You know the old joke: two elderly ladies are having dinner at a high-priced but low-quality restaurant. “Ugh, the food here is terrible,” says one. “Yes,” the other responds. “And such small portions.” That’s essentially the situation regarding interviews of Kamala Harris as well: she’s vapid, dishonest and unpleasant, and Americans just aren’t seeing enough of her.
As it turns out, if Harris doesn’t start becoming significantly more accessible, and there are no signs that she is, then she will finish this campaign having given the fewest interviews of any presidential candidate in the age of modern media. It’s not that anyone really wants to hear from her except for the most thoroughly indoctrinated leftists, but Americans need to know where she stands and what she intends to do as president, especially since the Democrats are running a ballyhoo-and-BS campaign that is extremely light on informing us of what actual policies Harris will attempt to implement if she succeeds Old Joe Biden as the nation’s Chief Figurehead.
The New York Post reported Thursday that Harris’ record-breaking inaccessibility is “not just because she entered the race historically late.” Since she became the Democrat nominee after the party’s coup against Old Joe Biden, she “has given just six sitdowns, leaving both her allies and critics wanting more.” Not only that: all of her interviews have been softball sit-downs with sycophants, including her carefully scripted and shockingly abbreviated CNN interview with Dana Bash with her comrade Tim Walz on hand and ready to cover for her.
The Post notes that her other interviews have been likewise less than challenging: “She has also sat down with Philadelphia’s ABC station, Spanish-language radio host Chiquibaby, and a panel at a gathering of the National Association of Black Journalists (NABJ).” In contrast, Donald Trump “has done at least three times as many interviews in the same period, with some lasting at least an hour – such as his recent one-on-one over X Spaces with Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk.”
Also, unlike Harris, Trump often willingly sits down for hostile interviews with far-left “journalists” who are anxious to make a name for themselves by getting the Bad Orange Man to say something damaging to his chances or who spend the whole interview badgering Trump about the fictional insurrection or the bogus criminal and civil charges against him, or even worse, about something he said in 1966, or whether he will denounce some obscure Nazi that neither Trump nor anyone else has ever heard of.
It's no mystery why Harris is being kept so carefully under wraps. Only too often, when she says something, she says something stupid. As the Post puts it, “even in Harris’ limited public availability, she has been unable to avoid awkward moments and the ‘word salad’ for which her critics have so regularly mocked her.” And even she isn’t tossing word salads, she has given fodder to her opponents, as when she insisted that her “values have not changed” after cynically adopting several Trump policies she had previously denounced.
Related: Of All the Reasons the Left Has Given Us to Vote for Kamala, This Has to Be the Craziest
Interviews have also exposed Harris’ habit of ignoring questions and answering by saying something completely irrelevant. J.D. Vance has mocked this: “You'll say, 'Vice President Harris, what is your plan to lower the inflation caused by your policies?' And she'll say, 'well, I grew up in a middle class family.'" When asked what she planned to do to combat inflation, she answered, “We as Americans have beautiful character. We have ambitions and aspirations and dreams. But not everyone necessarily has access to the resources that can help them fuel those dreams and ambitions.”
Yeah. And that is precisely why we need more Kamala Harris interviews. We can endure the gales of inappropriate laughter and the outrageous sycophancy of the interviewers for the chance to see Harris up close, fumbling even the simplest questions and indulging her propensity to pronounce pretentious piffle as if it were perspicuous policy.
If this empty pantsuit is what Americans, having been drenched in leftism for decades now, actually choose, well, so be it. But we should at very least have the chance to see the actual candidate, rather than just the slick Madison Avenue marketing campaign about how full of joy, and how very brown and female, Kamala Harris is. Will we actually get that chance? Unlikely.
