Talk about a lot of build-up for almost no reason whatsoever! But that doesn't mean that last night's CNN fluffery didn't reveal something key to this election. 

Beege and I dutifully live-blogged our analysis of the first Kamala Harris media interview of the election (and maybe the first in three years on a major national platform) as it unfolded on CNN. Between that instant commentary and Duane's extensive analysis of The Interview this morning, we have perhaps dissected 18 minutes of content as thoroughly as has ever been done before. 

Later, though, an exchange that stunned me in real time grew into perhaps the most revealing moment of an almost entirely substance-free infomercial. Harris kept dodging Dana Bash's questions about her flip-flops and previous policies, and even evaded any specifics about her Day One plans if elected. But Harris flat-out refused to engage on perhaps her clearest and firmest ground, not even to take a potshot at Donald Trump -- who probably deserved it in this case, at least more so than other areas:

Kamala Harris pretty much sidesteps awkward question from CNN over race

Dana Bash: ‘Trump suggested you happened to turn black for political purposes’

VP Harris: ‘Next question please’#CNN pic.twitter.com/60wWD5AW6O

— Avinash K S🇮🇳 (@AvinashKS14) August 30, 2024

DANA BASH, CNN CHIEF POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: I want to ask you about your opponent, Donald Trump. I was a little bit surprised, people might be surprised to hear that you have never interacted with him, met him face-to-face? That's going to change soon.

But what I want to ask you about is what he said last month, he suggested that you happened to turn Black recently for political purposes, questioning a core part of your identity.

KAMALA HARRIS (D) VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Same old tired playbook, next question, please.

BASH: That's it?

Harris: That's it.

That's it? That may be a good question for CNN about the overall interview, too. Duane has more on that, so I won't belabor it here. The event failed to deliver any answers about Harris' policies, her grasp of the issues, and most importantly, how long and how many people have covered up the fact that the current president has suffered from significant cognitive decline. Bash posed the question but let Harris off the hook, as Adam Baldwin predicted yesterday during our taping of the Amiable Skeptics episode for today, and in other cases "led the witness" to give Harris an easy out on tough questions.

But this response stunned me. Trump got way out over his skis at the NABJ by acting as an identity-politics expert, not to mention got it wrong that Harris had never identified herself as a black woman before 2019. It was a foolish idea, and one that Trump has since thankfully tossed into the dumpster to focus on issues that matter to voters. 

Bear in mind too that Harris had not yet been asked about this, mainly because she's been ducking the press for the last six weeks as nominee. This was her first opportunity to hit back at Trump and a golden opportunity to pursue the identitarian politics Harris has embraced. Bash practically played Magic Johnson with this monster assist, giving Harris all the room she needed to dunk on Trump, at least for a 30- or 60-second attack on an issue that plays well for her.

Instead, she passed the ball back to Bash and went back on defense. Bash's surprise could not have been more evident. 

That turned out to be the most revealing moment of the entire 18 minutes, and explains nearly everything else about Harris. It casts a massive contrast with Trump too, whose instincts are always toward pugilism. Republicans may not like all of Trump's policy impulses, and may like some of his other impulses even less. But what they like about Trump is that he fights. It may get him into trouble, like at the NABJ for a mild example, and it creates message discipline issues that become opportunity costs. But he fights, and for Republicans and other voters who are tired of getting steamrolled by the Left, that's enough.

Harris doesn't fight. It's not in her. Harris retreats when challenged and avoids confrontation when possible. She lacks a fighting instinct, and her entire campaign thus far demonstrates it. 

That explains the "my values haven't changed" dodge that Harris debuted last night. Maybe they really haven't, but she's changing her policy positions because she won't fight for them. She won't explain her policy shifts because she won't fight for them.  Harris has refused to engage the media because she won't fight with them. Harris has yet to publish her agenda or an Issues page on her campaign website because she won't fight for them.

Harris expects to be elected on the basis of her identity and her "joy." And that's all she's prepared to engage on. What does that say about what kind of president she will make -- especially on foreign policy? If she won't fight for herself and her "values," why would anyone expect her to fight for America and its interests?

And that's it. That's the election in a nutshell. We have one candidate who won't fight, and another candidate whose first instincts are to run to a fight. It makes me wonder whether Harris and her campaign really plan to show up for the debate on September 10. If they do, they'd better find a fighting spirit, or it may turn out worse for Harris than the previous debate turned out for Joe Biden.