Harris Slammed Over Disastrous Solo Interview With Local Station

[iluvatar5150]

But she did. ?? As I pointed out, the poster had no issues understanding the specifics of her proposed policies from her answer.

It was basically a long-winded setup to explain what she was trying to accomplish with those plans.

 

[durangodawood]

It was basically a long-winded setup to explain what she was trying to accomplish with those plans.

This is what counts as "disastrous". Basically just because Ron Desantis and co made fun of it. No one else even cares.

Look up the definition of disastrous. You'll see pictures of Trump at the last debate, and of "dog" meat that looks suspiciously like chicken. Oh and Bidens debate too. We all know how that turned out.

 

[Larniavc]

Harris Slammed Over Disastrous Solo Interview With Local Station

Vice President Kamala Harris faced criticism and mockery online over the weekend after she conducted her first solo interview as the Democratic Party’s presidential nominee.Harris looked nervous and struggled to answer easy questions from a friendly reporter at 6abc Action News in Pennsylvania...

www.dailywire.com

“She is the Michael Scott of presidential candidates but with no endearing qualities whatsoever,” said political commentator Sean Parnell.

She seems to get 'slammed' an awful lot in these posts. Yet nothing ever seems to come of it. That's weird.

I particularly like how the daily wire links to it's own articles for support.

 

[Hammster]

But she did. ?? As I pointed out, the poster had no issues understanding the specifics of her proposed policies from her answer.

Are you actually being serious?

 

[The IbanezerScrooge]

Are you actually being serious?

Yes. Are you?

 

[The IbanezerScrooge]

It was basically a long-winded setup to explain what she was trying to accomplish with those plans.

Right, which is how all interviews go with anyone, not just politicians. Do they really want her to just state her one-line policies in answer to questions with no commentary or explanation? Do people really think that would make for good TV? It's such a dumb critique and it's proven so by the fact that one of the critics in this thread clearly understood exactly what her policies were from her "meandering mess of a response" so what's the issue?

 

[Fantine]

You posted it within an hour of the OP. It’s not hidden. And it’s linked in the article in the X post.

I thought it would be good to let people see the primary source more directly. Some people don't like to use "X." I don't.

 

[probinson]

Is that how you would rather her answer questions? Like a robot using only the most efficient and necessary words with no explanation or other commentary? You didn't seem to have any trouble getting the specifics from her answer to the question.

Interesting spin. There really weren't any specifics.

I'm not sure why you equate simply answering a question to being "robotic". I mean, I would hope that even you have to admit that talking about people being proud of their lawns has absolutely nothing to do with her proposed "opportunity economy", right? It's entirely possible for Harris to answer that question without all of the pandering.

Harris reminds me of someone trying to hit a word count in an oral report. She's just rambling. None of her waxing poetic about her mother buying a house when she was a teenager has ANYTHING at all to do with the question that was asked.

Perhaps specific details on the plan (since the question asked was to provide specific examples) would have been beneficial. For example, who qualifies for this "assistance"? What "additional support" will be offered to first-generation homebuyers? How long will this assistance be offered? You know, specifics that would actually answer the question.

Or what do you mean by "partner with the government" when speaking of private sector housing developers? Will the government own a stake in these houses that are built?

But I suppose that's too weighty for most people. Apparently they'd rather hear vapid stories about how Harris lived in a neighborhood where people were really quite proud of their lawns.

 

[Bradskii]

I've transcribed the first question in that interview. Here it is.

​

If you don't want to read that meandering mess of a response, Harris plans to:

Meandering mess? Are you kidding me? She filled in some details of her background to give an idea of where she came from and what her values are and then laid out some details of policies that are designed to help out the lower paid.

When people are talking extemporaneously it generally sounds quite natural. People will use fillers, stop a sentence half way through and start another. Repeat a point, pause for thought...it's all quite natural. But print out the transcript and quite often it looks at time somewhat odd. Because we are used to reading that which has been considered and edited and altered to make better sense. It's quite easy to determine if someone is reading a prepared speech or talking off the cuff. They are entirely different.

That said, put in a few paragraph breaks in Harris' transcription and it reads very well indeed. As a comparison, this is the transcript of the first couple of minutes of a discussion between Neil deGrasse Tyson and Richard Dawkins. I listened to it some time ago. Sounded great. Two men that are very used to speaking off the cuff on any number of complex subjects. But print out the text and it sounds stilted and messy. And yes, sometime meandering:

Today I'm in conversation with the one the only Richard Dawkins. Richard welcome back to my office this is like your fourth time here or something I've lost count. Well welcome I mean we we have a lot of catching up to do I think um so recently at least this year we lost Daniel Dennet philosopher. Daniel Dennet I recently learned I didn't read all of his books I read some of them uh he declared that Darwin's evolution by natural selection was the greatest idea anybody ever had, he's coming to it not as a biologist but as a philosopher so how do you reflect on that declaration. He said that at the beginning of his book uh Darwin's dangerous idea and his point was that uh before Darwin came along it seemed obvious to everyone that big complicated things like humans and oak trees and things had to have a an explanation in terms of design and it was a huge stroke of insight for Darwin to see that it didn't that the laws of physics alone could produce this prodigious amount of complexity filtered through this odd process of natural selection. To me it's always been strange that it took so long that it took until the middle of the 19th century for Darwin and Wallace and even maybe one or two other people this is thousands of years of thought brilliant people have come before. Aristotle could have could have had it and didn't I mean when you think how much cleverer you had to be to do what Newton did uh or or inventing calculus um working out about the laws of how how how... You'd think that somebody would have tumbled to evolution by natural selection before the middle of the 19th century yet they didn't and so that's an astonishing thing and it needs an explanation.

 

[Arcangl86]

ANd somehow I suspect that if VP Harris had given answers that were concise and sounded polished, people would have immediately claimed she had a teleprompter or was fed the questions ahead of time. Really interviews are a no win for her. Especially since the people who seem to care the most wouldn't vote for her regardless.

 

[probinson]

Meandering mess?

Yes.

Are you kidding me?

No.

She filled in some details of her background to give an idea of where she came from and what her values are and then laid out some details of policies that are designed to help out the lower paid.

She was very obviously pandering.

When people are talking extemporaneously it generally sounds quite natural. People will use fillers, stop a sentence half way through and start another. Repeat a point, pause for thought...it's all quite natural. But print out the transcript and quite often it looks at time somewhat odd. Because we are used to reading that which has been considered and edited and altered to make better sense. It's quite easy to determine if someone is reading a prepared speech or talking off the cuff. They are entirely different.

Interestingly enough, these are almost the exact same talking points Harris gave in the debate when asked a similar question. It seems pretty well rehearsed.

That said, put in a few paragraph breaks in Harris' transcription and it reads very well indeed.

Not really. She danced all around the question before finally landing on a vague proposal that will almost certainly never become a reality. By blathering on she can make it sound like there's some substance to her proposal.

All she really had to say is, I have a plan to give $25k to first-time homebuyers that congress will almost certainly never approve. It would have been much quicker and far more honest.

 

[Gene2memE]

Watched the interview. It was fine. Nothing outstanding, original or inspiring, but no 'their eatin the dawgs' level stuff-ups either. Workmanlike. Professional.

The biggest criticism I could probably level is that she was obviously initially nervous and fell back on some well trodden personal stories and rote phrases at the start before she got into her stride.

She's no Obama when it comes to rhetorical gifts, or even a McCain or Romney, but its obvious that she actually puts some thought into her responses and attempted to bring a little bit of nuance to the discussion.

 

[Bradskii]

Interestingly enough, these are almost the exact same talking points Harris gave in the debate when asked a similar question. It seems pretty well rehearsed.

Gosh, I guess I suppose she could give a different story every time someone interviews her and says 'People want to know more about you...' as was done in the clip. And she spent 90 seconds doing that - giving some background about herself. Before another 2 minutes detailing an increase in the small business payments, how many new houses she promised to have built in her first term and how much financial help she was going to give first time home buyers.

Not really. She danced all around the question before finally landing on a vague proposal that will almost certainly never become a reality.

This is more your complaint. You don't like what she said rather than how she said it.

 

[The IbanezerScrooge]

Gosh, I guess I suppose she could give a different story every time someone interviews her and says 'People want to know more about you...' as was done in the clip. And she spent 90 seconds doing that - giving some background about herself. Before another 2 minutes detailing an increase in the small business payments, how many new houses she promised to have built in her first term and how much financial help she was going to give first time home buyers.

This is more your complaint. You don't like what she said rather than how she said it.

DING, DING, DING!! That's it right there. It wouldn't matter what Harris said. All the same posters would have something negative to say about it because they don't like her politics. If she gave short concise answers they'd criticize her for being short and not elaborating on what she was talking about. It's not like shes accusing minorities of eating people's pets or anything so what else do they have other than , "I non't like the way she talk!"

 

[BPPLEE]

I've transcribed the first question in that interview. Here it is.

​

Interviewer: When we talk about bringing down prices and making life more affordable for people, what are one or two specific things you have in mind for that?​

​

Harris: Well, I'll start with this. Um, I grew up a middle-class kid. My mother raised my sister and me. She worked very hard. Um, she was able to finally save up enough money to buy our first house when I was a teenager. Um, I grew up in a community of hard-working people. You know, construction workers and nurses and teachers and, I try to explain to some people who may not have had the same experience, you know, if, but, a lot of people will relate to this. You know, I grew up in a neighborhood of folks who were very proud of their lawn. You know? And, um, and I was raised to believe and to know that all people deserve dignity, and that we as Americans have a beautiful character. You know 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. So, when I talk about building an opportunity economy, it is very much with the mind of investing in the ambitions and aspirations and the incredible work-ethic of the American people and creating opportunity for people for example to start a small business. Um, my mother, you know, worked long hours and our neighbor helped raise us. We used to call her, I still call her, our second mother. She was a small business owner. I love our small business owners. I learned who they are from my childhood. And she was a community leader. She hired locally. She mentored. Our small businesses are so much a part of the fabric of our communities, not to mention really I think the backbone of America's economy. So my opportunity economy plan includes giving start-ups a $50,000 tax deduction to start their small business. It used to be $5,000. Nobody can start a small business with $5,000. But investing in people's innovative ideas and giving them the ability to go for it. Um, opportunity economy means, look, we don't have enough housing in America. We have a housing supply shortage. And what that means, in particular for so many younger Americans, the American dream is elusive. It's just actually not attainable. So part of my plan is to work with the private sector and housing developers to give them a tax credit, to be able to partner with us as the government, to build, and my goal is, 3 million new homes by the end of my first term. In addition, to help people who just want to get their foot in the door, literally, and so giving first-time home-buyers a $25,000 down payment assistance, to be able to just get in the door and then they will do the work they need to do to save and to pay that mortgage and to build wealth for themselves and their family. These are some examples of what I mean when I talk about an opportunity economy and a lot of it has to do with just the community I was raised in and the people that I, you know, I admired who work hard, you know, and deserve to have, you know, their dreams fulfilled because they're prepared to work for it.​

​

If you don't want to read that meandering mess of a response, Harris plans to:

• Give $50,000 to people starting a small business.
• Give tax credits to housing developers to "partner with ... the government" to build 3 million houses by the end of her first term.
• Give first-time home buyers a $25,000 down payment.

For reference, it took her 540 words to say what I just summarized in 39 words.

Is any of that "bringing down prices and making life more affordable for people,"?

 

[BPPLEE]

Gosh, I guess I suppose she could give a different story every time someone interviews her and says 'People want to know more about you...' as was done in the clip. And she spent 90 seconds doing that - giving some background about herself. Before another 2 minutes detailing an increase in the small business payments, how many new houses she promised to have built in her first term and how much financial help she was going to give first time home buyers.

This is more your complaint. You don't like what she said rather than how she said it.

Which is more important? I think not liking what she said is more concerning than how she said it

 

[Bradskii]

Which is more important? I think not liking what she said is more concerning than how she said it

Then discuss her policies! Which in this case might be difficult. Let's face it, if the Republicans announced an increase in small business startups then you'd be all for it. Because hey, small business! Don't you think that financial support for them is a good thing? Be careful how you answer - and no cheating. Tell me without checking to see if anyone else had had that idea.

And you've got a housing shortage. The answer is obvious - build more. Maybe you'd want to argue about that?

Probably not, so there's nothing else to do except try (and I really mean do one's very best at making the attempt) to complain about how she answers questions. Gee, 90 seconds giving some personal background. Heck, edit that out. Who needs it. Why not just put a flash card on screen with the details, no words more that two syllables and perhaps randomly use upper case. Give the woman a blank sheet of card and a sharpie and she can fill in the details. She can do it in the ad breaks.

Maybe people will complain about her writing skills then. I wouldn't put it past them. It's pretty much where we are right now.

 

[Fantine]

Is any of that "bringing down prices and making life more affordable for people,"?

Compared to tax cuts for the 1%--absolutely.

 

[RileyG]

Harris Slammed Over Disastrous Solo Interview With Local Station

Vice President Kamala Harris faced criticism and mockery online over the weekend after she conducted her first solo interview as the Democratic Party’s presidential nominee.Harris looked nervous and struggled to answer easy questions from a friendly reporter at 6abc Action News in Pennsylvania...

www.dailywire.com

“She is the Michael Scott of presidential candidates but with no endearing qualities whatsoever,” said political commentator Sean Parnell.

Sean isn’t wrong.

 

[RileyG]

I’d rather her actually answer a question directly.

Without laughing manically, I may add