2024 U.S. Elections | Trump v Harris
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
He literally said that they were under a time constraint to finish the interview due to her lateness
And if 'we were going to do 25-30 minutes' then why is 28 not perfectly within that paramater? If anything, the Harris campaign let it ran longer than what they negotiated for 'maybe 20'.
It's like 1984 here, 'The party wants you to ignore the evidence of your eye and ear'
He claimed a few years ago he never had any plastic surgery. From the looks of it, he's changed his mind in recent years.
The old eye test!
According to Bret, Kamala showed up at 5:17. There was a 30 mins interview taking it to 5.47. They they had 13 mins to get the tape ready to air at 6pm.
If anything, it would make far more sense that it was Fox that needed to wrap up to meet the deadline. Kamala looked like she could have continued to expose Trump all day.
Sour grapes from Bret Baier because he didn't catch her with a gotcha moment.
Infact, it was him and Fox that got exposed as they played Trump being asked about him wanting to use the army against Americans, as opposed to using one of many of his quotes where he has said this, including the one one with Maria Bartiromo at the weekend.
Not only did they not use one of the original quotes from Trump, but they even cut short the one with Harris Faulkner where he said exactly the same to her about targeting Adam Schiff and Pelosi.
Fox are a propaganda machine. She went on there, held her own, didn't give and inch and dispelled a lot of the BS that they spew about her being low IQ or weak.
What would those two minutes have changed for Harris anyway to have her team end the interview?He literally said that they were under a time constraint to finish the interview due to her lateness
And if 'we were going to do 25-30 minutes' then why is 28 not perfectly within that paramater? If anything, the Harris campaign let it ran longer than what they negotiated for 'maybe 20'.
It's like 1984 here, 'The party wants you to ignore the evidence of your eye and ear'
I suspect both sides were looking for a viral moment and neither go what they wanted.
For Harris, it has less to do with preparation and everything to do with her natural speaking style. She's always talking like a prosecutor: trying to establish context, first discussing set-up facts and details, building a case. It's too slow to ever work in the type of fast paced environment like a hostile TV network. Her style of speaking simply doesn't work in that environment. She could prepare nonstop for weeks and it wouldn't matter, in my opinion. Someone like Newsom has a natural speaking style far more suited to going on a hostile TV network and getting interrupted because he's much more a quick on his feet and far better at adapting his points than Harris, who is more plodding and methodical. I think she was prepared just fine, she simply isn't suited to looking as good as someone like Newsom in those conditions. It's not like she ever was a quick thinker during the 2020 primaries.
Precisely. And after they already let it run way past the negotiated time allocation, Schrodinger staffers, I guess.
And the elephant in the room is this, what incentive does Bret Baier have not to specifically say that her people were waving at him to end it? He said she got what she wanted out of the interview, his words, not mine, wouldn't it be a big win for him to be able to say he pressured her so hard her people prematurely ended it?
The numbers you’re suggesting don’t make sense based on what Baier said though. Baier would have like this to go as long as possible I’m sure going into it, what interviewer wouldn’t, but he was expecting/hoping for a 30 minute interview, and they needed a hard starting point of 5:15 at the latest, which he says clearly, which brings them to approximately 5:45 so they have time to “turn the machine around”. To get the interview out at 6, they don’t have those 15 minutes to conduct more interview time. If they could use those 15 minutes and still get it out at 6, then they wouldn’t be saying “it needs to start at 5:15” for a (they’re aiming for) 30 minute interview
No, im sure she came in and thought it was going to be softball questions about her favorite recipes, what color she may paint the Oval Office and how she and Doug first met.
Come on man. She was well prepared, especially after some missteps on 60 mins.
She was never going give exact answers to "How many illegals have come in under your administration?" because be it 1mil or 10ml, there is no good answer.
The tactic was obviously to push back and put the onus back on Trump. The campaign have turned their attention almost solely onto Trump of the last few days and this was an extension of that.
Agreed. From what I've seen from her over the years, she is most comfortable being the questioner (Kavanaugh, Bill Barr etc), and when she's being interviewed, she prefers to have friendly interviews with people who generally already agree with her about what's being discussed. This was the first time i think I've seen her in an antagonistically hostile environment where the interviewer was predictably only going to ask absurdly hard questions, particularly as he was pressed for time.
Also, agreed on Gavin. He and Buttigieg have proven they can go into the guts of the machine at Fox and have their way with them. That's how its done.
This is a good post and I think why the debate format against Trump suited her. While I’m not his number one fan, Mayo Pete’s style suits him well on Fox because he is so fast at getting to counterpoints. Not sure if that’s his Oxford debating or military intel/“military Uber” background or just a personality thing.
@Raoul leaving aside the circular he said she said stuff, I'm thinking that perhaps you're not used to these kind on interviews in the states.
This seemed like a totally standard political interview by the standards over here. Every single politician gets interviewed like this on a regular basis.
Having seen this style all the time, I think she did fine. I wouldn't bat an eyelid if a politician had a performance like this on contentious issues over here.
This seemed like a totally standard political interview by the standards over here. Every single politician gets interviewed like this on a regular basis.
Having seen this style all the time, I think she did fine. I wouldn't bat an eyelid if a politician had a performance like this on contentious issues over here.
I suspect its different where you are. In the US, most interviews aren't like going on Hardtalk or getting interrogated by the likes of Tim Sebastian or Mehdi Hasan. They are usually quite cordial, where candidates typically go on channels that aren't going to embarrass them with absurdly unfair questions. A few notable exceptions are Obama with Bill O'Reilly during the Super Bowl HT show in 2014 and Obama with Chris Wallace (then at Fox) in 2016.
Everything she said was a viral moment because she attacked Trump with every response, leaving Fox very little to run back. Baire admitted it himself.
That was clearly the plan, so to say "She came in with a false sense of security" is just a really poor observation.
Its hard to say anything went viral other than the interview itself; specifically how it was conducted and concluded. Even though Harris had much more to lose going in, neither Harris nor Baier can claim that they came out of the interview in better shape than they were going into it. At the end of the day, it won't move the needle, and if Harris wins, it will probably guarantee Fox are shut out of future interviews with the sitting POTUS.
Fox News and their selective editing of Trump is very much viral...
As is the contrast between the lovefest earlier in the day with Trump with his audience of GOP plants, to the attempted verbal assassination of Harris just hours later....
Will it move the needle, it could. I can almost guarantee there will not no Fox News viewer who will have seen that interview and flipped from Harris to Trump. Far more likely the other way because she showing she has backbone and she is not the dummy they have portrayed her as.
While he looks like a pussy who is making excuses and dropout out of debates, 60 mins and most recently CNBC. He knows he pooped his adult diaper during the debate, so he is just going to play it safe and keep running the trans and border attack ads for the next three weeks.
Please please please make this happen, takes a special kind of talent to swing NY red by 10 pts and lost 5 house seats.
The first clip was a good moment for her imo. It was generally a mistake to negotiate that FNC be allowed to interject video in what was supposed to be an interview, not a tv segment.
That Fox interview did nothing to change the obvious: the race is still 50-50
Recommend listening to David Plouffe on Pod Save America.
Exactly, and it's one of the key reasons I would’ve much preferred Newsom to run in her place, had we had a normal primary.
On the other side, you’ve got a loose cannon, completely lacking in attention to detail, swayed by whoever happens to be in his ear last.
'Murrica!!!
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/harr...3da6456e364/liveblog_67110899e4b0e33eefb1fb2d
Trump just pulled out of another interview with NBC. He's falling apart before our eyes and a bigger deal should be made of it. Dems shouldn't push the 'unhinged and unstable' line they are pushing, it should be 'impotent and incapable', which undercuts his strong man image.
Trump just pulled out of another interview with NBC. He's falling apart before our eyes and a bigger deal should be made of it. Dems shouldn't push the 'unhinged and unstable' line they are pushing, it should be 'impotent and incapable', which undercuts his strong man image.
David Plouffe is one of the best American political strategists of the last 40 years alongside James Carville, we will see if he can deliver again in a few weeks
Good to hear a Harris staffer sounding just a little bit bullish. Been a while.
Plough seems to have come a long way from predicting Hillary had a "100% chance of winning" in 2016.
Newsom / Whitmer would've made a pretty solid ticket imo. If Harris loses, I suspect both will be in the mix for 28.
Yup exactly. Most interviews here are robust. It's pretty normal to hear a journalist arguing back and forth with a politician. And being used to that, I thought she did fine.
I haven't watched her interviews, what kind of hard questions has she been getting?
I'm just Occam's razoring this: Fox set this up as a hit. They literally had pre-planned photos of (beautiful white) girls who'd been killed by evil nasty immigrants ready to roll. The whole tone was one of dominance and overpowering to try and fluster into a meme, which would then be the story.
For me, they also had this 'she ran away' narrative ready to go in advance, in case they failed to get their moment. Which they did. Because she did fine.
For me, they also had this 'she ran away' narrative ready to go in advance, in case they failed to get their moment. Which they did. Because she did fine.
Just watch the first interaction, it's indicative of the rest of the interview.
Did you expect a 6 point swing?
Donald Trump could piss on the flag and shoot a Bald Eagle and it may only change the race by half a point.
Is Plouffe as good as he was in 2008 though? The media landscape has changed massively since then. As has the demographics of the country and the nature of the opponent and his party.
It would be incredible if he just grew up and closed by saying “I’ll be voting for you. I have daughters and I can’t imagine having a sex offender as President. One that will take away women’s rights. I hope all my listeners do the same”
No amount of money will ever replace the feeling that he could die with that is “I decided the 2024 Election”.
It’s clearly the right thing to do and would inflate his ego in a way nothing else could.
I mean, obviously he won’t. But it’d melt the internet and he could sport that shit eating grin. Mainly because he’d be able to wear it all and say ‘You can’t cancel me bitch’ or whatever his latest catchphrase is.
We won't know until Nov 5th but for now the Harris campaign has run a pretty tight and discipline operation regardless of good or bad news cycle, that's generally a good thing even though it gets some outlets pissed for lack of scoops.
In general I think Plouffe was a bit overrated since anybody can win 08 as Obama campaign manager (the Clinton campaign dropped the ball a lot that primary) and they failed to build on the unprecedented grassroots energy of that election, but to his credits he ran a pretty good 2012 campaign in a rather tough environment with Obama favorables underwater.
Agree, except one thing: the stimulus package. That was needed for the middle class as well, and of course for businesses. It helped pay the bills and retain staff. Without it we personally would have been in trouble (we are middle class).
The other thing is, a lot of that money ended up in fraudulent hands. Especially individuals with ‘fake’ companies and of course lots of republicans who voted against the stimulus bills.
Somehow it’s a lot more jarring when he throws that into a relatively calm story, compared to when he’s already ranting and raving.
It's a funny clip but why would this be specifically relevant to me?
It's a funny clip but why would this be specifically relevant to me?
I thought you were part of us in the Van Jones is crying laughing emoji club.
I think what he was talking about there is the First Step Act.
So his old racist ass was actually against it but just did it as a favor to his son in law and big celebs like Kim K and West.
So his old racist ass was actually against it but just did it as a favor to his son in law and big celebs like Kim K and West.