Election 2024 Part III: Out with the old!

[lymond]

Moderator Action: Back to topic. Several posts deleted. Take it offline if you wish, but keep it away from here. Enough to worry about in this world to have to worry about each other. Cheers - lymond

 

[Sommerswerd]

I think it may help her even with people who don't watch the interview. Just hearing that she was willing to go on Fox may make a favorable impression since for years now, neither side has bothered engaging the other side by agreeing to an interview by the hostile network. It's the opposite of Hillary's "deplorables" comment. It signals that you want to be president for all Americans. It signals that you have the courage of your own convictions. It showed that she can hold her own in an unfriendly environment (women have to prove that they're tough; men enjoy the assumption that they are). In correcting Baier, she got to say things that right-siloed people might not previously even have heard about Trump. It's unlikely, in itself, to have actually won her a vote, but neither will it have lost her one, and it may add in an incremental way to people's positive impressions of her.

She can, for rest of the campaign call Trump a coward, both for dodging a second debate with her and for not being willing to submit himself to such hostile questioning.

Edit: Remorseless made some of the same points while I was typing.

There was another point in the interview where Baier tries to bait her by accusing her of calling Trump supporters "stupid", "dumb" or similar... as in "Are you saying that Trump voters are stupid?" and her excellent response was to immediately become aghast and respond "Of course not, I would never say such a thing about the American people!" To your point, a stark contrast with Hillary Clinton's infamous "deplorables" comment. Harris then went on to reference how Trump in fact, does constantly insult and degrade the American people who he sees as opponents, calling them "the enemy within" and similar, along with the usual barrage of calling people dumb, stupid, etc.

 

[Klaus Hergersheimer]

Brett made a huge mistake by interrupting Harris repeatedly. Women hate men who interrupt them or try to "mansplain" something. It may not make much of a difference to Fox viewers, but undecided women might view this and turn away from Donald the clown.

Harris did well in the interview, and hopefully she will bring this up in campaign speeches, pointing out how Benedict Donald is ducking interviews left, right, and center.

So if I'm reading you right: Harris doesn't actually answer the questions that are asked (preferring to answer the one she wished she was) and so thus Baier is "mansplaining" when trying to get her to answer what he asked...?
Is this what you mean?

Though I assume there is some sort of strategy here beyond conducting an interview, that I am missing. (rarely do I understand much of anything in this post-ideological world). Presumably it is to willingly get "beat up" on Fox, exclaim how mean they are and this only proves it, and thus have justification to never have to talk to them again. So why do it to begin with...

Ok now for a more serious question:

How does Kamala Harris become any better at interviews after this?

 

[Voidwalkin]

Though I assume there is some sort of strategy here beyond conducting an interview, that I am missing

I think the primary intention was really simple: win over Trump supporters. She's consistently said she wants to earn all votes. This has been said regarding every demographic. I don't really see a good reason to doubt her sincerity about that. Perhaps that it is doubted or frequently not even given consideration of having even potential sincerity is a sign of the times.

The other potentially influential factor, secondary to that, would be to stop the narrative she is hiding from the media. It is more difficult to argue that now.

BTW: times are more ideological than ever before!

 

[Zardnaar]

Other thing is the interview gets headlines. And she didn't screw it up.

Worst thing a politician can have is a quiet news day. Hence Trump's outrage comments. Gets people talking and spotlight on him.

 

[Klaus Hergersheimer]

It's funny because Tim Russert used to be like this kind of reporter all the time and was considered top-tier, but when Harris confronts someone like that, it's "heading into the lion's den".
That's what I mean by post ideology.

 

[Farm Boy]

Tbf Hiding from interviews is likely Trumps only option now. His most recent town hall he short circuited for like 40 min. For all the bluster about Biden supposedly having dementia that's mostly normal old age things Trump just had a tell tale moment of it. It's what my Grandmother used to to earlier in her diagnosis, lose her place entirely. Harris absolutely should hammer on this point though.

I looked a little into this, because it was more fun than most of the **** in the news. Apparently, he does behave like this fairly often while entertaining guests, just not on the campaign trail. But it kicked off when the 2nd member of his audience needed emergency medical care at the event. Assclown he may be, but he's been shot and had people die on him at these things now. Taking things back a notch when he sees people in distress in front of him and trying to vibe it up might be one of the first more human things I've seen him do.

 

[SemiLazyGamer]

We might be getting that October surprise: the judge in charge of Jack Smith's case against Trump has denied Trump's request to keep a new dossier sealed because of election considerations and will be unsealing it tomorrow.

The 5 page brief:

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.258149/gov.uscourts.dcd.258149.265.0_3.pdf

 

[Gori the Grey]

This is my favorite part:

Finally, and relatedly, Defendant claims that the “asymmetric release of charged allegations and related documents during early voting creates a concerning appearance of election interference.” Motion at 5. There is undoubtedly a public interest in courts not inserting themselves into elections, or appearing to do so. See id. at 6. But litigation’s incidental effects on politics are not the same as a court’s intentional interference with them. As a result, it is inf act Defendant’s requested relief that risks undermining that public interest: If the court withheld information that the public otherwise had a right to access solely because of the potential political consequences of releasing it, that withholding could itself constitute—or appear to be—election interference. The court will therefore continue to keep political considerations out of its decision-making, rather than incorporating them as Defendant requests

Finally, somebody turns his "election interference" BS around and says "either choice I make would impact the election (so I'm just going to do my own damn job the way I would do it if you were any other damn defendant.)"

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

In a segment reacting to his own contentious interview, Baier conceded that Harris may have gotten exactly what she wanted from that interview.
“I think she had a … a mission, that she wanted to do. And maybe, she wanted to have a viral moment, she wanted to have a pushback,” Baier said. “She came to Fox News and she wanted to have a ‘go after Donald Trump’ viral moment that plays on other channels, and on social media. And I think she may have gotten that.”

So, even Bret is saying Kamela got what she wanted from the interview.

Fox News host Bret Baier has said he "did make a mistake" during his interview on Wednesday with Vice President Kamala Harris and that he had intended to show a clip of Donald Trump making comments about "the enemy from within."

Oh, it was just an honest mistake. Oh you silly Bret

Baier added that he'd wanted to play both clips to show that Fox News had "asked him the question about that sentence and what he was trying to mean."

Why do people always need to ask Trump what he means just after he said what he means?

 

[Zardnaar]

In a segment reacting to his own contentious interview, Baier conceded that Harris may have gotten exactly what she wanted from that interview.
“I think she had a … a mission, that she wanted to do. And maybe, she wanted to have a viral moment, she wanted to have a pushback,” Baier said. “She came to Fox News and she wanted to have a ‘go after Donald Trump’ viral moment that plays on other channels, and on social media. And I think she may have gotten that.”

So, even Bret is saying Kamela got what she wanted from the interview.

Fox News host Bret Baier has said he "did make a mistake" during his interview on Wednesday with Vice President Kamala Harris and that he had intended to show a clip of Donald Trump making comments about "the enemy from within."

Oh, it was just an honest mistake. Oh you silly Bret

Baier added that he'd wanted to play both clips to show that Fox News had "asked him the question about that sentence and what he was trying to mean."

Why do people always need to ask Trump what he means just after he said what he means?

She clowned him imho.

 

[Sommerswerd]

Harris' lead in national average polling had been steadily slipping. She is down to a 2.1% lead on 538, a 1.6% lead on RCP and a 2.5% lead on Silver Bulletin. So even though she is still leading, she is well within the danger zone where she could win the popular vote, but still lose the election.

On a somewhat related note, apparently the FOX News interview Harris did with Baier was a hit:

Harris’ Fox News Interview Was a Ratings Smash Hit​

Vice President Kamala Harris’ interview with Fox News host Bret Baier was a ratings smash—netting over 7.1 million viewers only 20 days before the presidential election in November.

The Harris campaign’s gambit to sit down for an interview with the conservative-leaning cable news channel certainly got her message out to viewers. The contentious interview was the highest rated of all of Harris’ recent appearances on cable news shows during her media blitz—including her appearance on 60 Minutes, which was watched by 5.7 million viewers, according to early Nielsen data released by Fox News.

It also surpassed her September interview with CNN’s Dana Bash—another contentious back-and-forth which drew in 6.3 million viewers, according to Nielsen.

Even more people tuned in to watch a rerun of the Baier interview at 12:00 a.m., bringing the total viewership up to 8.5 million, Fox said.

About 882,000 of those viewers in the first broadcast were in the coveted 25-54 demographic, a number that grew to at least 1.2 million after the midnight broadcast, according to Fox.

Fox also broadcast an event with former President Donald Trump on the same day—a town hall in Georgia focused on womens’ issues moderated by Fox News host Harris Faulkner. The event, which was attended only by women, saw about 2.9 million viewers, with only about 338,000 viewers in the 25-54 age range.

However, the time slot could have affected viewership—Special Report with Bret Baier aired at 6:00 p.m., while the town hall aired at 11:00 a.m.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/harris-fox-news-interview-with-bret-baier-was-a-ratings-smash-hit/

 

[Kyriakos]

Donald Trump wipes out Kamala Harris' lead with college grads: Poll

Fox News survey shows Trump reduced Harris' lead among those with college degrees from 14 points in August to 1 point in October.

www.newsweek.com

In the 2020 election, Biden beat Trump among college graduates 55 percent to 43, according to a CNN exit poll. In 2016, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton beat Trump by 10 points among college graduates.

Trump's eradication of Harris' lead among college graduates—who are estimated by CNN to make up 41 percent of this year's electorate—could prove pivotal in the neck-and-neck 2024 election.

"Overall, the movement toward Trump is subtle but potentially consequential, especially if he is making gains among college-educated voters," says Democratic pollster Chris Anderson, who conducts Fox News surveys with Republican Daron Shaw.
"However, the race has been well within the margin of error for three months and the outcome will likely hinge on which side is more effective at getting their voters to the polls as opposed to persuasion."

Harris' 49 percent share among college graduates and 46 percent among white voters with a college degree are her lowest in Fox News' polling since she became the 2024 Democratic presidential candidate.

Trump's 48 percent score is also his highest among this demographic and a record high among voters aged 65 and over (49 percent).

Harris recorded her lowest score among Black voters (67 percent) and voters aged 65 and over (47 percent) in the Fox News survey.

Trump has previously relied on the support of white non-college voters during his presidential campaigns, receiving 64 and 65 percent backing from this demographic in the 2016 and 2020 elections, according to Pew Research.

 

[Klaus Hergersheimer]

Polls will always tighten as the elections approach; neighbors are going to look to outdo the other who votes the other way.

This veneer of ever-consummate professionalism now wearing off of Harris, and people who are genuinely surprised by it happening, is only evidence of a candidate who never really ran a competitive race before until now.
A California Democrat is not exactly something as rare as hen's teeth.

 

[Samson]

Polls will always tighten as the elections approach; neighbors are going to look to outdo the other who votes the other way.

This makes not sense to me in so many ways.

 

[Manfred Belheim]

Why does it go on so long?

 

[Gori the Grey]

Regarding the Fox poll, Kyr, you have to be a more discerning customer of polls.

That Fox poll surveyed registered voters. Particularly this close to the election, a poll is meaningless unless it polls likely voters (there are of course difficulties in ascertaining that, but some polls work to do so).

Right-leaning polling outfits have been flooding the media with polls designed to show a closer race than actually exists. When CNN does an equivalent exit poll after this election, Harris will match Biden's numbers with this demographic.

The article's presentation of the data is also designed to be misleading. The poll is a Fox poll, but the write-up starts by citing two earlier CNN polls, to give the impression that the key numbers here come from a CNN poll as well.

It also includes this little nugget:

When broken down further, the results show that the vice president has a 1-point lead over Trump (49 percent to 48) when those with college degrees are asked how they will vote in November.

And that leads one to wonder what question they asked that showed a Trump lead.

And when you start following the links, you get this little tidbit:

Meanwhile, Harris is ahead by 6 points among voters from the seven key battleground states, according to Fox News.

So the Fox news poll was disastrous news for Trump, and Newsweek poked around in it for some datapoints that could then be phrased to Trump's advantage.

 

[EnglishEdward]

I too am quite baffled.

 

[Voidwalkin]

I think she will probably exceed Biden's lead with college educated voters.

She will probably not perform as well with non-college educated voters, though. The gap between the two seems to continue to widen.

 

[Kyriakos]

Regarding the Fox poll, Kyr, you have to be a more discerning customer of polls.

I didn't write the article ^^

"Overall, the movement toward Trump is subtle but potentially consequential, especially if he is making gains among college-educated voters," says Democratic pollster Chris Anderson, who conducts Fox News surveys with Republican Daron Shaw.
"However, the race has been well within the margin of error for three months and the outcome will likely hinge on which side is more effective at getting their voters to the polls as opposed to persuasion."

Newsweek maybe was trying to be subtle, but potentially consequential.