Contrary to the pitiful howls from both outright foes and critics-because-they-can like the New York Times, I thought Kamala’s interview yesterday with MSNBC’s Stephanie Ruhle was quite good. However I do have a suggestion to offer to Ms. Harris that I am confident would make her answers both more effective and less susceptible to attack:
Before giving your larger, contextualized response, directly answer the specific question asked. Then provide the bigger view.
For example: Ruhle asked why you think Trump polls higher on ‘who would be better for the economy’ – and you responded by stating that, in fact, the Biden-Harris record on the economy is better than Trump’s. And then talked about why your plans are superior to Trump’s, how economists agree, etc. – all good and valid points. But you did not address the specific question.
Starting with the general and moving to the particular can be an effective communications strategy, but not here. Not when a thousand vultures are watching for anything to grab onto in an attempt to tear your performance apart.
What if instead you had started by saying something like, ‘well, many voters believe Trump is good on the economy because they have long bought into the mystique of Trump as a successful businessman, despite his multiple business failures.’ And then go into the reality of Trump’s record, both as an entrepreneur and as president. And finish by making your case for why you will be better for the economy than Trump. This approach yields not only a better beginning to your response but also a stronger close.
If only I had a way to get this message to you and your team, Kamala, as I am certain this tactic would prove effective!
Leave a Reply