Yeah, this is another "react to" post where I react to statements made by liberals on a certain subject matter.
The question:
Why is there so much focus on wanting to know Harris' policies when we know almost next to nothing about Trump or RFK Jr's policies?
The 2024 election will likely come down to vibes and how voters feel about the candidates instead of what they know about them and their policies. Of course, it would be beneficial for voters to have an idea of what her policies are (which Harris has provided during her speeches), but voters will ultimately let their feelings decide who they pick.
I do find it a double standard how Trump can dance around what his policies are whenever a camera is put in front of him, but news pundits keep demanding that Harris sit down for an interview and explain her policies in detail.
Now, first, my answers.
First of all, I KNOW RFK and Donald Trump were/are bad candidates. I've NEVER liked either of them. And part of it IS because they both little to no policies, and the policies they champion are generally terrible. I have detailed analyses of both of them on this blog as part of my metric, and I rip both of them. Donald Trump's policy platform reads like a 5 year old writing in crayon like he has a magic wand. END INFLATION in caps and crap like that. Okay, but how?
And then there's project 2025, which is their platform in reality, and that's full of some scary crap. The fact is, we KNOW what the GOP wants to do, in great detail, through THAT. And it's NOT good. It's TERRIFYING.
And then RFK. I've ALWAYS ripped him for being light on policy. He's always been a joke candidate for me. And when he does discuss stuff he's always going on about autism and vaccines and covid lockdowns, and honestly? I think RFK was a crap candidate.
Harris. Maybe there is a slightly higher standard here on paper, but mainly because I expect more from democrats, who generally are a bit more policy focused. And I've been somewhat lenient. Ive known it will take time for her to come up with policies. But...now we have a democratic platform and it kinda sucks. And that's what I'm going by. Perhaps it's not comprehensive, but it's something. And it's what I assume she wants to do. And I'm left underwhelmed, especially on my top priorities. She's a decent candidate, much better than Trump and RFK, but I care about policy because I have my own policy preferences. I MAKE my own policy. And I typically vote for the candidate that has the best policies.
I admit, this election, my hand is forced, given the egregiousness of Donald Trump's sins against democracy, to lower my standards. HOWEVER, make no mistake. I am still for policy, and I still judge democratic candidates regardless on the matter. I HATE the fact that this election is all vibes based. I want it to be POLICY based. I want good things. I expect good things, and after the convention I don't even like Harris much on VIBES. I don't like anyone on VIBES, and recent discussion should make it known that I actually resent the voter instincts of the masses and how easily entertained they are with vibes.
I guess we kinda dont need policy specifics unless you care about specific things like I do. Democrats have a brand that changes relatively little from election to election, for better or for worse. Often for the worse, given how Harris is light on policy to the point that she just seems like an obvious Biden replacement with no significant personality of her own, policy wise. And I'm one of the progressive democrats who want change.
Either way, I did want to post and highlight what other liberals are saying on this matter, and kinda rip them for their depressingly low standards here.
It's a double standard. It's just people who are anti-Harris for whatever reason looking for an excuse to smear. The Democrats publish a platform, and since Harris is a form on incumbent, we can look at the current administration to get an idea of what Harris will do.
It's sad and tired and I'm tired of the constant bad faith bullshit.
You're right; it's a double standard. What we've got on the right is a cult of personality. That has always been a factor in American politics. A lot of people on both sides have always chosen their candidate based on how they felt about him as a person, not on his policies. Is he the kind of guy you'd like to have a beer with?
(I use the masculine pronoun partly out of habit and partly because this attitude began when only men were ever candidates.)
Yet candidates used to always feel an obligation to talk about policies. Talking about policies is how they demonstrated their seriousness and competence. Trump seems to have given that up, and so have a lot of his supporters.
It's a double standard in a sense that we expect the D student to remain a D student while encouraging the B student capable of an A of being an A. When they just wanna skirt by with a C, when they have so much more potential, we rip on them.
The right is NEVER gonna have a policy platform I like or agree with. Intellectuals flock to the left because of this. There's a reason liberals snarkily say reality has a liberal bias and college educated voters drift toward democrats in large numbers. Trump has always been a vibes based candidate for low information voters. What some of us on the left resent is that the left is ALSO becoming a party of vibes and low information voters. I mean, I literally made this point yesterday, that most voters are just...kind of dumb. THey're not political experts, they're not even close, and if anything most have dunning kruger syndrome.
I understand that vibes do matter. But policy helps with the vibes. Look at Bernie. he's super vibes based, where he's like, WERE GONNA TAKE ON THE MILLIONAIAHS AND THE BILLIONAIAHS! But the dude is also policy based. WE'RE GONNA GUARANTEE HEALTHCARE, and stuff. And because in prior election cycles like 2016 and 2020, policy WAS important, and the left was asked HOW YA GONNA PAY FOR IT, we had answers.
If anything, expecting less this time is really just a deevolution of politics, and I kind of resent that aspect of politics. Like dont worry about policy, just vote on vibes. I dont live on vibes alone. Sorry, I don't.
Partly because democrats are expected to be adults and have policies and republicans are expected to run on fear and to obfuscate their actual agenda.
That’s largely based on differences in the activist groups for each coalition. Republican leaders, activists and donors - with the exception of the anti-abortion and gun lobby - don’t demand that republicans state the agenda. If I want somebody to put forth in agenda, that makes it easier to pollute, reduce worker protections and lowers taxes on the ultra wealthy, I don’t make my candidates say they want that. I just assume that when a Republicans is elected, they will do Republican things.
Democratic activist groups on the other hand demand public statements about issues. They don’t care if that issue isn’t good electorally and when statements are made, they always manage to state how they are lacking.
—
In this particular case, it’s also being driven disingenuously by Republicans. They want Kamala Harris to state a position, hoping that she’ll take one that is demanded by some liberal or progressive activist group that is not broadly popular so they can elevate and misrepresent it.
The GOP themselves have run entirely on vibes while hiding their agenda. But lefties like me, wanna know what we're voting for. I do care to get into the weeds of say, healthcare policy. And for some of us, the policy decides our vote. I feel like trying to deflect away from policy is just a "blue no matter who" trick. Like, don't think, just vote based on vibes.
I’ve really gotten to a point where I feel like activists shoot themselves in the face by making demands of a candidate prior to the election. Get the person most likely to be receptive to your demands in the halls of power, then hold their feet to the fire. Demanding perfection prior to the election just opens up weaknesses for others to exploit.
I saw an interesting perspective recently in line with this. In reality, one of these 2 people will be president, you have to pick the one that will be an easier framework for your activism. I probably butchered it but it was something along those lines.
So maybe she would be better in that regard.
Because all the attacks on her are not landing, so they need something else. They don’t care about policies at all
For the record, the Democratic Party does have a comprehensive, published platform.
https://democrats.org/where-we-stand/party-platform/
Indeed.
We've had eight years to learn what Trump's policy is on healthcare. All we know at this point was his admission that he did not know healthcare was "so complicated".
That's the whole nature of this dichotomy. When the right is the party of government bad and we need less of it, that's pretty straightforward. It's easy to run on. And we know what their goal is. To dismantle government.
The left, which actually believes in the use of government to solve problems, has to actually craft plans and policies to do it.
The most charismatic candidate wins. Policies be damned.
Trump policies:
- Keep Trump out of jail.
- Everybody around must be loyal to him
- He won't be loyal to anybody.
- Imprison, or better yet, eliminate, any dissenters.
- Personal profit, no matter how much it costs America.
RFK Jr. policies. 1. demonize vaccination (so of course he's been earmarked as Sec of HHS should Trump win) 2. pander for profit 3. take off shirt whenever there is an excuse.
I think I covered both platforms as extensively as the amount of thought each of them put into them.
The worst part of this is that it really doesn’t matter what Harris’s policies are if there is a Republican Senate. The details of her healthcare plan are inconsequential- it’s more about what types of bills she will sign that can make it through both houses.
It’s because it’s currently incredibly difficult to attack the Harris Walz campaign because all they talked about for weeks has been joy/unity and a mix of a few extremely popular policies (like >70% approvals). The right flank needs policies to fear monger off of and the left flank needs policies to say she doesn’t go far enough. Honestly, she should keep a balance of only release as few policy specifics as possible(except in areas where it becomes an issue) and continue the vibes campaign.
I disagree that it's a double standard. We know what Trump's policy agenda is, and we don't know Harris'.
Trump will pursue tax cuts for the rich. He will probably try to remain in office. He will end all prosecution against him. He will enrich himself and his family.
Is Harris going to focus on climate? Education? Wealth inequality? We have a ton of problems and folks want to know if their pet issues are what she'll attack, and if she'll attack it the way they think she should.
It's probably best she keeps her platform vague. She can only lose steam by having less-than-perfect policy choices for voters, like the $25k down payment assistance for me.
Trump policy is well described in Project 2025 which is a massive, 920-page document that outlines exactly what the next Trump presidency would look like.
I think we know a good amount about both candidates' policy agendas and goals. Obviously, since Trump was president for four years, we have a better window into what he will be like as president... and obviously because Harris jumped into the race VERY late, we don't have as much concrete information being put out by her.
It's important to note that Democrats have a platform and, in the absence of a specific Harris platform, we can assume the Vice President's vision mostly aligns with that.
The focus on her "lack of policies" is just a political attack, hoping to generate doubt among voters. The people who are complaining about it would not suddenly be happy if she posted a 900-page platform document. They would just shift to using that to attack her.
It's the same thing with the "she won't do an interview" attack line. They don't actually care if she does interviews. They just want to cast doubt on her and hopefully goad her into a situation where she says something they can attack.
They said the same basic stuff about Biden in 2020, that he was hiding from the press, refused to do events, etc.
Right now, all they can do is criticize her for not engaging the way they want her to. It's not the strongest line of attack and kind of makes conservatives look whiny and weak.
I'd personally rather see a platform and see interviews, etc. I think they're good - and I bet Harris thinks they're good.
But more than whatever I want... I want her to win. If her team thinks this is the strategy to win... I support it. I know enough about her and about Trump to cast my vote already.
That was my question the first time I heard someone complain that Kamala hasn’t talked about any policies:
When’s Trump gonna give up his campaign of bravado and bullying and talk about actual policies?
Then I realized he’s a one trick pony…he’s got nothing to talk about policy-wise because if he talked about his plans, which are largely contained in the same Project 2025 he’s trying to distance himself from, nobody would agree with him.
No comments:
Post a Comment