Kamala Harris Defends Policy Stance in Heated Fox News Interview

[Eric Loh]

7 minutes ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

It was a terrible campaign mistake driven by desperate measures needed - they even have Obama out haranguing black men to vote for Kamala as the polls show a lot of them aint gonna vote, and many are switching back to Trump.  The interview confirmed what the GOP supporters thought about her (and more), and the Dems supporters saw it through rose coloured glasses. But most of those still undecided saw it for what it was - a train wreck. IMO she lost a chunk of the white 'female' vote after that interview.  It looks to me like Kamala is causing a lot of white women and black men to not vote this time, and a bunch of them to actually vote for Trump.

 

This is a single term election only - it is a unique election in that there has only been one POTUS who lost Office and then won it back one term later (Cleveland in 1893). Many might not like Trump (he aint 'personable'), but they think Trump for another four years has got to be better than the last 4 years of Biden-Harris. Plus Trump has won over people he lost in 2020, and Kamala has not 'won over' people enough to view her as a suitable person to be POTUS.  

So much for your opinion regarding white female voter, By the way, Trump base has not broadened as he alienated many independents. In fact his legacy is pure poison for independents. 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/oct/08/white-women-voters-harris-trump

[Fat is a type of crazy]

2 hours ago, dinsdale said:

Politically there's no need for 60 minutes for Trump. He's done enough interviews and the Dems are in trouble.  I'm sure this is what his advisers would be saying. 

I think it's because he's become seriously unstuck during recent interviews such as the Bloomberg one and the Latino one. Serious normal questions where they expect a detailed answer and he is found wanting. Slogans and belittling others can only take you so far. 

[TroubleandGrumpy]

10 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

So much for your opinion regarding white female voter, By the way, Trump base has not broadened as he alienated many independents. In fact his legacy is pure poison for independents. 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/oct/08/white-women-voters-harris-trump

You remind me of a famous (in Aust) line from a great Aussie movie (The Castle) - 'Tell Him He's Dreaming".

[earlinclaifornia]

2 minutes ago, Fat is a type of crazy said:

I think it's because he's become seriously unstuck during recent interviews such as the Bloomberg one and the Latino one. Serious normal questions where they expect a detailed answer and he is found wanting. Slogans and belittling others can only take you so far. 

 Three weeks is a long time for him to hide the reality in this election

[Yellowtail]

9 minutes ago, Fat is a type of crazy said:

I think it's because he's become seriously unstuck during recent interviews such as the Bloomberg one and the Latino one. Serious normal questions where they expect a detailed answer and he is found wanting. Slogans and belittling others can only take you so far. 

Unlike Harris, who provided precise, direct and detailed answers to every question. 

[Yellowtail]

7 minutes ago, earlinclaifornia said:

 Three weeks is a long time for him to hide the reality in this election

Biden hid for six months in 2020

[John Drake]

4 hours ago, theblether said:

 

20 Harris staffers speak to Politico. This is the Pennsylvania team. Politico are apparently readying "what really happened" at Fox. 

 

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/10/16/kamala-harris-pennsylvania-campaign-drama-00183844

 

 

 

That link has the ugliest picture of Kamala Harris I've ever seen.

[placeholder]

1 hour ago, Yagoda said:

So you don't live in that frozen landscape You've never been there You don't know anything about the oil industry up there and you get your news from a few propaganda arms and then you pontificate and make the world a dumber place

If you have evidence that the sources I cited have given false information, please share some proof of that. Otherwise, put up or...

[Fat is a type of crazy]

1 hour ago, Yellowtail said:

Unlike Harris, who provided precise, direct and detailed answers to every question. 

They had some very loaded questions - has your 4 years been terrible or very terrible? Hard to answer. But yes neither her nor Trump are the greatest at answering questions - but he's worse and since there's a 100 other reasons that Trump is a terrible option - whereas Kamala in my opinion is quite reasonable on most things - picking one because the other is so bad does make sense. 

Edited October 18 by Fat is a type of crazy

[John Drake]

2 hours ago, Thailand said:

Baier thought she was quite good and caught him out that should count for something?

 

"in the interim we had a good exchange"--quoting Baier. I don't hear him say what you claim he said.

[Celsius]

Jesus Wept, November 5th can't come fast enough.

[Yellowtail]

12 hours ago, Fat is a type of crazy said:

They had some very loaded questions - has your 4 years been terrible or very terrible? Hard to answer. But yes neither her nor Trump are the greatest at answering questions - but since there's a 100 other reasons that Trump is a terrible option - whereas Kamala in my opinion is quite reasonable on most things - picking one because the other is so bad does make sense. 

I am the opposite. I like Trump's policies better than Harris's policies, so I have 100 reasons that make Harris a terrible option. 

 

Again, "<derogatory nicknames, intentional misspellings or personal remarks will be removed.>" is just not that convincing to me. 

 

 

Edited October 19 by metisdead

[Yellowtail]

10 minutes ago, John Drake said:

 

"in the interim we had a good exchange"--quoting Baier. I don't hear him say what you claim he said.

That happens a lot. 

[dinsdale]

3 hours ago, LosLobo said:

Let’s cut through the noise:

1. Boilerplate Pablum? Harris discussed real issues—immigration, healthcare, and gun control—clearly outlining her administration's strategies. Dismissing them as 'boilerplate' just shows you’re not engaging with the content.

2. ‘Mentioning the other candidate once a minute’? You call that weak? It’s called context. She’s drawing contrasts, which is crucial in an election. Voters deserve to know the differences in leadership.

3. Introducing her own proposals? She did! If you want a detailed policy plan, look for it instead of nitpicking how often she referenced Trump. Your preference for soundbites over substance is limiting the discussion.

If you really want to engage, listen to the whole interview and consider the points she made rather than just counting mentions. That’s how real discourse happens.

What you seem to dismiss is you can make as many points as you like but not answer the question. It's a very simple concept. You either answer the question or you don't. We all know how it goes. We've all seen politicians not answer direct questions with diversions. It staggers me that you think Harris actually answered the direct questions put to her. Guess that's why you think she should be the President of the United States. Like minds i.e. empty.

[dinsdale]

3 hours ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

You remind me of a famous (in Aust) line from a great Aussie movie (The Castle) - 'Tell Him He's Dreaming".

Great movie.

[LosLobo]

1 hour ago, dinsdale said:

What you seem to dismiss is you can make as many points as you like but not answer the question. It's a very simple concept. You either answer the question or you don't. We all know how it goes. We've all seen politicians not answer direct questions with diversions. It staggers me that you think Harris actually answered the direct questions put to her. Guess that's why you think she should be the President of the United States. Like minds i.e. empty.

Interesting how you criticize Harris for not answering questions directly, yet your response is nothing but empty rhetoric.

You toss out buzzwords like ‘simple concept’ and ‘empty minds’ without backing them up with any real reasoning or evidence.

It’s almost like your own lack of logic comes from an empty mind—one that prefers shallow, simplistic answers over engaging with complex issues.

Maybe that’s why you’re struggling with the concept of nuance.

[Hanaguma]

2 hours ago, Fat is a type of crazy said:

They had some very loaded questions - has your 4 years been terrible or very terrible? Hard to answer. But yes neither her nor Trump are the greatest at answering questions - but he's worse and since there's a 100 other reasons that Trump is a terrible option - whereas Kamala in my opinion is quite reasonable on most things - picking one because the other is so bad does make sense. 

I am sure you could provide an example or two of these "very loaded questions".  Feel free to check the transcript. I would love to compare it to the 60 Minutes transcript, but for some reason it is unavailable...

[Hanaguma]

2 hours ago, John Drake said:

 

That link has the ugliest picture of Kamala Harris I've ever seen.

Well, she IS gonna turn 60 in a couple of days. Kind of strange for her to refer to herself as "a new generation of leadership". 

[Yellowtail]

5 minutes ago, LosLobo said:

Interesting how you criticize Harris for not answering questions directly, yet your response is nothing but empty rhetoric.

You toss out buzzwords like ‘simple concept’ and ‘empty minds’ without backing them up with any real reasoning or evidence.

It’s almost like your own lack of logic comes from an empty mind—one that prefers shallow, simplistic answers over engaging with complex issues.

Maybe that’s why you’re struggling with the concept of nuance.

Nuance like going on for ten minutes about Trump when asked how many illegals you let flood into the country? 

 

Or like claiming you're "follow the law" when asked if you still support your positions? 

 

 

[dinsdale]

12 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

I am the opposite. I like Trump's policies better than Harris's policies, so I have 100 reasons that make Harris a terrible option. 

 

Again, "<derogatory nicknames, intentional misspellings or personal remarks will be removed.>" is just not that convincing to me. 

 

 

If I was voting in the US Presidential Election my thoughts thoughts on this in no particular order would be:

Is illegal immigration a very big problem?

Is life expensive?

Is crime out of control (I'm thinking NY and LA with this one but could be anywhere)?

Is DEI a good thing?

Is the woke agenda a good thing?

Should female sports only be for females (by this I mean a person that can have a baby)?

Is the minority woke agenda being forced onto society?

Is censorship a problem?

Has my freedom of speech been reduced?

Is the world going to sht?

Should I have another beer and another bong?

Well the answer for me to the last one is easy

and yes there are plenty of other issues

 

 

[Fat is a type of crazy]

6 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

I am sure you could provide an example or two of these "very loaded questions".  Feel free to check the transcript. I would love to compare it to the 60 Minutes transcript, but for some reason it is unavailable...

A lot of it to me sounded like straight out Trump talking points - like he was doing it on behalf of Trump. Maybe you are used to that on Fox News. Normally they give the interviewee a chance to spruik some positives. Ask yourself if he would've been anything like that with Trump.

The approach to the immigration questions for example - yes it is an important and key issue and there are some terrible individual consequences - but the discussion was emotive noting that 'a large number of  men' had committed heinous crimes - no context or comparison to crime in general - asking for an apology three times regarding the tragic cases of the 3 ladies killed - I am not suggesting it is not important but that type of question is loaded with emotion and repeating it again after she made her statement was not fair and balanced in my opinion. He would repeat questions after she gave an answer that I consider was a reasonable response - played emotive Trump campaign ads focusing on obscure gender issues that are big Trump talking points  - talking about how Trump is seen as better for this and that as part of the  question e.g. saying how well Trump is going against her and attempts at gotcha questions - clearly more combative than he would be against Trump - played the wrong quote that lessened what Trump said - which Kamala picked him up on - and which the host admitted later but was too late  - finishing the  discussion of the Iran issue with a criticism with no ability for her to respond. 

If he treated Trump the same then no worries. 

 

[dinsdale]

17 minutes ago, LosLobo said:

Interesting how you criticize Harris for not answering questions directly, yet your response is nothing but empty rhetoric.

You toss out buzzwords like ‘simple concept’ and ‘empty minds’ without backing them up with any real reasoning or evidence.

It’s almost like your own lack of logic comes from an empty mind—one that prefers shallow, simplistic answers over engaging with complex issues.

Maybe that’s why you’re struggling with the concept of nuance.

I'm sorry but you have got no idea. If you think giving an answer to a question to which the answer requires a number (i.e. How many?) and not giving an answer with a number in it is answering said question then your deluded.

There are seven bananas. Q: How many bananas are there? A; There are seven bananas.

How Harris answers:

There are three apples

Q: How many apples are there?

A: Well I see a future where everyone will have apples. 

Q: How will you deal with inflation?

A: Well I was brought up in a middle class ..................................................

Q: How many illegal immigrants have crossed the border since you've been the VP?

A: Well yes the border is a problem but Trump ..................

 

[placeholder]

Poor Bret Baier. He's trying to pass off his defense of Donald Trump as a mistake.

 

"Baier said on “Special Report” on Thursday that he “did make a mistake” when it came to clips shown in the interview.

“I want to say that I did make a mistake,” Baier said, with Harris Faulkner also on his show, in a clip highlighted by Mediaite. “When I called for a sound bite, I was expecting a piece of ‘the enemy from within,’ from Maria Bartiromo’s interview, to be tied to the piece from your town hall, Harris, where you asked the former president about ‘the enemy from within.’”

https://thehill.com/homenews/media/4940441-baier-made-mistake-trump-clip-harris-interview/

 

This makes no sense. If Baier was expecting another clip to be shown, why didn't he say so when the wrong clip was shown? Thanks for the viral moment Brett. And for drawing attention to Trump's nasty piece of lunacy.

[Yellowtail]

29 minutes ago, Fat is a type of crazy said:

A lot of it to me sounded like straight out Trump talking points - like he was doing it on behalf of Trump. Maybe you are used to that on Fox News. Normally they give the interviewee a chance to spruik some positives. Ask yourself if he would've been anything like that with Trump.

The approach to the immigration questions for example - yes it is an important and key issue and there are some terrible individual consequences - but the discussion was emotive noting that 'a large number of  men' had committed heinous crimes - no context or comparison to crime in general - asking for an apology three times regarding the tragic cases of the 3 ladies killed - I am not suggesting it is not important but that type of question is loaded with emotion and repeating it again after she made her statement was not fair and balanced in my opinion. He would repeat questions after she gave an answer that I consider was a reasonable response - played emotive Trump campaign ads focusing on obscure gender issues that are big Trump talking points  - talking about how Trump is seen as better for this and that as part of the  question e.g. saying how well Trump is going against her and attempts at gotcha questions - clearly more combative than he would be against Trump - played the wrong quote that lessened what Trump said - which Kamala picked him up on - and which the host admitted later but was too late  - finishing the  discussion of the Iran issue with a criticism with no ability for her to respond. 

If he treated Trump the same then no worries. 

 

Yes, asking her how many illegals she allowed to flood across the border (which she never even attempted to answer) was right out of Trump talking points. 

 

It seems like an easy, straight forward question, does is not?

 

She/Biden cancelled all of the Trump border policies, and blamed the open border on not being able to pass her/Biden's amnesty bill. 

 

Seems to me like she was treated fairly, and I do not think she really answered much of anything. 

 

The gender issue is a big deal to a lot of people, and she dodged it. 

 

 

[dinsdale]

44 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Yes, asking her how many illegals she allowed to flood across the border (which she never even attempted to answer) was right out of Trump talking points. 

 

It seems like an easy, straight forward question, does is not?

 

She/Biden cancelled all of the Trump border policies, and blamed the open border on not being able to pass her/Biden's amnesty bill. 

 

Seems to me like she was treated fairly, and I do not think she really answered much of anything. 

 

The gender issue is a big deal to a lot of people, and she dodged it. 

 

 

An easy question to answer indeed but that's not what she was told to do. Her instructions were to evade every question and attack Trump at every opportunity. On Fox. Incredible. No votes would have moved from the Republican's to the Democrats that's for sure but the question is how many swing voters who watched that were lost to the Republicans. IMHO the losses would outweigh the gains. Substantially.

[Yellowtail]

3 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

An easy question to answer indeed but that's not what she was told to do. Her instructions were to evade every question and attack Trump at every opportunity. On Fox. Incredible. No votes would have moved from the Republican's to the Democrats that's for sure but the question is how many swing voters who watched that were lost to the Republicans. IMHO the losses would outweigh the gains. Substantially.

I think she should have been better prepared. She should have known all of these questions would be asked. 

 

 

[dinsdale]

20 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

I think she should have been better prepared. She should have known all of these questions would be asked. 

 

 

How couldn't she or her advisors? They must have which makes me think, as I said, the game plan was to avoid all questions and attack Trump. This takes the focus off both the past and the future in regards to their policies. IMHO if this was the case then it's a very ill-conceived plan by people who don't know what they're doing. Idiots advising an idiot.

[proton]

I watched it again, she never mentions any policies, apart from telling the interviewer to look them up on her website, which somebody else wrote and uploaded. She had plenty to defend, but the only answer to everything was Trump Trump Trump.  

[earlinclaifornia]

https://edition.cnn.com/2024/10/18/politics/video/bret-baier-mistake-kamala-harris-fox-news-interview-digvid

‘I did make a mistake’: Baier addresses contentious moment during Harris interview

Edited October 19 by metisdead
Oversize font reset to normal.

[Smokey and the Bandit]

17 hours ago, Eric Loh said:

 Trump is chronically late for interviews, press conferences and his own rallies. She masterfully adapted Trump’s penchant for lateness. 
 

She handled the interview well in spite of consistent interruptions and attempts to talk over her. Brilliant that she point out Trump’s deficiencies to the Fox audiences. 

"She handled the interview well in spite of consistent interruptions and attempts to talk over her. Brilliant that she point out Trump’s deficiencies to the Fox audiences"...........