Kamala, We’ll Never Know Ye

Echoing Biden, Kamala Harris seems determined to go as long as possible into the general election without holding a press conference or granting a real interview to a journalist willing to challenge her deflecting answers to questions. Can she, like Biden, make it all the way through the presidency without any substantial interaction with the press?

4 Comments. Leave new

  • Ted, I think you are being far too kind.

    If Harris wins the election, she will be replaced by Walz in 2028 after probably four terrible years of nothing. She will be told by the party to leave D.C., and never come back.

    If (should I say “When”?) Harris loses? She will become about as welcome as a heaping helping of radioactive thalidomide at an IVF clinic and will be told by the party to leave D.C. and never come back. BUT … the added bonus will be that she’s made Walz untenable as well.

  • @ted_rall I sure wish there were more substance / more talk of issues. Yet, I can’t blame Harris for understanding the politics of the situation; apparently most swing voters are trying to figure out whom to have a beer with, and Harris is playing to that.

    @alex_the_tired If Trump wins in 2024 that will be proof that even a heaping helping of radioactive thalidomide at an IVF clinic can make a comeback. If Trump 2024 can pull it off, I wouldn’t be so sure that Harris 2028 couldn’t duplicate that.

    • alex_the_tired
      September 2, 2024 1:46 PM

      Lee,

      I don’t think Trump’s current “comeback” is actually a comeback. When you quarterback the results of 2020, Trump didn’t “lose” the election. I don’t mean that in some cra-cray 5G and fluoridation kind of paranoid delusion way. What I mean is that the 2020 election turned on very few votes: Arizona (10,457 — 0.31%), Georgia (11,779 — 0.24%), and Wisconsin (20,682 — 0.63%). The whole 156 million-vote election boiled down to a coin toss (1/5000th of a percentage point). If not for COVID, Biden would have lost due to a combination of advancing senility and decrepitude (my God, he looks like a monkey’s paw; I can’t vote for him, I’ll end up with a fish stuck to my nose) driving down democrat participation just enough to hand Trump a win.

      In 2016, Hillary Clinton lost the Electoral College to Trump by just under 78,000 votes (again, in the 5,000ths of a percentage point range). She needed Pennsylvania (44,292 — 0.72%), Wisconsin (22,748 — 0.77%), and Michigan (10,704 — 0.23%), and she would have passed 270.

      It isn’t that Trump is a GREAT candidate. It’s that Trump, like no candidate in my memory other than Ronald Reagan, has perfected the ability to lie through his teeth and pretend to care about “the smallfolk” while a brain-dead press corps(e) just lets him run the entire news cycle. Coupled to how the democrats keep fielding terrible, terrible candidates — wooden and inauthentic; millionaires claiming to understand economic hardship — these weak Republicans keep piling up wins.

  • I wonder who, exactly, is this mythical “journalist willing to challenge (Harris) deflecting answers to questions” to whom she could grant an interview … even if she wanted to!

    All praise joyous and lethal genocide !!!

You must be logged in to post a comment.
css.php