top of page
Writer's pictureWireNews

Kamala Harris’ Interview: Strategic Move or Unintended Admission?

Updated: Oct 13

by Ram ben Ze'ev


Kamala Harris’ Interview: Strategic Move or Unintended Admission?
Kamala Harris’ Interview: Strategic Move or Unintended Admission?

In a surprising yet calculated move, Vice President Kamala Harris has agreed to her first interview in months. The interview, set to be conducted by CNN, a network often criticized for its Democratic bias, will be taped rather than broadcast live. What’s more intriguing is that Harris will not be facing the interview alone—her newly announced vice-presidential choice, Tim Walz, will be by her side, ostensibly to offer support and perhaps guidance.


This decision raises significant questions about the message the Democratic Party is sending, both intentionally and unintentionally. Is this simply a matter of political strategy, or is it a subtle admission of the challenges Harris faces as the first female vice president and potential presidential candidate?


A Carefully Controlled Environment

The choice of CNN as the network for this rare interview is no accident. The network's favorable stance towards Democrats offers a controlled environment, allowing the party to shape the narrative in their favor. However, the decision to pre-tape the interview adds another layer of control, ensuring that any missteps or uncomfortable moments can be edited out before the public sees it. This approach, while common in politics, suggests a lack of confidence in Harris’ ability to navigate the tough, unscripted questions that a live interview might entail.


The Presence of Tim Walz

Perhaps the most telling aspect of this interview is the inclusion of Tim Walz. Traditionally, vice-presidential candidates are given the spotlight to prove their mettle independently, especially in high-stakes situations like a major interview. Yet, Harris, the sitting Vice President, has chosen to share this platform. While the Democrats may argue that Walz's presence is intended to showcase unity and strength within the ticket, it inevitably raises eyebrows.


Is the Democratic Party unintentionally suggesting that Kamala Harris needs a male counterpart to validate her position? Given that the United States has never had a female president, this decision raises questions. In a political arena where every action is analyzed, it could be seen as an implicit acknowledgment that the presidency—or even the vice presidency—still demands a male presence to be credible. This implication, intentional or not, undermines the progress Harris's candidacy was meant to symbolize.


The Gendered Undertones

The optics of this situation cannot be ignored. Harris has already faced significant scrutiny as a woman of color in one of the highest offices in the land. Her critics have often framed her as lacking the gravitas or leadership qualities traditionally associated with the presidency. By appearing alongside Walz, Harris is reinforcing those critiques, playing into the narrative and telegraphing that she is not fully equipped to handle the role on her own, without a man there to provide guidance.


---> Follow on Twitter/X @rambenzeev and read all of RAM's articles on X


Moreover, the decision could alienate a key demographic that the Democrats need to energize—women voters. Many women see Harris as a trailblazer, a symbol of breaking glass ceilings. However, the party’s apparent hesitancy to allow her to stand alone could be perceived as a lack of faith in female leadership, a message that could have far-reaching consequences in an election year.


Of course, there is a strategic element to consider. Walz, a former governor with a reputation for pragmatic governance, could help appeal to moderate voters, especially in swing states. His presence might be intended to reassure those who are on the fence about Harris, offering a familiar, steady hand to balance the ticket. Yet, this strategy is not without risks. It could backfire by reinforcing stereotypes that female leaders are inherently less capable or need male validation.


A Risky Gamble

Kamala Harris' choice to conduct her first interview with CNN under these conditions is a risky gamble. While it might aim to showcase unity and strength, the optics hint at a much more concerning narrative. At a time when the Democratic Party needs to exude confidence and clarity, having Tim Walz by her side could be perceived as a tacit acknowledgment that Harris still struggles with proving her presidential viability.


This interview, regardless of whether it succeeds in shifting public perception, will be heavily scrutinized, especially for what it reveals about the role of gender in politics. As Harris and the Democrats press forward, they must recognize the fragile line between strategy and symbolism, knowing that every move is loaded with significance—especially when it concerns the pursuit of the highest office in the nation.


It’s clear that the decision to conduct Harris' first and potentially only national interview in this manner was anything but typical, and likely wouldn't have been made by a man.


###


bottom of page