Harris Slammed Over Disastrous Solo Interview With Local Station

[MrMoe]

It might be considered so on a TV news interview, yeah. Or considered short, unfriendly, lacking detail, etc. etc. No matter what she said those who aren't even going to vote for her would have some criticism. Let's not pretend that the way she answered this particular question is the difference between agreeing with what she said enough to vote for her or not.

The exact same can be said for the opposite side.

And AGAIN... the critic in this thread that gave the example had no trouble gleaning the specifics of Harris' proposals from the answer she gave.

After reading the transcript. People who watched the interview live might not have caught everything in that jumble of thoughts.

 

[MrMoe]

I've been watching him for nine years. Being able to "answer questions and answer them succinctly" (which was the point under discussion) is not one of his strong suits. His meandering speech patterns have been the subject of much discussion and while I, personally, don't find him hard to follow on most occasions, he's hardly "succinct."

Nothing remotely objective about this.

IME, they purportedly see lots of things.

So do you. So you're both the same.

 

[iluvatar5150]

Nothing remotely objective about this.

That's not correct. His meandering speech patterns have been talked about quite a bit.

Regarding whether or not he's "succinct," is there some measure of "succinctness" we can use? Read this:

Donald Trump National Association of Black Journalists | Rev

Speaker 1 : Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the 49th Annual National Association of Black Journalists Convention and Career Fair. We are about to begin a ...

www.rev.com

...and tell me he isn't go all over the place. It isn't until they get to questions about JD Vance halfway through the interview that he doesn't go off on a wild tangent within a couple seconds.

Harris' preface may have been a bit long-winded, but when she finally got to the point, the whole thing came together and it became clear what she was doing. Trump is just like a cat chasing a laser pointer.

 

[probinson]

She hasn't proposed "just handing $25k" to people. As far as I'm aware, she hasn't articulated the details of that plan yet.

That's because it's not a "plan". It's a campaign promise that will almost certainly never gain approval in congress.

And yes, she has indeed advocated for handing $25k to first-time homebuyers for "down payment assistance". What would you call that?

 

[iluvatar5150]

That's because it's not a "plan". It's a campaign promise that will almost certainly never gain approval in congress.

And yes, she has indeed advocated for handing $25k to first-time homebuyers for "down payment assistance". What would you call that?

It could be a number of things: It could be a pile of cash, but it could also be low-interest loans for the down payment or subsidies or other assistance for the mortgage insurance that's usually required for down payments under 20%. Some other examples are here:

Housing Down Payment Assistance Programs By State

For many homebuyers, one of the most challenging aspects of purchasing a home is saving up for a down payment. If you don’t have tens of thousands of dollars on hand for this hefty, upfront expense, consider applying for down payment assistance (DPA) in the form of a loan or grant. There are more

www.forbes.com

 

[probinson]

It could be a number of things: It could be a pile of cash, but it could also be low-interest loans for the down payment or subsidies or other assistance for the mortgage insurance that's usually required for down payments under 20%.

Perhaps it would be more beneficial if Harris could spend more time talking about the details of that plan instead of telling stories from her childhood. Then we wouldn't have to speculate.

But as it stands, all her website says is that they'll give "up to" $25k to first-time homebuyers to help with their down payments "with more generous support for fist-generation homeowners".

What exactly does that mean? I don't know. You don't know. All we know for certain is that people were super proud of their lawns in the neighborhood where Harris grew up.

 

[iluvatar5150]

Perhaps it would be more beneficial if Harris could spend more time talking about the details of that plan instead of telling stories from her childhood. Then we wouldn't have to speculate.

no arguments here

 

[Vambram]

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

What are we going to do about the tax cuts that the middle and lower class received during the Trump administration?

 

[Bradskii]

You don't see any negative economic repercussions with just handing $25k to an undetermined number of people?

I see millions being helped in buying their first home and prices possibly dropping because of the extra housing supply. What do you see happening?

 

[probinson]

I see millions being helped in buying their first home and prices possibly dropping because of the extra housing supply. What do you see happening?

If "millions" of first-time homebuyer are handed $25k, you think that will cause prices to drop?

Demand would skyrocket much faster than supply could keep up. Any idea what happens to prices when demand surpasses supply? Does the economic law of supply and demand not apply here?

 

[Bradskii]

And all the same posters have something positive to say about because they do like her politics. What an astute observation you've made!

Hardly anything positive. Nobody in their right mind would post a link to that interview and say 'hey, just look at the rhetoric, the pacing, the command of the English language, the subtlety, the nuance, the incisive way she really nails the answers. A magnificent example of the politicians expertise!'

It was just an interview. Nothing more, nothing less. How the presentation could be used as a means to criticise is beyond me.

I posted a link on another thread to one that Trump did with Lex Fridman. Went on for the best part of an hour. And yeah, he made some fumbles. He stopped and started and repeated himself. Some of it might be described as rambling. But that's how interviews go. Nobody expects perfection. So I was reasonably impressed. Now just because I didn't like what he was saying, that I didn't like how he detailed what he planned to do didn't mean that I could therefore rip into how he was putting himself across (there are plenty of opportunities to do that elsewhere).

But some of you guys? It doesn't seem to matter what Harris says. You pick holes where there are none to pick. You make complaints when there is no cause to do so. It's crying wolf. And it's so obvious that all other arguments are treated the same.

Want to discuss the implications of the cash injection for first time home buyers? Then have at it. Bring to the table some decent arguments. Bring some facts and figures. Bring some honest complaints. Let's discuss it.

Here's a quote to get you started, from here: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/kamala-harris-25k-down-payment-165720310.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall

“The biggest problem in the housing market is the lack of supply, and a demand subsidy on its own doesn’t help — it actually makes the problem worse,” she said. “However, [Harris] is not proposing it on its own; she’s including it as part of a larger plan to increase the housing supply by 3 million homes by the end of her first term in 2029, and she’s pairing it with subsidies for new construction.”

By pairing builder incentives and new-construction subsidies with a demand subsidy, a potential issue that could result in lower home prices is mitigated, she said.

“Builders can be confident there will be demand for the homes they build because first-time homebuyers will have this credit,” Fairweather said. “Additionally, the home values of first-time homeowners likely won’t decrease because of the added demand from these buyers looking for both existing homes and new construction.”

 

[iluvatar5150]

If "millions" of first-time homebuyer are handed $25k, you think that will causes prices to drop?

Demand would skyrocket much faster than supply could keep up. Any idea what happens to prices when demand surpasses supply? Does the economic law of supply and demand not apply here?

I’m skeptical that demand would spike as much as you fear. As I already noted, similar assistance programs already exist in many places. And this is only for first-time homebuyers. And the house still has to be within their budget. My prediction: the increased demand will only come from people on the cusp of affordability. For others, it’ll just take the edge off.

 

[probinson]

Hardly anything positive. Nobody in their right mind would post a link to that interview and say 'hey, just look at the rhetoric, the pacing, the command of the English language, the subtlety, the nuance, the incisive way she really nails the answers. A magnificent example of the politicians expertise!'

"The way she tugs at the heartstrings by talking about the adoration people have about their lawns."

It was just an interview. Nothing more, nothing less. How the presentation could be used as a means to criticise is beyond me.

It was a demonstration of Harris' mastery of saying a lot of words while really saying nothing.

But some of you guys? It doesn't seem to matter what Harris says. You pick holes where there are none to pick. You make complaints when there is no cause to do so. It's crying wolf. And it's so obvious that all other arguments are treated the same.

You're being incredibly dishonest. I've answered with what I am criticizing. You are the one that really doesn't seem to want to talk about how Harris would rather tell us about her childhood than get into the specifics of her policies and proposals.

Want to discuss the implications of the cash injection for first time home buyers? Then have at it. Bring to the table some decent arguments. Bring some facts and figures. Bring some honest complaints. Let's discuss it.

Yes, I've tried to do that. But here you are, again, pretending like that's not happening. You're not interested in a discussion in earnest on the merits of her proposals. You're interested in complaining about how bad the people are that just don't like Harris.

Here's a quote to get you started, from here: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/kamala-harris-25k-down-payment-165720310.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall

“The biggest problem in the housing market is the lack of supply, and a demand subsidy on its own doesn’t help — it actually makes the problem worse,” she said. “However, [Harris] is not proposing it on its own; she’s including it as part of a larger plan to increase the housing supply by 3 million homes by the end of her first term in 2029, and she’s pairing it with subsidies for new construction.”

By pairing builder incentives and new-construction subsidies with a demand subsidy, a potential issue that could result in lower home prices is mitigated, she said.

This, of course, assumes that the builders take advantage of the subsidies, and does not address my earlier question of what exactly Harris meant when she said that she wanted private sector homebuilders to "partner with the government".

“Builders can be confident there will be demand for the homes they build because first-time homebuyers will have this credit,” Fairweather said. “Additionally, the home values of first-time homeowners likely won’t decrease because of the added demand from these buyers looking for both existing homes and new construction.”

If you build it, they will come. Of course, as I already mentioned, this proposal is almost certainly DOA, as unless there is a massive shift in the balance of power in congress, it has exactly zero chance of being implemented.

 

[Bradskii]

If "millions" of first-time homebuyer are handed $25k, you think that will cause prices to drop?

Demand would skyrocket much faster than supply could keep up. Any idea what happens to prices when demand surpasses supply? Does the economic law of supply and demand not apply here?

In itself? Yes, I think it would. But she is coupling that with building more houses. So builders will be confident that there will be a buyer. And we're talking low cost housing for first time buyers who aren't earning a great deal anyway.

We have the same housing shortage in Australia and I don't think it would be a wise move here because established houses are generally sold at auction (as opposed to new ones that have a fixed price set by the builder). In other words the price is fixed by the buyer. So just give $25k to people and a lot of them turning up at auction will be able to bid $25k more. And the price goes up. It's then a seller's market.

With fixed price housing, that doesn't happen. The price is fixed by the vendor. And just because some people have been given that $25k doesn't then mean that anyone selling a house thinks 'Hey, I'll up my asking price by that amount'. The house needs to be at a price that low earning first time buyers can afford and if the one next door is selling for $25k less then that's the one they'll buy. It becomes a buyer's market.

 

[probinson]

I’m skeptical that demand would spike as much as you fear.

I'm not so sure. To hear Harris talk, the only thing stopping people from buying a home is that they don't have the down payment. Others here are suggesting that "millions" of people will take advantage of this program. There is already a housing shortage, so this stands to cause a considerable spike in demand.

As I already noted, similar assistance programs already exist in many places.

Except we don't actually know that. I'm aware of exactly zero programs in which someone is handed $25k for a down payment. Perhaps this proposal will function more like the programs you listed earlier, but neither of us can know that since Harris nor her campaign hasn't expounded on any of the specifics of this plan.

My prediction: the increased demand will only come from people on the cusp of affordability. For others, it’ll just take the edge off.

It would be interesting to know just how many of those people are on the cusp of affordability.

 

[probinson]

In itself? Yes, I think it would. But she is coupling that with building more houses. So builders will be confident that there will be a buyer.

Will they? Do you understand that this proposal must go through congress?

And we're talking low cost housing for first time buyers who aren't earning a great deal anyway.

Where does it say that? There have been absolutely no specifics given for this "plan". Just, "Hey everyone! Vote for me and I'll give you $25k to buy a house!"

We have the same housing shortage in Australia and I don't think it would be a wise move here because established houses are generally sold at auction (as opposed to new ones that have a fixed price set by the builder). In other words the price is fixed by the buyer. So just give $25k to people and a lot of them turning up at auction will be able to bid $25k more. And the price goes up. It's then a seller's market.

I'm not sure why you don't think that will happen with Harris' proposal.

With fixed price housing, that doesn't happen. The price is fixed by the vendor. And just because some people have been given that $25k doesn't then mean that anyone selling a house thinks 'Hey, I'll up my asking price by that amount'. The house needs to be at a price that low earning first time buyers can afford and if the one next door is selling for $25k less then that's the one they'll buy. It becomes a buyer's market.

If you say so. Your first explanation is more in line with reality though. A $25k handout will almost certainly result in higher housing prices.

 

[Bradskii]

Will they? Do you understand that this proposal must go through congress?

So you don't want anyone to propose policies that will require congressional approval?

Where does it say that? There have been absolutely no specifics given for this "plan". Just, "Hey everyone! Vote for me and I'll give you $25k to buy a house!"

From here: Harris Will Propose $25,000 In Down Payment Aid For First-Time Homebuyers As Part Of Economic Agenda

'The support program, announced in a campaign email, will “provide working families” that have paid rent on time for two years and are in the market for a home with up to $25,000 in down-payment assistance, “with more generous support for first-generation homeowners.”

I'm not sure why you don't think that will happen with Harris' proposal.

I gave my explanation.

If you say so. Your first explanation is more in line with reality though. A $25k handout will almost certainly result in higher housing prices.

Only if everyone was given $25k. Then all prices would rise by $25k. There's be no doubt about that. But, as I said, it's only going to affect a small percentage of the market available to low wage earners buying a first home. If there are two neighbouring houses equal in value and one owner puts the price up by $25 and the other doesn't, as a first time buyer, which one would you buy?

As I said, with prices fixed by the seller it becomes a buyer's market. They get to choose whether to buy or not.

 

[ralliann]

No one is asking you to care, but there are many who do care that a potential leader is able to answer questions and answer them succinctly, which Kamala struggles with. All those other topics you mentioned revolve around Kamala being a poor communicator.


Also, that last one is cultural appropriation. Wonder why she isn't being called out on it.



None of those things have anything to do with Kamala Harris' ability to say use a lot of words but say very little.

I suspect because whoever is running the white house, will continue and they like that. So, what she says or doesn't say does not matter.

 

[probinson]

So you don't want anyone to propose policies that will require congressional approval?

You know that's not what I said. I said that this proposal has an extremely slim chance of getting congressional approval.

From here: Harris Will Propose $25,000 In Down Payment Aid For First-Time Homebuyers As Part Of Economic Agenda

'The support program, announced in a campaign email, will “provide working families” that have paid rent on time for two years and are in the market for a home with up to $25,000 in down-payment assistance, “with more generous support for first-generation homeowners.”

Uh huh. So what exactly is a "working family"? There is nothing there that says anything about income level requirements. It simply says that you have to have paid your rent on-time for two years and want to buy a house. That's it. That could mean that the young, working professional in California paying $4,000/month for rent that has paid on-time for 24 months could qualify. That's hardly "low-income".

And what does "more generous support" mean? And how on earth will they determine if someone is a "first-generation homeowner"? Are they going to do family tree searches to confirm you're the first person ever to buy a house in your family line?

There are far too many questions about this policy proposal to know if it would be beneficial.

I gave my explanation.

Yes. IMHO, it seems rooted in fanciful and wishful thinking.

Only if everyone was given $25k. Then all prices would rise by $25k. There's be no doubt about that. But, as I said, it's only going to affect a small percentage of the market available to low wage earners buying a first home.

Except you've not shown that. You have no idea who will or won't qualify for this assistance and whether it will be a "small percentage" because Harris hasn't told anyone the specifics of her plan.

If there are two neighbouring houses equal in value and one owner puts the price up by $25 and the other doesn't, as a first time buyer, which one would you buy?

Well, isn't that just the perfect scenario for your point. In case you were unaware, there is a housing shortage. It's not like there are a ton of options for people to choose from. Driving up demand will drive up prices. As wonderful as you think Harris and her policies are, they are not exempt from the laws of economics.

As I said, with prices fixed by the seller it becomes a buyer's market. They get to choose whether to buy or not.

I guess. But then they wouldn't get the free $25k from the government. So it's not quite as you're portraying it.

 

[Bradskii]

You know that's not what I said. I said that this proposal has an extremely slim chance of getting congressional approval.

The point being is that you can't criticise a proposal because congress may veto it.

Uh huh. So what exactly is a "working family"? There is nothing there that says anything about income level requirements. It simply says that you have to have paid your rent on-time for two years and want to buy a house. That's it. That could mean that the young, working professional in California paying $4,000/month for rent that has paid on-time for 24 months could qualify. That's hardly "low-income".

It's a simple plan to 'promote homeownership with tax incentives and support for first-time buyers'. Assuming that it would be done via taxes rather than a direct payment. Do you really think this is going to be geared to young professionals in an upper tax bracket?

Well, isn't that just the perfect scenario for your point. In case you were unaware, there is a housing shortage. It's not like there are a ton of options for people to choose from.

That's why it has to be coupled with the building of additional houses. As I said, it won't work unless that happens as well.

Driving up demand will drive up prices. As wonderful as you think Harris and her policies are, they are not exempt from the laws of economics.

The idea is to balance supply and demand so that doesn't happen. Build a million houses and give a million families the financial opportunity to buy them.

I guess. But then they wouldn't get the free $25k from the government. So it's not quite as you're portraying it.

No, they will be looking to buy. But they will determine which house to buy. They won't won't be signing papers on a house that costs $25k more than the one next door. And, as I said, this is a limited market. It's low cost housing for first time buyers. It'll have no effect on more expensive houses.