Dana Bash conducted a better interview than I would have expected.  The answers by Kamala Harris and Tim Walz, though, were almost shocking.

Listening to the analysis by the CNN crew led by Abby Phillip afterward was as expected: the vice president moved the ball forward and claimed to be a change agent without any real change that one can believe.  When Kamala claimed to be committed to her values, I wondered whether she was admitting that she did not change any real opinions and supported the Biden administration programs.  Only former Bush staffer Scott Jennings pointed to the incongruities.

Going through the details of the Harris walk-backs, Bash tried to give Harris a lifeline, which Kamala did not take.  Harris claimed that her values did not change when asked how in 2019 she opposed fracking but said that in 2020 she had accepted it.  She says that in the White House, she would not oppose fracking, but the administration has restricted it on federal land.  How will this work in Pennsylvania?

On immigration, Harris wants to push the compromise legislation that she argued Trump opposed to help his campaign.  He opposed it since it would legitimize more illegal immigration.  She once argued that there is not criminality in migration, but now she says she would enforce border laws, but which ones does she mean?  As the CNN crew noted, the winds have changed, so she now has changed.  Instead of leading, she is following the polling on issues.

When asked about the decision by Biden to leave the race, she wanted everyone to believe that she was concerned about him, not herself.  This can humanize her and limit the belief that she is aggressive in gaining power.  She said she was making bacon for her family, but for average people, this is now expensive food.

Tim Walz made no apology for misstating his military record and implying that he used weapons in warfare.  He defended abortion when discussing infertility, attacking Vance on that issue.

Harris showed loyalty to Biden, defending his mental capacity, the economy (saying that they had to rescue it from Trump’s mismanagement of COVID), and Biden himself as a man.  All of this elevates her with the undecided.  So this interview was a plus for her campaign.

But it all belies the reality.  The economy is better than in 2021–22 but still unaffordable for many.  The border is still a mess, and the illegals are branching out to live in many blue states, where they will become part of the hidden population, giving more congressional seats as opposed to citizens.  Health care is less available for those who pay for it as waiting times has increased.  She still favors the “Green New Deal,” which will bankrupt this nation, but now she says we can drill and provide clean energy.  She said in a 2020 debate with Mike Pence that Biden would not ban fracking, but she never said that she had abandoned this view.  Clearly, her campaign has decided to use lawyerly statements.

Whereas Trump annoys many with his blunt statements, Harris splits hairs so finely that one can only conclude that she is dishonest, which has been her history when running for California attorney general and as the prosecutor in San Francisco.

The Trump campaign must learn from this interview, as she has tried to present herself as a regular person.  She did not explain her flip-flops, and the media will not expose them.

David Axelrod pointed out that Harris must make stark contrasts on issues that poll well.  Harris wants to exude joy rather than anger, which was evident at the interview.  Harris was disciplined, and most feel that Trump is not.

Trump must be more controlled.  There is still a good chance for Trump to win, but Harris did not embarrass herself, while getting a softball interview with few serious follow-up questions.

Image: Gage Skidmore via Flickr, CC BY-SA 2.0.