Ukrainian forces enter Russia, heading towards Kursk. Iran threatens a full-scale attack on Israel. Weakening labor markets signal economic woes ahead. A U.S. ally, the Philippines, is increasingly embroiled over an island with China. The border crisis continues. With widening problems, both here and abroad, one might think The Presidential contest in its home stretch should be laser-focused on who can best handle our myriad of issues.

While Trump’s four-year record illustrates how he tackles problems, Kamala Harris recently replaced Joe Biden at the top of the ticket. Will she continue the Biden-Harris administration policies or take a different approach? The November election is approaching, and voters should know where the candidates stand. As crazy as it sounds, we have no idea where Kamala stands on any issue save abortion. She’s for it right up to birth with little restriction.

In her short 2020 presidential, she took clearly defined positions on illegal aliens, medicare for all, taxes, and a host of other things. Does she still hold those views? She’s been part of the present administrations. Is she standing in lockstep with its actions? For example, was she in favor of our disastrous Afgan withdrawal? What was her input on the administration’s legislative agenda that resulted in the inflation hurting so many? So many questions and so little time.

What do we know so far about the Democratic presidential Candidate? According to the Washington Post’s top writer, Fareed Zakaia, she is “winning the all-important battle-vibes. He informs us that “…people don’t tend to vote rationally, but rather use voting to express themselves in emotional, ideological and moral ways.” “Harris has run a remarkably focused and disciplined campaign, one that seems deliberately light on substance and high on feelings.”

Not to be outdone, The New York Times’s Ezra Klein claims, “Harris’s communications are playful, mocking, confident, even mean.” Nowhere does he mention substance. Like Zakaria, what is important is to “fight — and win — the battle for attention. She had help, to be sure. Online meme-makers who found viral gold in an anecdote about coconuts. Charli XCX’s “Kamala IS brat.”

Time Magazine features a very flattering Harris Cover. The story inside was long on vibes but didn’t feature an interview or any statement from the subject.

We finally have one policy position: she’s against taxing tips. Where have we heard that idea? Oh yes, Donald Trump proposed it months ago. Kamala certainly learned something from Joe Biden about plagiarizing. Stealing from your opponent takes the art to new heights. Interestingly, writers at the Democrat-allied New York Times and the Atlantic knocked no taxes on tips just the month before.

I always expected the Democrats to run someone younger than old Joe once the Republicans set their ticket. I thought the change would take place at the convention. The new Candidate would receive overwhelmingly favorable press. Probably a Governor or someone else not directly involved in national and international issues. Without a position trail, the Candidate would be a blank slate, which the media could paint a desirable picture.

Instead, we have an integral part of the present administration who was there for every decision. Further, we have the record of Kamala’s aborted 2020 presidential run. We know where she’s been in the past, but are these still Harris’ positions, or has she changed? If she’s changed, why?

Some of her staff have leaked that she now favors fracking and is no longer for getting rid of private health insurance. However, she hasn’t voiced any of this herself. She refuses to answer questions, and the media does not press her for answers. If you favor a candidate, the last thing you want to do is embarrass her.

It is better to picture Kamala as a good vibe and a “joyful” candidate. Given her history and Indian background, I prefer to refer to her as the “Jaalee” candidate in Hindi.

While the media has long been more favorable to Democrats, just remember how they characterized the saintly Mitt Romney as a murderer and an animal abuser. This time, the bias goes so much further. The same outlets not so long ago that thought so little of Kamala Harris they wanted her off the ticket as vice president are now telling us how wonderful she is.

Much of what claims to be journalism today has nothing to do with factual presentation—the old who, what, when, and where, giving way to feelings over facts. With the left always seen as occupying the moral high ground, it’s easy to dismiss the other side as “fake news.” Suppressing contrary information is necessary to protect the public from “misinformation.”

No one in the media has paid any price for their active suppression of contrary stories to the mainstream media narrative about the Russian collusion, COVID policy and origins, the Hunter Biden Laptop, and so many more stories where they were dead wrong.

However, punishing those who bucked this group-think is a matter of record, even though they were right. The best example is our paper of record, the New York Times, which eliminated top talents Editor James Benett and Bari Weis for failing to toe the line.

Adhere to the approved storyline, keep your job, and get promoted. Stray, and you’re a leper. No wonder so many fall in line. Maybe when Jeff Bezos tires of losing money on that paragon of left-wing virtue, the Wahington Post, and all these lemmings are out of a job, journalism will have a Renaissance.

Of course, the ultimate power in the U.S. is in the hands of the consumer. Until we demand better products, we’ll have mediocrities at best, such as candidates like Biden, Trump, and Harris. Even if it makes you uncomfortable, read, listen, or watch the media presenting a different viewpoint. They might be right. Nobody can “gaslight” you unless you let them.

By the way, for those unfamiliar with Hindi, “jaalee” in English is Phoney.