This article was originally published on Washington Times - Politics. You can read the original article HERE
Vice President Kamala Harris came out of her debate with former President Donald Trump armed with confidence she could win the White House with an aspirational message light on specifics.
In the weeks since she has become the Democratic Party’s nominee, Ms. Harris has talked about joy, vision and values, but has been bereft of policy ideas. Instead, she has called for a broad range of standard proposals embraced by mainstream Democrats.
She added policies to her website only this week, more than 50 days since President Biden dropped out of the race and endorsed her. Ms. Harris’ policy page is vague and dedicates nearly as much space to criticizing Mr. Trump’s proposals as it does detailing her own.
Avoiding specifics has been a hallmark of the Harris campaign, which is betting that good vibes for the first major-party Black female nominee — who replaced the nation’s oldest president — will carry her to the White House. That was evident during the debate Tuesday night, where Ms. Harris steered clear of laying out a comprehensive vision for the country.
When asked about her economic agenda, Ms. Harris said part of her plan is “understanding the aspirations, the dreams, the hopes and the ambition of the American people.”
The vice president also sidestepped a question about why she has changed her views on a host of issues ranging from fracking to decriminalizing illegal border crossings. She simply responded by pledging to be a president who is “lifting people up and not beating people down and name calling.”
SEE ALSO: Five big questions Harris dodged in the debate
When former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton ran for president in 2016, she had more than 200 policy proposals. In 2020, Mr. Biden released a 110-page policy document to accompany his campaign.
The Harris campaign has argued that by becoming the nominee so late in the election, Ms. Harris hasn’t had the time to put together detailed policy proposals that typically accompany Democratic presidential candidates. It takes a few months for a presidential campaign to put together a highly detailed policy plan, but those documents had been prepared for the now-scuttled Biden campaign.
It’s a smart political strategy, said Jon Krosnick, who teaches political psychology at Stanford University and said voters aren’t eager for specific policy details. Instead, he said, voting decisions are often based on the people’s perceptions of a candidate as personal, honest and compassionate, among other traits.
“Should she be more specific? She only has voters to lose by doing that. If she focuses on general goals, people will say ‘I like the principles and values that are driving her and I don’t need to know her specific policies,’” Mr. Krosnick said.
Republican strategist Jimmy Keady disagreed, saying Ms. Harris avoids specifics because her policies are unpopular with voters.
“Kamala Harris refuses to talk about the issues because she knows the Democrats lose on the issues,” he said. “Illegal immigration, worsening inflation and rising crime rates are all talking points for Republicans because the Biden-Harris administration has failed on each of them. Republicans win when they talk about the kitchen table issues that matter to voters.”
SEE ALSO: ‘Shake It Off’: Trump dismisses Taylor Swift’s endorsement of Harris
Recent history has shown that policy-heavy candidates have struggled in elections. In 2016, Mrs. Clinton nearly lost the Democratic primary to Sen. Bernard Sanders, who ran a populist campaign focused on wealth inequality. She lost in the general election to Mr. Trump, who ran his own populist campaign aimed at invoking feelings about restoring America’s greatness rather than a long list of concrete policy proposals.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts flooded voters with so many policy proposals in the 2020 Democratic primary that her slogan became “She’s got a plan for that.” Ms. Warren never finished higher than third in any state.
Democrats also have had success tying Mr. Trump to Project 2025, a conservative blueprint for governing created by The Heritage Foundation. Mr. Trump has distanced himself from Project 2025, even though many of his closest policy advisers were involved in drafting the 900-page policy document. Project 2025 was never endorsed by the Trump campaign, and Mr. Trump said Tuesday he’s never read it.
“[Conservatives] have been more explicit with Project 2025 and that hasn’t gone well,” Mr. Krosnick said. “It backfired and was perceived as extreme by middle-of-the-road, undecided voters.”
Mr. Trump has posted a detailed 16-page policy platform on his website, but also struggled with specifics during the debate. In one notable exchange, he struggled to say how he would change the Affordable Care Act.
“I have the concepts of a plan,” he said, adding that voters will be hearing about “concepts and options” in the future.
Democratic strategist Brad Bannon said the debate format doesn’t create much of an opportunity for candidates to delve into details.
“Our campaigns are defined by soundbites and you don’t have a lot of opportunity to detail policies,” he said. “The debate is a good example because the candidates are limited by time constraints. You don’t have the opportunity to talk about policy.”
This article was originally published by Washington Times - Politics. We only curate news from sources that align with the core values of our intended conservative audience. If you like the news you read here we encourage you to utilize the original sources for even more great news and opinions you can trust!
Comments