Walz will be present with Harris in her first major interview …
… which will also be by a very friendly interviewer, Dana Bash, and it will be recorded rather than live.
The friendly interviewer part was pretty much a given. After all, there are few Harris-hostile potential interviewers in the MSM, and why would Harris ever purposely seek one out?
The non-live aspect of it makes sense, too, for the same reason. If the interviewer and the news outlet is friendly, airing a recorded interview gives them time to edit out any errors Harris might make. And many viewers won’t even realize it’s been done. On the other hand, politicians on the right would prefer live interviews because the same time lag gives the news outlet time to edit the interview in order to make the conservative look as bad as possible.
But what of Walz’s presence? I’ve noticed that, so far, quite a bit of the Harris social media presence features back-and-forth schtick with Walz. I saw someone online call Walz her “emotional support animal” – which is not only pretty humorous but may be fastening on a truth, which is that this woman portrayed as mega-strong is bothered by a feeling of insecurity about her ability to weather interviews or press conferences and would like her running mate to be by her side.
That may be true, but I also think that Harris may feel that presenting Harris/Walz as a team as often as possible reassures voters reluctant to vote for a female president that Walz will be a big part of the administration if they win. His supposedly avuncular – or Dad-like – teddy bear quality is apparently what the left believes to be his big selling point. So I think in this interview we have some sort of attempt at the message that Mom and Dad will take care of us, the dependent but beloved children.
Ah yes the totally compromised chinese tool, military shurker, riot enabler, thats not a good look
miguel cervantes:
But none of that will be visible, or discussed, in the interview.
Shouldn’t the Trump campaign let it be widely known that the interview is prerecorded and thus edited?
Time also for Trump call out the hand holding of Harris by Walz.
I’m just restating the obvious, but this Harris campaign is truly mind boggling. It is so transparently pathetic and bogus. But which is the most important ingredient in its possible success? A pathetic Democrat electorate, a media in the tank, or possibly that the campaign doesn’t matter because the outcome is rigged?
physicsguy:
How do people hear what Trump has to say? The press? TruthSocial? Twitter? Because Trump already has commented on the upcoming interview.
Walz is the little known Care Bear, Evil Bear.
TommyJay:
I actually think it’s the first – the electorate. Even given the rest, Harris/Walz shouldn’t be getting more than 25% of the vote.
From Trump and/or his campaign:
So it isn’t really a press interview. It is a staged campaign event.
neo,
Yes agreed.
A smart but far left friend posts these things on Facebook. (OK, it’s Facebook, and thus maybe should be ignored.) But they are these mindless, ad-hominem ridicule memes about Trump or Republicans. Totally devoid of any content, let alone some shred of accuracy or truth.
I suppose he sees these things from some FB source, likes them, and click-click, reposts them. But still… So mindless. And indicative I think, of a blind faith in Kamala, the alternative.
The National Pulse has its own take on this, if a somewhat indelicate one:
“BREAKING:
Kamala FINALLY Agrees to Interview But Not Without White Man to Hold Her Hand.”
https://thenationalpulse.com/2024/08/27/breaking-kamala-finally-agrees-to-interview-but-not-without-white-man-to-hold-her-hand/
You’re right, Neo.
Once again, how to break through to the general population given the propaganda fortress that the Democrats have built?
I hope there are smarter people than me working on the solution. But, as this has been going on for so long, maybe there isn’t a way. Depressing how they hold so many of the cards in the deck.
“His supposedly avuncular – or Dad-like – teddy bear quality is apparently what the left believes to be his big selling point.”
I don’t see it. There’s something about the guy that’s just…off. I got the same vibe from Tim Kaine when he was Clinton’s running mate.
https://www.dossier.today/p/kamala-harriss-top-economic-adviser
Sg. Joe: Walz is disingenuous, calculating, and as smarmy as they come. It’s palpably sickening.
re: Sgt+Joe+Friday
His avuncular persona looks to me to be a thin construct that he has purposefully created. It works well when you get new people over and over but my guess you find out he is perpetually manipulative once you know him for a while.
You know thinking about the dastardly duo really does make me nauseous
I read the Power Line blog regularly, so I know that avuncular presentation covers a totalitarian core. His COVID performance was one of the worst in the country. He has signed bills to take children from their parents if they object to “gender affirming” treatment and to allow abortion up to the moment of birth. Beginning next year, traditional religious believers will no longer be certified to teach in public schools in Minnesota unless they sign an affirmation of critical race and transgender ideologies.
Dems are saying a joint interview is common for after the convention, but in other cases, the presidential candidate has been out doing interviews and press conferences for months. Harris has been locked away and there’s no guarantee she will do any other appearances after this one. This makes her appear weak and incompetent.
airing a recorded interview gives them time to edit out any errors Harris might make
So Trump had better see to it that his own camera is running for the whole occasion.
I think “emotional support Maoist” fits Walz better.
The trial balloons she posted on X of her tax policy and her price control schemes didn’t go over well. I didn’t hear the “news” swooning over them either. Harris and Trump are basically neck and neck, even after weeks of glowing tributes about her, and of course the DNC JOY PALOOZA!
This interview is damage control. If there’s no bump after getting a free campaign ad on CNN, then I doubt she debates Trump live. They will just try to run out the clock by putting her on the campaign trail exclusively.
physicsguy
You ask: “Once again, how to break through to the general population given the propaganda fortress that the Democrats have built?”Bill Whittle takes a crack at it:
https://billwhittle.com/how-to-beat-harris-part-2-polls/
Dana interviewed JD Vance and was very hard and combative. Of course, he’s a Republican and she doesn’t like them, but also she was probably influenced by peers who thought she was hard on Biden or soft on Trump in the Trump-Biden debate. Bash isn’t afraid of being too easy on Harris or too hard on Trump, but the idea that she may not be hard enough on Trump terrifies her.
I wondered why Vance would bother going on with Bash, but he handled her quite well and maybe scored some points for standing up to her without “mansplaining.”
Middle America may know people like Vance, but that doesn’t mean they’ll admire him or vote for him. Maybe he’s not a dad or uncle, but the brother-in-law you see over the holidays and want to avoid.
They could publish the transcript today, it has already been written.
“Once again, how to break through to the general population given the propaganda fortress that the Democrats have built?”
One way is through effective campaign ads on the local TV stations. Here in Michigan they have been running some really good ads featuring mothers of young people murdered by illegal immigrants, tying the deaths of their children to Harris’ open border policies. The ads will elicit a strong emotional response I think, especially in those LIVs who base their votes on feelings rather than facts.
crasey – thanks for the Bill Whittle link, I think it’s a must watch for those pessimists who are ready to give up when we’ve barely begun to fight.
TommyJay
My central point has always been the lazy, intentionally ignorant electorate. Above all.
@Richard F Cook:My central point has always been the lazy, intentionally ignorant electorate. Above all.
TommyJay @ 5:32pm,
“It is so transparently pathetic and bogus.”
This gives me hope. It’s a sign they no longer control the message. Also, they are mediocrities. Pathetic is the best they can do. Mediocrities can be overcome.
As Michael Malice points out: “The enemy class is not made up of impressive people.”
A picture of Walz I saw (I think) on Legal Insurrection reminded me of the Pac Man video game character.
Also (hat tip SCOTTtheBADGER) Walz reminds me of the Snuggles toilet paper bear.
Sgt.+Joe+Friday wrote: “His supposedly avuncular – or Dad-like – teddy bear quality is apparently what the left believes to be his big selling point … I don’t see it. There’s something about the guy that’s just…off. I got the same vibe from Tim Kaine when he was Clinton’s running mate.”
Agreed. I think he’s more like Chucky the evil ventriloquist’s dummy.
SteveS wrote: “Walz is disingenuous, calculating, and as smarmy as they come. It’s palpably sickening.”
Ditto.
Kate, Richard F Cook, and Niketas Choniates are also spot on. Anyone who votes for this awful ticket deserves the disasters that will follow!
How is Walz like a teddy bear except in body shape?
@ Dax > “Anyone who votes for this awful ticket deserves the disasters that will follow!”
Unfortunately, if the awful ticket wins (by whatever means), the disasters will also fall on those who didn’t vote for it, probably even harder.
Seems appropriate here, as I’m sure Sarah would have added this interview to her list.
One of the shortest posts I’ve ever seen there; check it for the embedded links.
https://accordingtohoyt.com/2024/08/28/this-is-the-year-of-the-white-rabbit-reprise/
Tim “The Tampon Man” Walz reminds me irresistibly of Elmer Fudd.
crasey,
Thanks for that link. However, I think Whittle is too naive in his assessment. He says we just need to keep speaking out to break the uniformity. That’s true as long as the “subject in the Asch experiment” is able to hear us. And that’s the rub. The entire media and Democrat propo machine is built to keep that middle 40% from ever hearing from the conservative side. That’s the “fortress” I’m talking about.
In the early morning I listen to talk radio 680 AM(also on iHeart Radio on the internet) here in Boston and Kamala is not getting any love. The audience is mostly working class by their accents. There are people calling in from all over the country, not just locals. I’m guessing that there is a lot of under-the-radar talk shows out there that are un-noticed by the MSM that are getting the word out.
Addressing the news blackout by the Regime Media, as noted by physicsguy and Paul in Boston, Matt Taibbi’s Substack post today is very much on point.
One of the reasons I read his work, other than his consistent line of well-informed snark, is that he is a Democrat Liberal of the old days (perhaps huxley will weigh in on that) who is appalled at what has become of “his party” and its prior (alleged) principles.
This is an important post and definitely RTWT.
My reaction: having seen what the DNC and Chicago police did in 1968 to suppress dissent within their own party*, why didn’t they transfer the “question authority” mantra to their own leadership and “connected” members?
The only difference that I can see between now and then is that the Regime Media is totally complicit in the censorship, instead of being just generally biased toward the left (as Taibbi amply demonstrates).
As the maxim says: When someone tells you who they are, believe them.
https://www.racket.news/p/activism-uncensored-at-dnc-protests
*(There were no “pouncing Republicans” at the time, or Taibbi chooses not to mention them, until Nixon started using the fracas to promote his campaign.)
NOTE: I have a late shift today, hence the early comment during breakfast, but probably won’t be catching up to the news again until the week-end. We’re starting to close up shop for the winter.
I really hate living in interesting times.
Regarding the Harris-Walz nexus, could it be that two psychos are better than one?
(Or maybe the consensus amongst the Dem-olition experts is that by appearing cheek to cheek they’ll cancel out each other’s psychosis…kinda like noise reduction…)
To be sure, TRUMP, TRUMP, TRUMP, TRUMP, TRUMP….
crossing the streams, or they might as well summon the stay puff marsh mallow man,
‘choose the form of your destroyer’
‘dialing back the ambient noise’ we see what they intend for this country, and it seems the press is intent on forcing it on us, ‘by hook or by crook, in a house with a mouse (as much as we )don’t like green eggs and ham’
This Waltz -Harris “interview” will be akin to Stalin being interviewed in 1940 by some reporter from Izvestia or Pravda.
The toughest question they will receive will be something like ” what is your favorite ice cream flavor” or “do you prefer cats or dogs?”
And yet, millions of “adults” will watch this stupid charade and will come away impressed with the experience and intellect of Waltz and the Cackler.
Un-F’n- believable.
do that many people watch cnn, I know the nets will simmer all sorts of bits through out, like bad gumbo
Pathetic is the best they can do. Mediocrities can be overcome.
As Michael Malice points out: “The enemy class is not made up of impressive people.” — Rufus TF
I’m not going to disagree with you or myself, however I do believe that we have to careful with that type of thinking.
Briefly, there are a few impressive thinkers on the left (IMO), usually behind the scenes, and sometimes they have great and negative influence.
The Harris campaign is pathetic because she is a very pathetic intellect, and probably the rot of power and privilege has taken its toll over the years. I also believe that she has gotten some terrible advice over the years about her presentation style, but I don’t think that is the dominant factor.
It’s in the news today that the Harris campaign staff is in shambles. Again and again. She can’t manage a small group of subordinates.
Now I’m considering “recent” history, say a century, where there have been brilliant actions from the left with deep and very long lasting negative consequences for what was the American ideal. Republicans fight battles and skirmishes, while the left thinks about the long multi-generational war.
Assassinating Pres. McKinley. The public education system, primary and secondary. The federal income tax. Unionizing the federal workforce. Obamacare. The federal seizure of the student loan system.
I’m sure there is plenty more I can’t remember off the top of my head.
well Republicans say GOPe, have given up the battlefield, yes in the 60s, they did little to slow public sector unions, to use one example, and they were all taken over, the 16th amendment was a gradual process, those that did stand up like Goldwater in the 60s, to use one example were crushed, he still retained a modicum of influence, of course
Reagan did put up a valiant effort, but it can be charitably said, his successors dropped the ball, in small ways and large,
Bill Bennett really thought he could reform Education, but that wasn’t the reason the department was instituted in the first place’
‘we don’t need no thought control’ that’s we got, the same happened with the Iron Lady across the Pond, and those who stabbed her in the back,
George HW Bush certainly surrendered 100 yards easy, to keep the metaphor alive,
with the tax compromise, with the peace dividend which was squandered, of course Bill Clinton was worse, by a geometric factor,
Obamacare was secured by a whole host of strategems, including McCain’s kabuki resistance, McConnell’s active compliance against the Tea Party, was Vietnam, an exercise to diminish the patriotism of the people, instead what as ostensibly the goal to fight Communism, the way it was conducted
suggests that, as it was with the last Expedition into the East, this phase ended with the Kabul capitulation and the Al Hijra,
There are those who will say that in the 60s what could Republicans be expected to do, that being squarely in the center of nearly 60 years of Democrat dominance of both Houses of Congress.
(And this is why it’s Leftist misdirection to blame the Right for “McCarthyism”. While McCarthy himself was a Republican, the House Committee on Un-american Activities was usually chaired by Democrats during the “blacklist” era.)
But it’s exactly that which created today’s GOPe. The Republicans who did well in that period 1935 – 1997 were the people who used their minority position strategically to extract appropriations. And the people in the leadership positions now disproportionately got their start in that time or came up when people from that time were numerically dominant. Many of them mastered the art of mouthing conservative principles when needful, combined with excellent constituent service and the bringing home of much pork in barrels. Consequently they rise high on the powerful committees and are used to letting the Dems get what they want so that their own cronies can get paid.
The Democratic Party has no enemies to the Left and the GOPe has no friends to the Right. They backstabbed Trump, the TEA Party, and Gingrich and no doubt will do the same if Trump is elected again.
well I am looking at the big picture, when they could have put up resistance they didnt, so the Dems went all on in the Vietnam project exactly why, and why was it fought so poorly, they went all in the Great Society, perhaps following Michael Harrington’s misunderstanding,
McCarthy perhaps not in the most tactful ways did pick at prog dominance in the Agencies, was there a perfect way, tell us how, the Communists used the depression to seed the apparat, publications like the New Yorker for instance set the mood,
https://leadandgold.blogspot.com/
when I read the Wise Men the first effort by Thomas and Isaacson, I saw the contempt they had to anyone to the right of say Adlai Stevenson, of course the notion that anyone like Whitaker Chambers would have anything to tell us, much less Nixon,
they saw Nelson Rockefeller as their cat spaw, in the party, the Mitt Romney of his day, with more heterodox habits,
@miguel:McCarthy perhaps not in the most tactful ways did pick at prog dominance in the Agencies,
McCarthy is as responsible for the second Red Scare as the Republicans are for the Klan and Southern racism: i. e. not at all. He was riding a wave, and the Dems of today blame it all on him to airbrush their own role in it.
one of the flaws of Nixon, was he was un incumbered by ideology, so he allowed
too much of Rockefeller influence, into his cabinet and adjunct advisors, so Kissinger who was a mediocre strategist, became a major force, unlike say Hitchens or Hersh I don’t paint him with the Vader mask to Nixon’s Emperor, but he was out of his depth, hence he was easily parodied in the Pink Panther and even a Wild Wild West film, this naivete about Mao, created the world we see now, there really isn’t a difference between East Asia and Eurasia, in point of fact it was a matter of degree,
but he was a square, in the parlance of the hip, and that is as unforgivable as actually trying to stabilize policy in South East Asia, which he didn’t do very well
the Stalinist retreads like Chomsky even though he styled himself an Anarchist, it took Horowitz, a former fellow traveller to really anatomize him, so he attacks Huntington for his role in the hamlets in the Neo Mandarins, but the 80s he’s comparing Reagan to Hitler, I’m not making this up,
Perlstein a leftist in good standing did seem to understand something of the enemy, he was facing, so he spent a generation dismantling the public face of both Nixon and Reagan, as with Frances Fitzgerald a figure which is probably out of note, actually she should be shunned for how she misread everything, first in Vietnam then everywhere else,
in the pop culture lane we probably find Joan Didion and her drive bys first on her native California, then Central America and then Miami, which I didnt recognize in her portrait, but then I wasn’t supposed to,
that was a bit of a ramble I must admit
https://twitchy.com/amy-curtis/2024/08/29/abc-news-rejects-kamalas-hot-mic-request-n2400287
https://x.com/HeyTammyBruce/status/1828936256723824680
“….Harris says ‘My values have not changed’ in first interview…”
Well she’s right about that, at least.