Kamala Harris Isn’t Verbally Skilled Enough To Hide Her Party’s Extremism

Unquestionably, Democrats have this century’s most inarticulate ticket. Harris’ NBC interview word salad on so-called “gender-affirming care” and Walz’s profanity regarding Elon Musk are recent examples of their challenges in communication. This is not simply a problem for Harris and Walz but for a party dependent on veiling their extreme policies beneath moderate words. 

Just look at Harris’ answer to NBC’s very simple question: “Do you believe that transgender Americans should have access to gender-affirming care in this country?” Harris responded, “I think we should follow the law,” before attempting to escape by deflecting to Donald Trump. When forced back to the question, she said: “I believe that people, as the law states, even on this issue about federal law, that that is a decision that doctors will make in terms of what is medically necessary. I’m not going to put myself in a position of a doctor.”

Harris’ poor showing with the press — of which she has a long history — is bad for any party. It is particularly dangerous for Democrats. That’s because, for decades, the Democrat Party has only succeeded when its presidential candidates have sounded like the moderates they were not. Once successful, they veer left, but before they can veer, they must first get there. To get there, they must sound moderate. And to sound moderate they must effectively communicate.

Barack Obama is a good example. His most common compliment remains his “charisma.” “No drama Obama” always seemed cool under pressure and passed that along to his audience. Even Biden in 2020, managed to pull it off — not so much by communicating but with his long, nondescript Senate record and then by using a large polling lead and Covid as shields to avoid campaigning. In effect, he communicated by not communicating and got away with it.

Not so for Harris and Walz. Harris, in her desperation to say nothing, resorts to saying everything, only to wind up not having said anything. And Walz when cornered falls back on his “knucklehead” defense or cusses — vulgarity being the adult version of a baby crying because it lacks another way to communicate.

This is not what Democrats planned. They had hoped to shoehorn Harris into the White House through limited exposure in the short, three-month campaign window. But Democrats’ “Hide Harris” strategy soon started to stall. Rather than help Harris communicate, running mate Tim Walz only added fuel to the ticket’s inarticulate inferno with questions about his military service and Tiananmen Square lie.

So Harris increasingly has had to do what she doesn’t do well: go before the media. And as Harris’ poll numbers have gone from stalling to falling, her campaign has scrambled to find suitably softball venues for her. 

Harris’ problem — beyond being unable to speak in public — is she lacks Biden’s 2020 advantages. She lacks a moderate record, a large polling lead, and a pandemic excuse to be a recluse. Therefore, she must do her own convincing, and that means doing her own communicating. 

Harris’ candidacy is a balloon Democrats have inflated with hot air — and America is watching that air leak. As her polling lead shrinks, Harris is forced to do more rigorous interviews, such as her recent interview with Fox News’ Bret Baier. In one of these, the balloon is likely to pop, as it would have if she’d responded to a serious interviewer like she did on “The View” when asked if she would do anything differently than Biden has.

It is a big irony that Democrats, desperate to rid themselves of Biden’s communication failures, managed to pick someone worse. It’s an even bigger liability for a party dependent on its candidate’s communication skills to hide from the American people how extreme they are.

J.T. Young was a professional staffer in the House and Senate from 1987-2000, served in the Department of Treasury and Office of Management and Budget from 2001-2004, and was director of government relations for a Fortune 20 company from 2004-2023.