In addition to Vice President Kamala Harris’s poor performance, the visual setup of her CNN interview has been heavily criticized.
The critiques, which are all justified, highlight several issues:
- The interview was conducted in a strangely dark setting.
- The location appeared cluttered, with scattered coffee cups.
- Kamala Harris wore a gray suit that blended into the dim environment.
- Tim Walz, who has been accused of stolen valor, towered over Kamala, making her appear diminutive.
- CNN's Dana Bash also appeared much taller than Kamala.
- Kamala was positioned furthest from the camera, giving the impression she had brought her father to a job interview.
- Her posture made her look even smaller, barely able to rest her elbows on the table.
- Overall, she seemed like a child at the grown-up table.
- The scene simply lacked a presidential feel.
- Tim Walz resembled a lawyer or chaperone.
On top of that, her interview performance was disastrous, as previously reported by Breitbart News. Overall, this was a major misstep by the Harris campaign.
To me, she seemed small, frightened, and timid.
What’s puzzling is that her team chose this dark and empty setting for the interview.
Kamala Harris needs to project a presidential and commanding presence. Optics are crucial in presidential politics. While some might dismiss this as a shallow aspect of choosing a leader, I believe that understanding or hiring people who understand how to manage optics reflects the candidate’s competence.
I expected Kamala to excel in this interview, especially given the favorable conditions:
- A left-leaning news outlet
- A sympathetic interviewer
- Six weeks of preparation
- Awareness of the high stakes
- Guidance from the Obama team
Kamala Harris is not unintelligent. Her issues are twofold: 1) She hasn’t thoroughly thought through her policies, focusing only on what will help her get elected, and 2) She tends to falter under pressure.
In summary, she choked on Thursday night.
Bringing Tim Walz along was a poor choice that only added to the unflattering optics. Her responses were empty, even when Dana Bash provided her with softball questions that were more like multiple-choice answers:
"Generally speaking, how should voters view some of the changes you’ve made in your policies? Is it because you’ve gained more experience and knowledge, or because you’re running for president in a Democratic primary?"
It’s hard to imagine how poorly Kamala performed in parts of the interview that CNN likely edited out.
But those visuals, wow. Did Kamala think that flanking herself with Walz and Bash would make her appear like the commanding "ChairCackler of the Board"? If so, it backfired, giving off more of a "Bugsy Malone" vibe — an intellectual child struggling to play a grown-up.
Meanwhile, the Trump-Vance ticket is open to all interviewers, with former President Donald Trump even participating in hour-long, unscripted podcasts — something Kamala Harris would struggle to do without harming her campaign.
If I were Kamala, I’d be extra cautious because Joe Biden seems ready, rested, and eager to step in!
This version maintains the original points while presenting them in a slightly different style