David, you will forgive me, but I recognize a puff piece when I see it.
Dave Cavell was Kamala's speech writer - in other words, she did not put that speech together. In Washington, it is the bureaucracy that puts all the speeches together - remembering all these things - the politicians themselves don't actually put the speeches together.
I googled Chancellor Olaf Scholz *who has only been in office for about 3 years), and this is what came up.
"German Chancellor Olaf Scholz praised U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris as a "competent and experienced" politician who could well win the U.S. election, but stopped short of endorsing her over Republican Donald Trump."
This is called diplomatic speech. He will need to be on good terms with her if she becomes president. By the same token, if Trump becomes president, he will need to on good terms with Trump as well.
By the way, I can't read the NY Times, as it is behind the paywall. So I can't google her further.
Here's a piece form the LA Times.
The results of Harris’ work are difficult to measure, analysts say.
"The three countries in Harris’ portfolio showed significant drops in annual migration, from more than 700,000 border arrests in the 2021 budget year to fewer than 500,000 in 2023. But total apprehensions at the border during the Biden presidency hit record numbers, with 2.2 million in 2022."
That statement doesn't even make sense. If there were more migrants crossing the border, then how could Harris be responsible for a drop in numbers. That's when you dig deeper. It doesn't say that as a result of her work, fewer crossed the border It says that fewer were arrested when they crossed the border.
This is an announcement by the White House of Harris's work in South America.
Note that the deeds weren't actually done - they were 'commitments' made by various South American banks and organization to invest more money in creating jobs.
Here's the other thing - when I look for her achievements, passive voice is used to state them. No direct statements are used. This is a technique used by PR when one doesn't want to be caught in a lie, but one wants to make something good.
What I am looking for is evidence of her spontaneous comments that reflect wisdom and intelligence I don't see that. What I see is a giggling airhead.
David, I don't care what other people have to say. That is not how I make my assessments of people and things. I check their records, their actual words, how things were done, what was achieved, etc. To date, I have seen nothing that convinces me.
You have been a research scientist. In your work, you don't accept something just because someone says something, and you watch for tiny differences, for things that don't quite ring true. This is what I do when it comes to words.
You also seem to be a fan of Kamala Harris, and that's okay (as evidenced by your piece on Medium. And that's okay. As with anything I write on Medium, these are opinion pieces. We think differently.
And that's okay. What I think is irrelevant and unimportant. Same with you. In the bigger picture, nobody cares what we think or write. We don't matter.
In any event, time will tell. :)
