Vice President Kamala Harris has been facing mounting criticism for dodging questions and sticking to vague talking points during recent interviews. Critics from across the media spectrum have pointed out her reluctance to provide detailed answers on pressing issues, such as immigration, the economy, and the Israel-Hamas war.
Peggy Noonan, writing for The Wall Street Journal, described Harris as an “artless dodger,” arguing that her evasiveness is leaving voters with little more than “awful and empty” choices. Noonan’s remarks came after Harris sat down with Oprah Winfrey and addressed the National Association of Black Journalists (NABJ), where she failed to hold a formal press conference since becoming the Democratic nominee. Noonan didn’t hold back, calling Harris’s unwillingness to address key topics, like illegal immigration, “political malpractice,” adding that it’s disrespectful to voters.
Todd Purdum of The New York Times echoed this sentiment, stressing that Harris can’t afford to be vague, especially with Donald Trump dominating the political landscape and the polls. Purdum pointed out that Harris is currently polling below Joe Biden’s 2020 levels of support in some key demographics.
He noted that more direct, substantive answers would help her connect with voters and build trust, rather than sticking to rehearsed lines and stump speeches. He argued that clear, concise responses would go a long way toward persuading voters that they know what she stands for.
However, not everyone agrees that Harris needs to be more specific. Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and MSNBC’s Stephanie Ruhle have both argued that detailed policy discussions aren’t necessarily what will win the election. Clinton reflected on her own 2016 run against Trump, explaining that she had plenty of policy details, but that wasn’t enough to sway voters.
According to Ruhle, Harris isn’t running to be the perfect candidate—she’s running against Trump. The argument here is that the threat Trump poses is well-known, and voters may not need to hear every policy position Harris holds to make their decision.
Yet, some journalists, including New York Times columnist Bret Stephens, argue that Harris needs to do more. In a column, Stephens called on the vice president to give detailed answers on policy and demonstrate a broader sense of leadership. He stressed that voters need to see that she’s more than just a liberal placeholder for the Democratic establishment and that she should articulate a vision that extends beyond the typical party lines.
Harris’s recent interviews have done little to dispel the notion that she’s avoiding tough questions. ABC’s Selina Wang reported that Harris “did not directly answer the question or offer any policy specifics” regarding the Israel-Hamas war, pivoting back to prepared talking points. CNN’s Abby Phillip echoed similar concerns, pointing out that Harris’s lengthy, meandering response to whether voters were better off than four years ago missed the mark. Phillip suggested that Harris needs a more straightforward, digestible answer to critical questions, especially when voters are looking for clarity.
Scott Jennings, a CNN political commentator, was even more direct, stating that Harris needs to stop dodging the questions entirely. He pointed out that during debates, she consistently avoided answering policy-related questions, raising concerns about her accountability to voters.