Let’s give three cheers for Kamala Harris...

By Asa Montreaux

Earlier I had the thought, and expressed myself thus, that if you sent Democratic Party ten dollars, normally Joe Biden had some lunch and lived. But what if I were to tell you… there is now a young, aggressive, tough nominee for the Democratic Party candidate? Well, it is funny. That is exactly what I have to tell you. 

 

Kamala Harris, the new Democratic Party candidate for the Presidential election, is exactly what the country needs… though the purpose of the article is to assuage your fears that the country is not ready for her yet…

 

Young, yes. Aggressive, yes. Tough, yes? Smart, yes? Lawyer, yes. So what are some of other attributes that make up her candidate profile? For one, the candidate is a woman. Two, the candidate is black.

 

You may see there has not been a black President before, but of course there has. The first black President is one of the most beloved Presidents of all time, and one of the most efficacious leaders of a democracy in all of history. So that’s covered. Rest assured we have been there before.

 

So what about this other… attribute… of the candidate? Female. There has never been a female President. So this may represent some negative energy for Harris. Is it surmountable? Legally it is. In reality, it is.

 

There has been one previous Presidential candidate that was female, and that had been Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election. 

 

I mean the situation is that had been the leader of the popular vote (the most total votes). It many other ways, in terms of choices between candidates themselves, etc., this had been the chosen candidate.

 

Leaving the past in the past, and just taking it from it the most important facts, a female candidate can win the Presidency. 

 

The question arises whether she was the right leader for the United States? Perhaps this was not the right candidate in a time of war in the Middle East, and strife along the border.

 

But when you combine the benefits of the a tougher candidate, and a temporal setting in which there is no ongoing wars in which the U.S. has active engagement, and there is no concern along the borders, this candidate is a no-brainer.

 

What are the drawbacks? I think it is safe to say that claims that she speaks with a lack of clarity, or with imprecision, are false claims. And it is only the case that this will go away. As the race really begins, when there actually is a debate, nothing will be off the cuff, and Harris will be fully in the game, rather than just warming-up. 

 

Look at the questions that Dana Bush asked Vice-President Harris in her first interview: “How should voters look at some of the changes that you’ve made? Is it because you have more experience now and you’ve learned more about the information? Is it because you were running for president in a Democratic primary?” 

 

Evidently given the density of the questions asked, there was no possible way for Harris to answer it, in a simple, complex way. If one were to describe the nature of this question, they would describe it as open-ended. The interviewer had asked for a searching, and complex answer.

 

What else is obvious, is that, there are three parts to this question. Having an opinion about an important topic requires one concise part.

 

And how could Vice-President Harris briefly answer this question, when she has not received a little political experience, but been the Vice-president of the job. If President Biden were to be attacked today, and pass away. She would be the President. Rather than answered succinctly, this question is answered at length.

 

Further, the second portion is constructed confusingly. That is about the past. Whereas, the first clause was about the present. She is the Democratic primary candidate. In fact, that was the reason for the interview.

 

The Democrats demand better, and clearer questions. And ones, summarizing and weighing the points I mentioned above, that are not biased, as this one surely was.

 

And they demand better coverage. They want major news sources to not describe impromptu, important interviews, as serious, planned ones. And they want them not to clip them In confusing way, which degrade the meaning, and highly emphasize one side of the story, which has clearly been the side of the conservatives.

 

There obviously were better parts to the interview. And better statement. But where are those? As readers, viewers, voters, we demand fairness and transparent reporting.

 

Dana Bush works for CNN. They had done they interview with Vice-President Harris, and it obviously true that they have not reported in a biased manner thus far. It really begins with the first debate, in which there was obviously a closely contested battle, with the man on the Republican card being a veritable sociopath. There is no justice is simply attacking President Biden for a moment, or two, in what was billed as just a warm-up debate (President Trump was not clearly going to be able to continue with election at all) 

 

I have to say it was the complete opposite. Watching that whole boring debate, but closely, I saw that he had one. But I saw that the American people where disservice by CNN, who immediately reported in the way that would get the most people to view their channel. They reported that the tough, and worthy President could no longer do it, and that something as strange, bizarre, and sick, as a second Trump Presidency, could happen.

 

I would ask readers of this, viewers of this, to look past these sensationalist reports, and see that these were perhaps relative reports. Relative to himself fours years ago, President Biden was not as strong. But he was still the stronger candidate, and what people haven’t discussed is whether taking on former President Trump, is an even harder task that being President. Never has there been a ruder, and more uncontrollable Presidential candidate. He is only worse in terms of behaviour than four years ago, and eight years ago. Maybe readers of this will think — who has gone more downhill really? President Biden, or former President Trump?