure, Democrats could keep pretending Harris was a generational talent, but her refusal to sit down for an interview, much less give a press conference, was eroding this fantasy.
On the other hand, as her handlers surely understood, the more people hear from Harris, the more concerned they tend to get.
Indeed, Harris is a thermonuclear platitude dispenser. Few people in American history have expended so many words to say so little.
Her turns of phrase are often so cartoonishly ludicrous they should be used in college textbooks to explain what a “tautology” is to students.
“I grew up believing that children of the community are children of the community.”
“It’s time for us to do what we have been doing, and that time is every day.”
Normal people don’t talk this way. Harris does. All the time.
In any event, let’s just say extemporaneous speaking isn’t Harris’s strong suit, either. The presidential candidate has an uncanny ability to respond to straightforward questions in circuitous, mind-bending arrays of irrelevant non-sequiturs.
To work around this problem, Harris’s “media blitz” was curated to ensure the candidate would never find herself in the vicinity of a tough inquiry. She visited sycophants like sex podcaster Alexandra Cooper and one-time shock jock Howard Stern. She spoke to allies at MSNBC and the cheerleaders at The View.
Even in these friendly venues, Harris could barely generate a substantive answer to any questions. She might be playing in the major leagues, but Harris keeps striking out at wiffle ball.
On The View, for instance, the gals wondered what differentiated her from President Joe Biden. Now, virtually the entirety of Harris’s campaign is hitched to some vague promise of moving forward, never back. Well, “Not a thing comes to mind,” was her answer. When former comedian Stephen Colbert offered her a redo, the best she could cook up was, “I’m obviously not Joe Biden. … I’m not Donald Trump” — which, physically speaking, is definitely true.
During an unscripted Univision town hall this week, non-journalist audience members finally pressed her on inflation. Harris let everyone know she was not just of middle-class stock but working-class stock. Which is to say, no one in the audience heard anything new.
And maybe they were lucky ones.
In a pre-recorded interview with 60 Minutes, correspondent Bill Whitaker threw a bunch of reasonable, if predictable, questions at Harris. No gotchas, no deep dives into policy. Yet, when the Israel-Palestinian situation came up — it’s been in the news, I’m sure you’ve heard — Harris unleashed this torrent of gibberish: “Well, Bill … the work that we have done has resulted in a number of movements in that region by Israel that were very much prompted by or a result of many things, including our advocacy for what needs to happen in the region …” and so on.
An online CBS producer mistakenly posted her sprawling answer in a trailer for the upcoming broadcast. CBS News quickly removed the video, replacing it on YouTube with a clip that was either truncated or doctored. Her original rant isn’t even on the transcript of the interview on the channel’s site, which makes you wonder how many outlets conducting these interviews are cleaning up Harris’s mess.
Surely, in a healthier political era, a presidential candidate incapable of articulating a lucid foreign policy worldview would find themselves put under tremendous scrutiny. These days, though, political journalists literally rearrange the Democratic candidate’s words to make her sound normal. I can assure you former President Donald Trump, who is also often at war with syntax, was never afforded such favorable treatment.
So, the important question is, why does Harris always sound like a ninth grader biding time during an oral exam?
Let’s remember, at some point, a well-paid campaign operative handed the candidate talking points crafted for this very occasion, calibrated to mollify the growing pro-Hamas wing of the Democratic Party and not lose Jewish voters. But you can see Harris scanning her internal cue cards to find the right answer. No one can speak fluently on a topic relying solely on scripts and talking points. She doesn’t know what she thinks. She doesn’t know what you want her to say. She has no reserve of knowledge to pull from.
Judging from her meandering nonanswers, it is highly likely that Harris has never thought about any of these issues in a serious way. Indeed, Harris’s most memorable quote on foreign policy reads as so: “Ukraine is a country in Europe. It exists next to another country called Russia. Russia is a bigger country.”
Then again, if she’s offered anything beyond a banality on the economy or faith or governance or culture or constitutional law or anything else, I’ve yet to run across it. This is a woman who, for years, was under the impression that the phrase “what can be, unburdened by what has been” made her sound like the next Martin Luther King.
Some have theorized that Harris has trouble speaking without notes because she’s scared to expose her radical beliefs. I’ve also heard people contend Harris is probably stifled by imposter syndrome, a crushing self-doubt about her intellect, knowledge, and skills compared to those around her. You might recall that the vice president used to stage mock dress rehearsals for dinners with friendly journalists because she was nervous about deferential journalists.
What if her anxiety doesn’t stem from a feeling of inadequacy but inadequacy itself? Take the incessant cackling. This tic is probably symptomatic of a well-earned lack of confidence. Her awkward syntax often betrays an imposter desperately attempting to convince you she’s a deep thinker.
Perhaps Harris, who was handed the nomination without winning a single primary vote, can’t answer questions because she doesn’t really believe in anything.
Obviously, most politicians triangulate, flip-flop, and “evolve” on policy. It’s unlikely, however, that any major politician in history has dropped as many positions as dramatically and as quickly as Harris. The likelihood she has a cogent explanation for guiding moral or political philosophy is slim.
Unless, of course, by a belief system, we’re talking about “empowering Kamala.”
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
Moreover, if 2024 is really the most pivotal election in the republic’s history — or, as Harris might say, a “moment in time in which we exist and are present, and to be able to contextualize it, to understand where we exist in the history and in the moment as it relates not only to the past but the future” — why don’t we have candidates who reflect the significance of the moment?
Because if you carefully listen to Harris’s words, you are confronted with vapid, political creation in way over her head. Though, alas, if history is any guide, she has all the qualifications we expect of a president.