How is healthcare policy just not an election issue anymore?

Anyone who comes away from this interview thinking that Harris is running a progressive campaign has their head in the sand. Just in the first 20 minutes:

• affirms she does not support banning fracking
  • when pressed about why she previously supported a fracking ban, she deflects
  • when asked if she’s seen any scientific evidence to support a policy in favor of fracking, she deflects and says ‘we can do ‘it’ without banning fracking’
  • when asked about how supporting fracking squares with the rest of her climate policy she says “I believe we can do it without banning fracking”
• affirms and reinforces xenophobic immigration stereotypes and reiterates her intent to enforce our border with mexico
  • says that strengthening the border would help reduce fentanyl smuggling, even though nearly all fentanyl is trafficked through legal entry
  • repeatedly alludes to illegal crossings involving drugs, guns, and human trafficking
  • does not mention asylum seekers or dreamers, or make any acknowledgement of the horrors and violence these migrants are fleeing from
  • fails to make any mention of the inhumanity of mass deportations and dragnet operations by ICE, or even any mention of the authoritarian mass deportation positions her opponent has been taking
  • fails to indicate any support for immigration reform to make it easier to immigrate or seek asylum, and actually says she supports the immigration bill that makes asylum more difficult
• repeatedly insists on the importance of working with conservatives on conservative interests, including a willingness to place republicans on her cabinet, while simultaneously distancing herself with progressive issues, interests, or perspectives
• When asked “would you consider withholding any arms shipments to Israel [to end the war in Gaza]?” she deflects by saying she “unequivocally supports Israel’s right to exist and defend itself”
  • in an rant on Israel, she repeats the unsubstantiated claim of mass-rape on Oct-7 and frames the event as a tragedy, but uses passive language and euphemisms while speaking of Israel’s response - “far too many palestinans have been killed”. Makes no mention of Israeli war crimes, genocide, West Bank occupation and settlement, ect
  • in discussing a ceasefire deal she only speaks to the Israeli conditions (hostages) but makes no mention or acknowledgement of the Palestinian conditions (assurances that the ceasefire will not end as soon as the hostages are released, a removal of Israeli occupation from Palestinian territory, the allowing of free movement in and out of Gaza, ect)
  • makes not even the slightest indication that Israel has done anything wrong, let alone any acknowledgement of the humanitarian crisis in Gaza still being caused by Israel

This interview could have just as easily been one for a republican candidate. The good news is that if your only concern is beating trump then this interview was fine, bordering on good. The bad news is if you care at all about the overton window shifting even further right, this looks like a leap to the right, not just a step. Harris is running on strengthening our border/military and prosecuting undocumented immigration criminally, soft-touch climate legislation, palestinian genocide denial (expected) and unconditional lethal aid to Israel. The only positive positions she’s come out with thus far are are child tax credits and reproductive rights, and maybe an under-formed plan to produce more houses (but no mention of action to prevent those homes being commercially owned as investments)

She’s affirmed a number of fascist concerns and positions while distancing or outright rejecting progressive/leftist interests. She’s given credence to the xenophobic notion that immigrants are a national security risk, that we need to increase military spending and presence abroad, and indicated that private industry is a priority over existential concerns over climate change/pollution (being unwilling to acknowledge the problems caused by fracking because it might damage PA industry indicates (to me) that she’s unwilling to take action that may threaten private interests). This is a return to Clinton-era “tough on crime” neo-liberalism. Not only do these positions actively make things worse, they also make it extremely difficult for anyone next cycle to run on reduced military spending, more aggressive climate action, international cooperation on human rights and climate, or a reduction of hostilities in foreign affairs. If you’re of the opinion that climate change is accelerating toward the worst-case scenario for the planet, then any indication that there are other interests (especially interests in protecting a specific industry) that are more important than averting climate catastrophe is beyond stupid. It is the same political calculation as deregulation and presents the same obstacle to meaningful climate policy.

Doubling-down on the most aggressive and xenophobic fears while the working class continues to decline is historically what tends to precede a slide into fascism. Even if she beats trump in November, all signs point to an even more active fascist movement for the next four years.

Now is absolutely not the time to be calm or complacent.

Will not ban fracking. Consistent stand since the debate in 2020.