Talk to the hand, not to me!

Last week Kamala Harris sat for her first press interview since...well, forever. She fielded mostly softball questions from CNN's Dana Bash and continues to brush off reporters questions since.

Kamala Harris isn’t a childless cat lady—but perhaps a cat has got her tongue, as she continues to avoid interviews and ducks the press. On Tuesday she whisked by frustrated reporters as she boarded Air Force Two, giving them the “talk to the hand” gesture, while “pretending to be on the phone,” according to some press reports.

Last week she finally gave her first interview since President Biden abandoned his candidacy and withdrew from the race 45 days ago. Sitting beside her was her avuncular emotional support chaperone, VP candidate Tim Walz. It was, as it turned out, more Oprah than Walter Cronkite, more stump speech than interview.

Dana Bash, CNN’s Chief Political Correspondent, lobbed mostly softball questions at the pair, and either failed, or refused, to follow up evasive or incomplete answers to her questions. There was, perhaps not surprisingly, no Harris bashing. I half expected Bash to ask Harris her favorite color, her astrological sign, or who was her teenage crush.

“Kamala Harris didn’t hurt herself in her interview this week with CNN’s Dana Bash,” writes New York Times columnist Bret Stephens. “She didn’t particularly help herself, either.” She was, says Stephens “vague to the point of vacuous,” and “struggled to give straight answers.”

Meanwhile, Stephens colleague at the Times, Michelle Cottle, had a different take. “I think that went pretty well,” Cottle asked rhetorically, “don’t you?” Cottle then defended Harris’ performance as a “solid job” (translation: she didn’t f**k up). “Did we get a deep dive into Harris’s policy positions? No, we did not,” Cottle wrote, “But that was not the point of this interview.” Alright—if not to find out more about what Harris will do if elected, what WAS the point? Harris isn’t hawking her newest movie or skin care product, she’s the Democratic candidate for president. Shouldn’t we expect direct answers to tough questions. According to Cottle, apparently not.

“This was about Harris introducing herself to Americans in her new role,” Cottle wrote, “and proving a few basic things to everyone.” Like? How about proving you can answer a direct question with a direct answer? That, sadly, remains unproven. Harris has had nearly four years as Vice President to introduce herself to the public, and she had a widely watched primetime address at the Democratic National Convention only a few weeks ago—shouldn’t we be beyond introductions? “Introducing” a candidate is the purpose of campaign ads and rallies, not primetime press interviews.

This wasn’t some glib and fawning appearance on “The View”—it was billed as a serious primetime interview with the candidate who would be President. A candidate who has, so far, refused to expand or explain—in anything other than broad generalizations and cliches—how she will govern if elected. Nor was it Bash’s job to introduce Harris, it was her job to interrogate her. “Amusingly,” Cottle wrote, “Bash looked more flustered than Harris did for most of the interview.” If you read on, you’ll see why.

“Kamala Harris’s campaign handlers were no doubt giving each other high-fives on Thursday night watching their candidate’s interview on CNN,” said a Wall Street Journal editorial. “The Vice President got away for the most part with repeating her campaign’s platitudes about ‘the middle class’ and ‘a new way forward’ and was never seriously challenged on anything.”

Both Bash’s failure—or unwillingness— to press Harris for details and specifics, and Harris’ non-answers were disappointing. I was hoping for more from both. I get why Harris was evasive; she’s trying to avoid both being pinned down or pinned to the Biden record. But Bash should know, and have done, better. If you want to call yourself “Chief Political Correspondent” for a major international news organization, then you should ask tough questions and be willing to follow-up slippery responses. After the interview, Bash was on the defensive, saying she knows it was “just right” because it “p**sed off” both the left and the right. I wasn’t a journalism major, but I don’t think that’s the standard they teach to.

Good at sitting and smiling.

Even after the almost 30 minute interview, we learned almost nothing new about Kamala Harris—or Walz for that matter—except that Harris is good at evading questions and Walz, says Reid J. Epstein of the New York Times, “is good at sitting and smiling.” That’s a low bar for the possible President and Vice President of the United States.

Before anyone accuses me of picking on Kamala, I am—someone has to. So let’s look at some excerpts from the interview and you’ll see why. Bash began by asking Harris what she would do on day one. “Strengthen the middle class,” was pretty much the extent of Harris’ reply. “So,” a frustrated Bash asked again, “what would you do day one?” Harris replied with more generalities. She said she would be “implementing my plan for what I call an opportunity economy,” “bring down the cost of everyday goods,” and “invest in America’s small businesses” and “families.” Blah. Blah. Blah.

“So,” Harris concluded proudly, “there are a number of things on day one.” That’s quite a to-do list, except she never explained how she would do any of it. Bash could, and should, have asked “how,” or “what’s your plan,” but instead gave up and moved on. Maybe that’s why she looked so “flustered?”

One of the slogans of the Harris campaign has been “we’re not going back,” apparently meaning back to when Trump was President. “But I wonder,” Bash asked, “what you say to voters who do want to go back when it comes to the economy specifically because their groceries were less expensive, housing was more affordable when Donald Trump was president?”

Harris started out by blaming Trump and the pandemic for high prices, and then bragged that inflation is now under 3%. “But you are right,” Harris told Bash, “Prices in particular for groceries are still too high. The American people know it. I know it. Which is why my agenda includes what we need to do to bring down the price of groceries. For example, dealing with an issue like price gouging.” This would have been a good time to ask “what agenda,” or to remind Harris that her “price gouging” fix has been almost universally derided by economists.

“So,” continued Bash, “you have been vice president for three and a half years. The steps that you’re talking about now, why haven’t you done them already,” Yes! Finally a good follow-up question! “We,” Harris replied, have brought inflation down to 3%, and capped “the cost of insulin at $35 a month for seniors.” Well, that’s good news for diabetic seniors, but I’m not sure they are a key voting bloc. This was the perfect opportunity for Bash to remind Harris that inflation had risen to an historic high of 9% under the Biden-Harris administration, or to press Harris on her having cast the deciding vote for the American Rescue Plan, which many prominent economists blame, including Lawrence Summers, President Obama’s economic advisor, for fueling inflation in the first place. Summers had called it the “least responsible” economic policy in 40 years. Instead, sadly, next question.

Next up, immigration. OK, I thought at the time, how is Kamala going to wriggle her way out of this one? “Why,” Bash asked, “did the Biden-Harris administration wait three and a half years to implement sweeping asylum restrictions?” Harris started by denying having any meaningful role in border policy—despite her campaign’s claims that “she was in the room” when all important decisions were made, and again, blamed Trump for the border crisis by reportedly killing a bipartisan deal to ramp up border security. She promised to lobby for and sign a border security bill. That was it. Yet another evasive non-answer. Yet again, Bash missed an opportunity to follow-up, or to remind Harris that the administration could have fixed the asylum process unilaterally, and legally, by executive action from day one.

Her agenda? No Agenda.

“Harris isn’t running on a policy agenda,” wrote Matt Bai, a Washington Post columnist, “and when pressed on it, she’s guaranteed to lapse into maddening generalities.” So here we are, less than one week away from the debate between Harris and Trump, assuming neither backs out, and Harris has only permitted herself to be interviewed once—and that with Tim Walz holding her hand. Hardly reassuring.

“Did the media or the Democratic ticket get anything out of this CNN interview?,” the Post’s Bai asked. “Maybe, if you’re a network looking for hype, or if you’re a candidate who just wants to check the box of having sat for some questions. But I’m pretty sure no one else did.”