Why does Kamala treat black voters like idiots?

Kamala Harris has risen politically thanks to the umbrella of polarization and identity politics. This means that in order to campaign, she understood, or was convinced, that it was necessary to contrast herself with Donald Trump and show herself as part of some oppressed group. That should do it, right?

Apparently that's how the vice president understands the world, and she is either too lazy or too dull to step outside of her electoral comfort zone. Her recent appearance on Fox News demonstrated the limits of this strategy and her intellectual limits as a candidate. But it also makes us wonder: What was the plan? Sitting down with Bret Baier, one of the network's most experienced interviewers, was a strategic mistake. With swing states close in the polls, Harris wasted time and opportunities trying to polarize in front of an audience already polarized against her. In front of Bret Baier, it was up to her to convince, explain and reason. And Kamala can't do those things.

Kamala Harris turned an interview about her years in office into attacks on her rival's record. She banally described the border crisis as a "topic" for discussion that people want to have... (Really?) and promptly blamed Trump for blocking Joe Biden's policies. Baier asked her why voters don't trust her to fight inflation, then talked about Trump's economic plan. Regarding transgender operations in federal prisons, she again focused on Trump. And when asked how her White House would be different from Biden's, she replied that she wanted to avoid the rhetoric coming from Donald Trump (?). This strategy of being "the lesser evil," and "not being Trump" may work in front of Trump-hating audiences. But in front of Fox News viewers, who see the Republican's positions as at least defensible, it was simply foolish.

Why is the Democratic campaign behaving this way? The reasons have to be several, not to rule out that the more clear-headed advisors are tied to the candidates' poor chances. But the reason that seems to prevail is condescension and contempt. Kamala has been patronizing to voters because she considers them her own, takes them for granted based on a childish fanaticism that renders them incapable of any critical thinking. On Fox News, she repeated her mantra that her voters want a president who has a plan for the future, but Harris could hardly tell us what that plan was.

Harris insults black voters

Harris was criticized for patronizing black voters with a prejudiced and demagogic plan in a desperate attempt to win using symbolic issues, as noted by the National Association of Black Journalists.

Her proposal, known as the Black Male Opportunity Agenda, is almost straight out of the racism handbook. It promises to graciously grant forgivable loans based on race. The proposal is aligned with the Biden administration's effort to incorporate race into government initiatives. Other proposals include improving job training programs for black men, legalizing marijuana and helping black citizens access and profit from the cannabis industry.

What is Kamala Harris' image of black men? Does she think they are people whose priorities are getting free money and drugs and also unable to access these things without help from a bureaucrat? Do voters like being stigmatized in this way? Harris argued that, as president, she will work to decriminalize marijuana, because she knows how the laws have been used to disproportionately affect black men. In what capacity does the vice president have that information? Do black voters not see how insulting that is?

Some surveys claim that black men invest heavily in crypto assets. Harris, in one of her pledges, vowed to suppport "a regulatory framework for cryptocurrency and other digital assets so Black men who invest in and own these assets are protected." Did black investors ask for such protection? Clearly, anyone who buys crypto assets does not want government intervention... Would Kamala believe that black people don't understand this? But then again, no one of any color expects a president to use their administration to protect one of the riskiest investments. Presenting crypto regulations as a gift to the black community seems to be an affront. Moreover, the reality is that voters are increasingly supportive of cryptocurrencies in general. Why is Harris turning it into a racial issue?

Harris was harshly criticized for these campaign promises aimed squarely at black male voters. Fairly, she was called racist, absurd and desperate. Almost no one posted a positive reaction to her promises. But the DEI candidate who rose to the top without winning any vote, just because she is a woman and pretends to be part of an oppressed minority, cannot understand the blunder. Race and gender have taken a pitiful prominence, and so Kamala made a promise to discriminate and disadvantage a large part of the population based on their race and went to flaunt that in front of the cameras.

One mistake after another

Signs such as a sharp turn against her in the betting markets, internal polls showing a dead heat in key states and the possible breakdown of the "blue wall" comprised of Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania, have produced panic among Democrats. Harris' decision to grant certain interviews stems from these signals. At first she chose friendly programs and stayed away from live press conferences during the campaign.

The reason for this "protection" became clear. On "60 Minutes" on CBS, her explanation of foreign policy on Israel was so twisted that the network decided to doctor it. On "The View,: she was asked a softball question practically tailored for her to shine. She was asked if she would have done anything differently than President Biden did, and Harris said she couldn't think of anything. Didn't the vice president realize that by presenting herself like this, she is destroying her campaign slogan about a new way forward? Doesn't she see that she is tying herself to the anchor of the Biden administration? On another occasion, when her teleprompter broke down, all the vice president could do was wave her arms and repeat her word salad until they got the machine fixed.

She can't think for herself, and the only reason a candidate who can't put two sentences together in a row will do interviews with non-affinity media is because her speeches are not enough to win. Her campaign decided to try something different but forgot to warn the candidate that she should stop underestimating voters, that she was no longer on safe ground. Surely today they regret this ill-considered risk.

Incidentally, a few days earlier, President Barack Obama, far more experienced and skilled than Kamala, also made the mistake of insulting voters. He scolded black men because of an alleged lack of enthusiasm for Harris as a candidate. "We have not yet seen the same kinds of energy and turnout in all corners of our neighborhoods and communities as we saw when I was running," Obama grumbled and proceeded to lecture black men for their lack of support for the vice president. "It makes me think, and I'm speaking to men directly ... that, well, you just aren’t feeling the idea of having a woman as president, and you’re coming up with other alternatives and other reasons for that."

"What Obama and Kamala are saying to black men is that they are worthless without the Democratic Party."

This reasoning by Obama is curious, because when Hillary Clinton was a candidate, an overwhelming percentage of black men voted for her. So why does he treat them as misogynists, why does he racialize them, homogenize them, belittle their judgment and consider them as their own people? Why do the leaders of the Democratic Party mistreat black men so badly?

No politician speaks so poorly to the voters who historically support them. No other group is so insulted. Democratic Party leaders mistreat black males like no other candidate mistreats any other sector of voters. They are treated as incapable, sexist, opportunistic profiteers, reckless children and imbecilic stereotypes. Characterizing a group of voters as fools incapable of voting intelligently is not likely to appeal to them.

But it's not just paternalism, contempt and condescension that underlies the message. There is also future guilt. What Obama and Kamala are telling black men is that they are worthless without the Democratic Party, and that if they reject Harris, they will not deserve forgiveness or respect. Rarely in history has a constituency been so humiliated. Rarely has a candidate shown such contempt and prejudice as Kamala has toward African American citizens.