Vice President Kamala Harris’ plan to avoid the media
because her team laughably thinks that no one pays attention to
significant networks or prominent newspapers isn’t going to last. Yes,
media is an ever-changing landscape, but solely focusing on TikTok and
social media is a surefire way to lose an election. People need to hear
ideas and policies that will help them, and Kamala hasn’t offered much.
What she has provided is a throwback to Soviet Russia.
It’s a window into why her team keeps her from press conferences. The
latest pitch to curb inflation is to stomp out price-gouging, which is
such pie-in-the-sky nonsense that it almost makes you wonder if Harris
qualifies for this office. She’s not—you know that, but that’s not the
point: what the hell is this campaign other than showing that Democrats
have a black woman running after wresting the nomination from Joe Biden?
Catherine Rampell trashed Harris, and now the editorial board writ
large is body-slamming her, calling her candidacy gimmicky:
Americans
are clearly still anxious and angry about the high cost of groceries,
housing and even $5.29 Big Macs. While the inflation rate has cooled
substantially since the 2022 peak, an ostensible Biden-Harris
administration accomplishment, prices remain elevated relative to the
Trump years. So it’s a real political issue for Ms. Harris. One way to
handle it might be to level with voters, telling them that inflation
spiked in 2021 mainly because the pandemic snarled supply chains, and
that the Federal Reserve’s policies, which the Biden-Harris
administration supported, are working to slow it. The vice president
instead opted for a less forthright route: Blaming big business. She
vowed to go after “price gouging” by grocery stores, landlords,
pharmaceutical companies and other supposed corporate perpetrators by
having the Federal Trade Commission enforce a vaguely defined “federal
ban on price gouging.”
Never mind that many stores are currently
slashing prices in response to renewed consumer bargain hunting. Ms.
Harris says she’ll target companies that make “excessive” profits,
whatever that means…
[…]
Her ideas would cost money, yet
she insisted in her speech that she would hold to President Joe Biden’s
pledge not to raise taxes on any household earning $400,000 or less
annually. That excludes 80 percent of taxable income, and does not take
into account the recent surge in families earning over $400,000. The
Harris campaign says it plans to raise revenue to cover these costs but
did not provide specific offsets in its economic plan rollout. Without
them, Ms. Harris’s full plan would add $1.7 trillion to federal deficits
over a decade, according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal
Budget, a nonpartisan budget watchdog.
To be sure, every campaign
makes expensive promises that will never come to pass, especially with a
divided Congress. Remember Mr. Biden’s pledge to make community college
free? Even adjusted for the pandering standards of campaign economics,
however, Ms. Harris’s speech Friday ranks as a disappointment.
In short, the paper said her speech sucked, and it did.
“Ms.
Harris is on firmest ground when she advocates increasing the child tax
credit from the current level of $2,000 per kid up to $3,600 per kid for
middle-class and low-income families, and for making it easier for
those lower on the income scale to access the benefit,” wrote the
editorial board. Are they aware that JD Vance is proposing raising the
child tax credit to $5,000?
Up until this cockamamie
price-gouging plan, along with making housing more expensive, Harris has
been stealing Trump’s ideas, starting with the no tax on tips.
Harris
hasn’t gotten smarter since she took the president's nomination away.
She’s still a vapid, uneven, and awkward political creature who got her
because the Democratic Party is engulfed in identity politics. That
addiction has led to this entire administration selecting unqualified
and sub-par administrators and cabinet secretaries, wrecking the
country.
No comments:
Post a Comment