After chattering with a friendly interviewer at CNN for about the length of a short downtown drive, the media is trying to make the best of Kamala’s interview.

In ‘7 Takeaways From Harris’s First Major Interview’ (that’s roughly one takeaway for every 2 minutes), the New York Times claimed that she “said nothing likely to cause her serious political trouble.”

Another op-ed condescendingly argued that, “Kamala Harris’s TV Interview Was a Solid First Effort”.

The Daily Beast went with “It’s Actually a Good Thing That Kamala Harris’ CNN Interview Was So Dull”.

After all the hype about her awesomeness, the underlying soft bigotry of low expectations is what really defines coverage of Kamala.

Anything short of an utter disaster is given an “A for Effort:”

A normal presidential contender giving this kind of weak interview after a campaign launch would have been dismissed out of hand. But the party is stuck with Kamala, the way it had been previously been stuck with Biden, and there’s simply no chance whatsoever of changing horses yet again in midstream.

Kamala may speak like a kindergarten teacher, but her movement and its media talks down to her the same way.

Setting aside politics, it’s a good thing to hold politicians of either party to higher standards rather than lower ones because it’s more likely to produce good results rather than their weakest efforts.

The bigotry of low expectations leads to DEI hires not to greatness.