When Kamala Harris takes the debate stage on Tuesday night, it will be one of just a handful of times she has fielded any unscripted questions since becoming the nominee. While Harris and her team appear to believe that the vice president can cruise into the Oval Office on “vibes” alone, polling data and basic common sense suggest that the coordinated media blackout may be a big turnoff with voters.
According to national pollster Frank Luntz, as of September 5, “The Trump-Vance ticket has done a combined 38 interviews since August 6, compared to only 1 for Harris-Walz.” A separate Newsbusters analysis found that “from July 22 to August 6, about two weeks before he was added to the ticket, Walz appeared on MSNBC, PBS, CNN, and Fox News a total of ten times.” He has since vanished from the airwaves.
Harris has consistently extolled the virtues of the press and made vague promises to do more interviews. But with early voting starting on September 22 in three states, there now appears to be a strong possibility that voters will begin casting ballots with Harris having done only the single sit-down interview – a softball-filled lovefest on CNN with Walz by her side.
Such a development would be a shocking departure from the norm in American politics. Typically presidential candidates sit for dozens of interviews where journalists have the opportunity to press them on issues that are important to voters. This is particularly important in Harris’s case, since she was just elevated to become her party’s nominee several weeks ago.
Yet Harris surrogates have dismissed the idea that interviews are even important at all. When Harris staffer Michel Tyler was asked on CNN if Harris would commit to more interviews, he deflected, stating, “We will commit to engage with the voters directly,” apparently referring to Harris’s rallies where she reads scripted remarks on stage.
In a recent interview, political professor Dafydd Townley likewise stated that Harris and Walz prefer large events because “they need to introduce themselves to the American public. While this is an opportunity to discuss policy, as much as anything else, it’s about engaging with targeted audiences in critical states.”
However, none of these events feature follow-up questions or opportunities for voters to ask Harris questions about individual issues or why she has completely reversed her position on a slew of important policies. Critics have also noted that her website until this very week did not contain an issues page that explains what she stands for or against.
Some sympathetic media outlets have recontextualized Harris’s lack of substance as a pivot to “vibes.” They assert that she is generating “joy” and “goodwill” and an ephemeral feeling of positive energy that is more potent than any actual political platform. A recent New Republic article stated that, for Harris, “a detailed platform will hurt her campaign more than it will help.” As Harris surrogate Ian Sams put it, “We don’t have time to sit around and think about why, over the last few years, certain things may have happened or may not have happened.”
While these excuses may have placated a corporate media that is all-in for Harris, the American people are less satisfied. After an initial polling surge following Biden’s exit from the race and the DNC Convention, Harris now appears to be in a slide heading into the home stretch of campaign season.
According to a Harvard-Harris poll out this week, Harris and Trump are now locked in a dead heat. At this point in 2020, Biden was ahead of Trump by 10 points in the same poll, while Hillary Clinton led Trump by seven points in 2016. A New York Times/Siena poll and Pew Research poll also out this week found virtually identical results.
Venerated political pollster Nate Silver has predicted the high water mark of Harris’s polling may have already come and passed. Harris would likely need a national vote advantage of at least +3 to ensure a victory in the Electoral College, and currently she is trending in the wrong direction.
This polling trend makes Harris’s debate against Trump on Tuesday all the more important. If she performs well, responds effectively to tough questions (should the ABC moderators ask any) and clearly articulates her agenda, it may be enough to carry her through to November without doing another interview.
If Harris performs poorly, however, she will likely be forced to sit for a number of interviews to attempt to right the ship. In Biden’s case, the interviews after his disastrous debate performance only confirmed what viewers had seen on stage and served as the final blows for his re-election campaign.
Harris’s record as vice president further suggests that more on-the-record interviews would hurt rather than help her campaign. Harris’s first sit-down interview after being tapped to lead the administration’s response to the border crisis, where she infamously said “and I haven’t been to Europe” after being called out on lying about going to the border, has continued to haunt her campaign. A year later, when Today Show host Craig Melvin asked Harris about whether the administration should change course in its COVID-19 strategy, Harris responded: “It is time for us to do what we have been doing, and that time is every day. Every day, it is time for us to agree that there are things and tools that are available to us to slow this thing down.”
Similarly confusing word salads have abounded in most of Harris’s public remarks, including her sole interview with CNN since becoming the nominee. As a result, it seems the Harris campaign has simply decided that they’ll let surrogates and the media make Harris’s case for her.
But Americans want to hear directly from their leaders – not scripted on a teleprompter or filtered through a friendly media pundit. Should Harris continue to hide from reporters and ignore interview requests, voters will rightly grow more and more suspicious. Ultimately, Harris’s unwillingness to face any sort of scrutiny may cost Democrats the White House.
Andrew Shirley is a veteran speechwriter and AMAC Newsline columnist. His commentary can be found on X at @AA_Shirley.
