Last night Kamala Harris subjected herself to a one-on-one interview with Fox News anchor Brett Baier.
I say she “subjected” herself to the interview because this is literally the first interview she has done with anyone who might ask tough questions instead of tossing her softballs.
Baier did ask tough questions, in the sense that he asked specifically about what she would do if president. But he asked them neutrally, politely and non-judgmentally. In other words, he acted like a professional journalist.
And Harris’s answers were little other than scripted platitudes and attacks on Trump…even when the questions were not comparatives, thus had nothing to do with Trump.
Simply stated, Kamala Harris demonstrated a near-complete inability to provide specifics on anything she claimed she would do. She came across as a vacuous script-reader; which is why she is now falling in virtually every political poll.
It is also why, despite that vaunted one billion dollar war-chest – way above what Trump has to work with – she is losing rather than gaining ground.
The more people hear her rehearsed non-answers, the more they gravitate to Trump – even if they see him as a bombastic, egomaniacal obnoxiously insulting bloviator. All of which he is.
If the choice is between the obnoxious blowhard – but one who has had multiple successes throughout his career (major construction projects throughout the country and world, a best-selling book, a hugely successful TV show)…
…and had what, certainly compared to Biden/Harris, was a successful term as president…
…versus an accomplishment-less flyweight who is lost without a script to read? More and more voters appear to be choosing the obnoxious blowhard.
I wonder what, if anything, Harris can do to reverse this trend between now and election day.
Frankly, nothing comes to mind.
