President Kamala Harris: Day 1

After more than a month as the nominee, Kamala Harris final agreed to an interview.  Dana Bash started off by asking, "What would you do on day one?"

Well, there are a number of things. I will tell you first and foremost one of my highest priorities is to do what we can to support and strengthen the middle class. When I look at the aspirations, the goals, the ambitions of the American people, I think that people are ready for a new way forward in a way that generations of Americans have been fueled by — by hope and by optimism.

I think sadly in the last decade, we have had in the former president someone who has really been pushing an agenda and an environment that is about diminishing the character and the strength of who we are as Americans — really dividing our nation. And I think people are ready to turn the page on that.

 

Okay, that was a non-answer.  It prompted Dana Bash to a follow-up question: "So what would you do day one?"

Day one, it’s gonna be about one, implementing my plan for what I call an opportunity economy. I’ve already laid out a number of proposals in that regard, which include what we’re gonna do to bring down the cost of everyday goods, what we’re gonna do to invest in America’s small businesses, what we’re gonna do to invest in families.

For example, extending the child tax credit to $6,000 for families for the first year of their child’s life to help them buy a car seat, to help them buy baby clothes, a crib. There’s the work that we’re gonna do that is about investing in the American family around affordable housing, a big issue in our country right now. So there are a number of things on day one.

 

At least this time she offered a policy: $6000 tax credit for a newborn.  Then we have a return to the vague aspirations of her administration.  This is so unspecific that it could come from either a Democrat or a Republican.  That is not accidental.

The funniest thing about her interview was that it gave the impression that Trump was the incumbent and she was the challenger.  Things are tough but we'll sort them out when she is president.  Huh?  Why not sort them now when she is VP?  Then she had her line about the last decade being contrary to the country's spirit.  Even Bash had to point out that she has been VP for the last 3 and a half years of that contrarian decade.

Love him or hate him, Trump doesn't dodge the press or offer empty platitudes.  He'll tell you his policy, even the wreckless and ill-considered ones.  Government funded IVF?  Really?  We don't have enough government funded items?  Trump talks unfiltered for hours while Harris has a 20-minute sit-down with her VP nominee at her side.  This is the 2020 hide-in-the-basement strategy.  Let's avoid making errors and hope Trump implodes.  Let's leave the electorate uninformed about us and hope they paint a rosy picture, like they did with Joe Biden.

The Trouncing

A debate with no audience.  A debate that even barred other reporters.  Strict time limits.  Two moderators who have clearly been anti-Trump.  It was a debate that most candidates would refuse.  Trump accepted and the trouncing began.  Mostly, this was a debate of contrasts.  Joe Biden looks old, sounds old, and frankly is old.  He is too old.  There were plenty of accusations back and forth.  Trump repeatedly called Biden the worst president ever.  Biden called Trump a convicted felon and sexual predator.  I suspect a transcript would narrow the gap in performances, but the visuals were quite bad for President Biden.  Interestingly, though Snopes recently declared the Fine People story from Charlottesville to be false, Biden brought it up as though it were true.

As for moderators, we need to do away with them.  Not entirely, but certainly as far as the questions are concerned.  Let the candidates ask each other questions.  They will each go for the jugular and it will be a livelier debate.  Keep the moderator(s) purely for timekeeping and some organization.  For instance, "It is your question, President Biden."  Give something like 30 seconds to ask a question and a couple of minutes to answer.  Some rebuttals as needed.  However, rebuttals go against their time, so one needs to be strategic.  Have a time on their podium, so everyone knows how much time each has used.  Would need to do some tweaks to deal with talking over one another.  It is beyond exasperating that every four years, the moderators are a bunch of Democrats who can't help but favor the Democrat.  With clear time rules and candidates asking the questions, that issue goes away.

In some of the post-debate commentary, I read calls to dump Biden at the convention.  Yeah, probably a good idea.  Also, Joe Biden is the reason for the 25th Amendment, sections 3 and/or 4.  Woodrow Wilson had a debilitation stroke in 1919 and yet remained president until 1921.  Very few will willingly surrender power, which is why George Washington was such a great man and Joe Biden is not.  Of course, his party is also to blame; they prefer him over Kalama Harris, or he would have been removed already.

Master of Branding

There is a new survey that shows CNN has plummeted in perception compared to its cable competitors, Fox News and MSNBC.  Is this downward trend because of Trump's labeling CNN as fake news?  He recently altered that to 'very fake news.'  Trump seems to have a gift for pinning his opponents - and he has openly called the media in general and CNN in particular opponents - with harmful branding.  It struck me as childish during the primaries when he would use these demeaning nicknames for his rivals: Little Marco, Lyin' Ted, Low Energy Jeb, Crazy Bernie, Crooked Hillary.  It's like schoolyard name calling but the results speak for themselves.  Trump is playing a perception game and through these gimmicky nicknames, he creates a perception.  'Very fake news' looks to be a sad excuse for branding and yet it appears to have worked.

 

A good brand will get confirmed, even if it doesn't apply well.  If Trump could point to just a couple of instances - even if they were aberrations from the norm - that confirmed his branding, it will stick like glue.  Of course, Trump isn't the only one who knows how to brand.  There is a reason so many think he is a fascist, because Democrats are old pros at branding Republicans.  However, I would have to say Trump is better.  Democrats always use the same batch of brands (e.g. racist, fascist, homophobe, sexist, Nazi) while Trump is comparatively subtle and clever (e.g. Low Energy Jeb).

 

With Trump as the current owner of Teddy Roosevelt's bully pulpit, one must be cautious in drawing the ire of one so skilled at branding and shameless in doing so.  For the moment, it is fun to see the over-inflated egos of the Washington elites popped but where might it lead after that?

Outraged by the Predictable

Of late, I have seen several stories about how Trump has 'lashed out' or 'attacked' or otherwise spoken ill of this person or that person.  However, it is always in response to those very people speaking ill of him.  Meryl Streep took the opportunity of her lifetime achievement award to criticize the president-elect and he responded by calling her overrated.  Obviously, that is a juvenile attack as Streep is clearly the most talented actress of her generation.  Then there was CNN being called fake news after joining the BuzzFeed Trump Dossier story.  Now it is John Lewis who called Trump an illegitimate president-elect and Trump responded in kind.  This is all entirely predictable.  We have seen the pattern for almost 2 years now.  Trump is like a 10 year-old on the playground.  Call him a "doo doo face" and you can expect to be called a "big dummy" in return.

 

Of course, all these outraged people must know that Trump is going to reply with his customary insults and belittling comments.  They also know that the majority of the media (e.g. CNN) will report the story to make Trump look like the instigator.  It all seems very childish on both sides to me.  However, Romney did not reply to attacks and lost.  Trump replies to EVERY attack and won.  Is there a lesson to learn there?

Clinton News Network

Chris Cuomo runs interference for the Clinton Campaign:

So, don't go looking at this stuff on your own.  Trust us to tell you what is important and what isn't.  Also interesting that it isn't illegal for the press.  Laws that apply to the viewers of CNN don't apply to the employees of CNN.  They're special.