Charles C.W. Cooke says we should apply Occam's Razor here:
Now, I hear similar questions about Kamala Harris. Why can’t she talk in public? Why can’t she answer elementary questions? Why can’t she provide any details of what she believes — or outline her political agenda — without descending into indecipherable platitudes? I think the answer is similarly simple: Harris is incapable of any of that, because she doesn’t have anything useful in her head. Hers isn’t a language problem, it’s an ideas problem. The issue is not that Harris possesses all manner of well-considered notions but struggles to translate them into English; it’s that she’s never engaged with politics as anything other than an electoral exercise, and she probably couldn’t if she tried. Last night’s interview with Stephanie Ruhle further persuaded me of this. Words follow thoughts — and Harris doesn’t have any.
She's a dimwit. That's the answer.
3 comments:
When an airheaded dimwit's foot gets planted that far up your hero's ass at the debate, it can only mean.....
MAGA Republicans claim they want substantive answers!
REPORTER: Do you support any restrictions on a person’s right to contraception?
TRUMP: We’re looking at that, and I’m going to have a policy on that very shortly. And I think it’s something that you’ll. Find interesting, and I thit’s another issue that’s very interesting, but you will uhh find it. I think very. Smart. I think it’s a smart decision. But we’ll be releasing it very soon.
--------------------
--------------------
TRUMP: I will say this. I believe I will be able to make a deal between President Putin and President Zelenskyy. Quite quickly.
REPORTER: But what does that look like? What does that look like?
TRUMP: I don't want to tell you what that looks like.
MAGA:
Full interview credit is awarded to Trump for his worthless falsehoods and non-answers, rambling grievances, recounting of imaginary conversations, and oratory gobbledygook. That Harris, though, she doesn’t have anything useful in her head.
Post a Comment