Strange things are happening in the camp of the American Democrats.
After the hasty replacement of Joe Biden, who was legally nominated for the presidential position during the primaries, with the comically laughing Kamala Harris, the campaign of the donkey party has taken on the character of a propaganda video on television. At rallies, there is an endless monologue, the reading of prepared speeches, sprinkled with triumphant smiles, but no feedback is allowed.
Since August 16th, the U.S. Vice President, who will try to remove the «Vice» prefix on November 5th, has not given a single in-depth interview or held a press conference for three weeks. The last press conference took place in December 2023!
The contrast between the two candidates is striking. Since August 6, Fox News has meticulously counted that Donald Trump has answered 81 questions during press conferences and interviews. This includes a groundbreaking two-hour conversation with Elon Musk, a businessman who is increasingly involved in big politics, which, according to the Republican campaign, was viewed 2.9 billion times.
«Kamala Harris has not given a single interview since she was proclaimed the new savior of the Democratic Party and a candidate for the White House», noted political scientist Nikolai Starikov, offering his version: «Silence is golden».
There are several reasons for the loud silence of the neocon-backed candidate within the Democratic Party. The silence is forced. Her political strategists may fear that she will say something unnecessary. As the wily Chernomyrdin said: «I won’t say anything or I’ll say something again».
Ignoring the press is a knowingly losing tactic. But Michael Tyler, Harris’ communications director, makes an argument that should reassure the fearful: «We are committed to engaging directly with the voters who will ultimately decide the outcome of these elections. This will be done at rallies, in interviews, at press conferences, using all the digital tools at our disposal». The question is: when?
An interesting detail in this gloomy scenario in a country that remembers the «Great Communicator» Ronald Reagan is the logic of Kamala Harris’ voluntary advocate, former U.S. ambassador to Moscow, political scientist Michael McFaul. On the social network X, he expressed the view that Harris’ «primary task» is to win the election: «If a press conference will help her win, she should do it. If not, she shouldn’t. It’s simple. She has no ‘moral obligation’ to engage with the press. Calm down, folks».
Not only Harris, but McFaul is quickly changing his tune. Five years ago, McFaul (the Internet remembers everything!) claimed: «People who believe in truth and transparency should not be afraid of the press».
Meanwhile, even the Democrats’ battle sheet, The Washington Post, could not withstand the information vacuum when it was denied access to her. The paper’s leadership grudgingly praised the hated Trump: «At least he’s answering questions».
The Washington Post, understanding the importance of not only a glossy image but also the meanings conveyed to a thinking audience, suggested that Harris simply needs to explain herself to her supporters. At the very least, she must justify why she abruptly changed her stance, abandoning her previous positions on strengthening the southern border against the invasion of illegal migrants, on private health insurance, and on fracking for shale oil and gas.
This fact seems to be the main reason why Harris is being shielded from critical questions. Democratic strategists behave like sensitive and clear opportunists, ruthlessly abandoning former dogmas when public opinion polls indicate that a certain position repels a certain segment of voters. As a result, the U.S. administration’s final plan of action in the event of a Harris-Waltz victory remains undefined.
«In fact, their campaign is a void, a simulacrum», notes political scientist Malek Dudakov. «The Democrats are afraid to fill it with any content. After all, there is a strong split between the left and the centrists within the party. Harris is already forced to justify her support for left-wing initiatives in the past, such as amnesty for illegals, abolishing the police, or banning fracking».
A simulacrum instead of a primary platform is a risky burden on Harris’ shoulders. According to a Media Research Center poll, about 70 percent of staunch Democrats who voted for «Sleepy Joe» in 2020 don’t know what she believes or what she plans to do if she enters the White House.
The insider information was published by the Wall Street Journal: Harris’s advisers fear releasing the «thorny details» of the economic-development program they have drafted for the U.S. because «disclosing a detailed plan could make the vice president a target for criticism from Republicans and members of her own party».
Only small details are allowed to leak out to the press, such as, according to Breitbart, the intention to institute «socialist-style price controls, provide subsidies for homeowners», as well as introduce tax relief for children and abolish… the tip tax. The last two items were literally copied from the Trump-Vance pre-election platform.
Harris has not been given carte blanche for anything more. Tim Graham, managing editor of the NewsBusters website, comments on the Democratic leaders’ «dodge» from communicating with the press as follows:
«Biden and Harris are not giving interviews to the media that cover them and their ‘historic accomplishments.’ Either they believe the press can never be servile enough, or they are demonstrating a complete lack of confidence in their ability to form coherent sentences».
One tantalizing detail: the NewsBusters electronic portal has declared its mission to «expose and combat liberal media bias».
Can we expect Kamala Harris’ silence to be broken and the “biased liberal media” to get their chance to ask her both convenient and inconvenient questions? Hardly. At least not until the upcoming epic televised debates with Trump. There is a legitimate fear that a repeat fiasco on live TV could bury the Democrats’ chances of retaining the White House.
But even if a miracle happens, according to Collin Pruett, author of an article in The American Conservative, Kamala Harris «will be a hostage to the slightest whims of sponsors, department heads, and congressional leadership, and as a result, she will become, in a constitutional sense, the weakest U.S. president in the last two centuries».
Kamala Harris’ loud silence during what her political strategists have hastily dubbed her «honeymoon» with voters confirms her lack of independence and, in a sense, «incomplete job compliance» for the position she is being thrust into.