Kamala Harris’ relaxed conversation with CNN’s Dana Bash: A Chat

The Topic: Discussion of Kamala Harris’ policy positions in a brief interview with CNN anchor Dana Bash.

Vice President Kamala Harris selected CNN for her initial interview with the knowledge that Dana Bash would ask soft questions, as highlighted in the editorial “What Values, Kamala?” on Sept. 2.

Important topics such as the Afghanistan withdrawal, President Biden’s mental state, and Governor Tim Walz’s handling of rioters in Minneapolis were omitted in the interview. Harris’ weak responses were not challenged, casting doubt on both CNN’s journalistic integrity and Harris’ qualifications for the presidency.

This interview demonstrates CNN’s bias in favor of Harris and raises concerns about her suitability for higher office.

Lenny Rodin

Forest Hills

Harris’ team may have guided her poorly in preparing for the interview.

During the CNN interview with Bash regarding policy changes, specifically on fracking, Harris falsely claimed she had never opposed fracking before, raising questions about her honesty and integrity in public statements.

Such discrepancies reveal Harris’ lack of transparency and credibility, essential qualities in a presidential candidate.

Myron Hecker

Pearl River

The interview with Harris underscores CNN’s alignment with her campaign.

Bash overlooked Harris’ lack of leadership in presenting original ideas different from Biden’s policies, failing to offer a genuine “new way forward.” This interview highlighted a lack of critical questioning and genuine policy discussion.

Eileen Corr

Brewster Mass.

The highly anticipated interview with Harris on CNN resulted in a superficial discussion.

Harris’ responses to questions about fracking and illegal immigration lacked clarity and credibility. Her claims about steady values despite changing policy stances added to the confusion.

Tom Smith

Sarasota, Fla.

Harris’ misleading statements during the interview were disappointing.

Her inconsistent stance on fracking and economic policies contradicts her previous statements, raising doubts about her trustworthiness. The interview failed to provide concrete answers on key issues, portraying Harris as evasive and lacking in substance.

Alan Brooks

Brooklyn

Bash’s attempts to elicit clear responses from Harris were unsuccessful during the interview.

Harris evaded accountability for past failures and resorted to blaming Trump for shortcomings, avoiding addressing her own role. The interview lacked depth and failed to inspire confidence in Harris’ leadership abilities.

Alice Daly

Mahopac

The CNN interview with Harris appeared scripted, lacking genuine dialogue.

The deceptive tactics employed by Democrats were evident in Harris’ vague responses and deflection of responsibility. Harris’ inconsistent positions and lack of tangible solutions for key issues raise doubts about her candidacy.

Carl Rosenberg

Great Neck

Harris’ promises to uphold certain values lack credibility given her history of flip-flopping on issues.

Her claims of representing the middle class ring hollow as many struggle with rising costs and economic challenges. Harris’ reliance on evasive tactics and misleading statements paint a concerning picture of her candidacy.

Lorraine Fittipaldi

Apollo Beach, Fla.

Harris’ interview, accompanied by Tim Walz, failed to address key issues effectively.

Her inability to provide clear responses and reliance on diversions raise questions about her leadership and credibility. The interview lacked substance and authenticity, failing to instill confidence in Harris’ candidacy.

James McCaffrey

Yonkers

Share your thoughts on today’s news by emailing letters@nypost.com with your name and location. Your letters may be edited for clarity, length, and style.