Obviously, the Democrats’ first “switcheroo” occurred when their party’s powerbrokers unceremoniously removed President Joe Biden as their presidential nominee with all the finesse of a posh D.C. restaurant owner prying a ravenous rat off their back-alley dumpster; and replaced him with Vice President Kamala Harris.
Now, the Democrat elite confronted an equally daunting task: transforming their anointed candidate into presidential timber in the eyes of the general public. Given the effort the Democrat establishment put into prepping the first “switcheroo,” making V.P. Harris palatable to Democrat voters was a foregone conclusion. Indeed, every percentage point the Republican nominee, former President Donald Trump, raced ahead of Mr. Biden in the rematch was another nail in the latter’s political grave.
It was the old political adage writ large: offer someone death (Mr. Biden) and they will accept torture (Ms. Harris). Propelled by the threat of Trump redux, Democrat voters not only refused to complain about being disregarded by their party’s power brokers for the third time in three presidential elections, they welcomed President Biden’s jettisoning and embraced the V.P. Harris selection.
In so doing, the Democrat establishment had succeeded in turning their party’s presidential primaries into non-binding referendums: a process whereby Democrat voters provide an advisory role that their ruling power brokers may or may not take into consideration when they determine who will be “our democracy’s” nominee and their running mate. Of course, the Democrat establishment’s ultimate aim of turning general election voters into a rubber stamp of their party’s handpicked candidate was yet to be a fait accompli. Thus, the crux: how to transform, by any means fair or foul, V.P. Harris from a less-than-winning radical hack into the glorious savior of our nation that only an American ingrate and/or insurrectionist would oppose?
Knowing time was short, the Democrat elite could not allow an unforced error by the less than facile rhetorician V.P. Harris to disrupt the creation of her cult of personality. Doubtless recalling how “Uncle Joe” Stalin said more with a menacing smile than a policy tract in Pravda, the leftist powerbrokers protected V.P. Harris from interactions with the press, no matter how compliant the reporter or the outlet. Instead, they ensconced her in ads, staged events, and public appearances, all of which were tightly structured and scripted with an emphasis on reimagining V.P. Harris’ personality and, consequently, avoiding the pesky problem that the Biden-Harris administration’s policies are an abject failure. The “same values, different vision” trope is a prime example of the Democrat elite’s stop-gap solution to this problem.
It has proven highly successful.
But the Democrat elite is cagey enough to recognize that this, alone, will not adequately feed the electoral kitty. Despite the efforts of leftist powerbrokers, independent voters still expect a candidate to at least pretend to hold press conferences and provide policy prescriptions for what ails America. As a result, sooner or later, the Democrat establishment’s handpicked, presumptive presidential nominee—even one who received not a single delegate when they pursued the Oval Office over four years ago—would have to step forward from behind her political Praetorian guard and face the music, albeit the fawning paeans of an adoring press.
So, how could the Democrat elite protect their presidential candidate from being beaned by a stray softball query?
The new “switcheroo”: “strategic vagueness.”
In her report concerning V.P. Harris’ economic speech by Forbes reporter Alison Durkee, one can limn the contours and motivations of the Democrats’ new switcheroo.
While the vice president has quickly garnered Democrats’ support and risen in the polls, Harris has released few concrete policy proposals in the first few weeks of her campaign—drawing some criticism as a result – with her speech Friday expected to [have been] the most substantive remarks she’s given on policy so far. Her focus on the economy comes as polling has repeatedly shown it’s the most important issue to voters in this election cycle, with the vice president hoping to attract support amid low approval ratings for Biden’s handling of the economy.
Thus, V.P. Harris’ conundrum rears its ugly head: how to appeal to voters who intensely disliked “Bidenomics,” which V.P. Harris not only supported but helped impose. Having mystically transcended her record regarding the Biden-Harris economy in the polls so far, the V.P. has no intention of allowing reality to diminish some in the electorate’s vain hope she can repair the economy she helped impair in the first place. Enter the new “switcheroo” of “strategic vagueness”:
Harris’ economic agenda released Friday didn’t go fully in depth about her proposals, which The New York Times reports is by design. The Timesreported prior to Harris’ speech that the Harris campaign has adopted a “strategic vagueness” for her economic proposals, believing that being more of a “blank slate” will help ward off attacks and attract more support from business groups.
As if the woke corporate elite and Wall Street are not already on board with the Democrat Party and their nominee. In any event, “strategic vagueness” as the article notes is merely the latest entry in the left’s lexicon to gloss an ancient political tactic to make it appear novel and, for some reason, more digestible. Hence, the strategically vague, deliberately blank slate candidate, V.P Harris, expects their new switcheroo to capture four key objectives.
The first is to maintain or increase her distance from the policies of the Biden-Harris administration.
The second is to deceive, confuse, and confound voters; and allow them to read – accurately or otherwise – whatever they may glean in the nebulously expressed policy.
The third is to keep advancing a thin veneer of policy, all the while hoping to keep the campaign about personalities—namely, between the public’s view of the authentic former President Trump and the newly reimagined V.P. Harris.
And, the fourth is the most important, and where the ultimate ulterior aim of the new switcheroo manifests itself: because of the deliberate strategic vagueness of the Harris-Walz policy professions, if they win the election, the Democrats will claim the public voted for every radical policy the new administration implements.
It will be akin to how in 2020, candidate Biden professed to be a moderate; but as president Biden governed as a leftist zealot. Yet, if the Harris-Walz strategic vagueness proves successful, their new switcheroo of professing moderation in a campaign and imposing radicalism while in office will continue and exacerbate the disastrous policies of Bidenomics.
Some might argue that the Democrats’ new switcheroo is a temporary expedient due to V.P. Harris’ sudden usurpation of President Biden’s 2024 nomination and that more detailed policy proposals will follow for the American people to evaluate. They would be wrong. The Democrat elite’s cynicism is beyond question, as is their political practicality. The public revulsion over V.P. Harris’ price gouging statement will not impel a change of course to bring forth more detailed policy proposals. It will result in the Harris-Walz campaign being even more strategic vague, vacuous, and evasive—i.e., deceitful to the public.
Evidently, the leftist party purportedly saving “our democracy” believes detailed policy proposals are dangerous in the hands of voters. To leftist riven with cognitive dissonance and a compulsion to project their vices upon others, what is one more instance of strategic lying by omission in a presidential campaign that is nothing less than systemic deceit upon the public? “Our democracy”—translation: “our party”—must be saved by any means necessary!
There should be no vagueness about how dangerous it is to empower such duplicitous radicals to impose their new switcheroo.
