Much is being made of the failure of Vice President Harris to engage with the press since becoming the Democratic nominee for president in the November elections. Rather, her modus operandi seems to be scripted appearances, reading off of ever-present teleprompters.
Political operatives explain that give and take with journalists is definitely not Ms. Harris’s strong suit, nor is she all that conversant with the issues at all events. So, the odds-on plan is undoubtedly to get the message out without risking any “misspeak.” It worked for an aging and declining President Biden during his campaign and, given her surge in the polls this past month, seems to be working for her too.
But we see an important distinction emerging.
Basic to the scheme is a compliant mainstream media that will not obsess over covering a presidential candidate who is, well, a virtual automaton – even though reporters and journalists would rather have the opportunity to verbally engage him (or her). And whereas Joe Biden got a pass from the media, it is not all that clear that Kamala Harris will get one too. Indeed, she may have shot herself in the foot in her presentation of her economic agenda the other day.
For one thing, Harris is only 59 years old, nowhere the Biden’s age when he first ran. Thus, in the middle of her remarks, when she spoke about “price gauging” instead of “price gouging” as being the cause of high food prices – despite reading from a teleprompter – it is likely everyone who heard her was less than encouraged about her candidacy.
But more significantly, Biden’s media “amen corner,” in particular, The New York Times and the Washington Post, may have abandoned her over her overall economic plan presentation.
One article in the Times said “The vice president’s plans represent more of a reboot of President Biden’s economic policies than a radically fresh start.” The article went on to say that her plan to expand upon some of the Biden policies could add trillions to federal budget deficits over the next decade.
One article in the Times also questioned her touting of the Bureau of Labor Statistics Report that inflation is now back below three percent for the first time since 2021, when 2021 is the year that Trump turned the economy, and the country, to Biden!
More biting was the Washington Post. It headlined an editorial on Harris’s economic presentation this way: “The Times Demand Serious Economic Ideas, Harris Supplies Gimmicks.”
And The Post went on to echo The New York Times’ point about inflation: “While the inflation rate has cooled substantially since the 2022 peak, an ostensible Biden-Harris administration accomplishment, prices remain elevated relative to the Trump years.”
When a Democrat running for president in 2024 cannot count on the support of The New York Times and the Washington Post, the candidate may be forced to come out of the basement and make its case face to face. It may be that in terms of the media covering for Kamala Harris as it did for Joe Biden all bets are off. But maybe we shouldn’t be quick to discount the possible effects of Trump Derangement Syndrome.
