“A new way forward,” Harris called it, and then borrowed Obama themes again — this time, his 2004 “Red America, Blue America” convention speech, saying, “With this election, our nation has a precious, fleeting opportunity to move past the bitterness, cynicism, and divisive battles of the past.”

The revisionism, quite frankly, was breathtaking.

Had Harris not been in the White House for nearly four years as the vice president of the United States, it would have been easier for skeptics to accept her words as gospel. But she is the present and has been the present for 3 1/2 years. Nonetheless, Harris and her team of Obama surrogates are banking there are more people willing to be raptured, people who went into this cycle liking neither President Joe Biden nor former President Donald Trump, and fewer who are wise to the great confederacy of revisionism that was Thursday evening’s stage show.

If the press and Democrats were being honest, they would acknowledge Thursday night was a buffet of misleading statements at best and lies at worst that began with Harris’s descriptions of Trump’s policies.

Here is a little unpacking. Harris said Trump would “enact a nationwide abortion ban.” Not true. Trump has repeatedly said he believes the issue is up to individual states and should be left there.

Harris also said, “As a part of his agenda, he and his allies would limit access to birth control.”

Nope. Never said that.

Harris also said the Trump tax cut “would raise prices on middle-class families by $4,000 a year.” There were some great mental gymnastics done by the Center for American Progress to get to that number — and also not true.

Significant to what people are feeling right now and for the past three years was the effect inflation has had on the average family during Harris’s administration. Average households have been forced to spend an additional $11,434 annually just to maintain the same standard of living they enjoyed before inflation soared to 40-year highs. This is according to data compiled by the consumer price index and consumer expenditure survey, used to examine the impact of inflation state by state.

Meanwhile, if there was any mention of fracking in that speech, I missed it. Yet if Harris indeed has changed from wanting to ban fracking on Day One of her presidency, as she said four years ago in her own words, she needs to tell the public why she changed her mind. And if she did truly change her mind, she should have said in that speech that she would lift the “pause” on liquefied natural gas exports that her administration placed on the industry. It’s a pause that is really a ban that has hurt working-class, white-collar, and agricultural workers across the shale-rich states that include the electoral battleground of Pennsylvania.

That explanation would have been consequential. That would have been aspirational because a policy was attached.

To date, Harris has not placed even a single policy position on her campaign website. The voter who has paid attention in the past four years knows a lot about her and recognizes she is not a change candidate and that she is basically running against herself and her administration’s policies that she endorsed, signed off on, and spoke about for three years.

She is banking on just enough voters to have not paid attention and are buying into the Madison Avenue-reimagined Harris we’ve seen since she became the presumptive nominee.

On paper, it could work.

Imagine running for president and waiting for over a month and not having to place any policy positions in front of the voter. Or waiting all that time before taking any hard questions, knowing you are likely going to get away with it for the next 70-plus days.

Sounds like a cake proposition.

 CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

Never mind that people are hurting. Never mind that people lost loved ones because of your administration (think of the chaotic Afghanistan withdrawal, fentanyl overdoses, or murders committed by illegal immigrants) or lost their economic dignity or their small businesses during your administration.

No member of the press should give Trump a pass on answering questions that help the public understand how he would lead. The same holds true for Harris.