Brzezinski on Undecided Voters Leaning Trump After the Debate: ‘I Don’t Get It!

BRZEZINSKI: “And then there is Jeremy Peters, who’s coming after us. Womp-womp. In your new piece, Jeremy, entitled ‘Pundits said Harris won the debate, undecided voters weren’t so sure,’ you write in part this: ‘In interviews with undecided voters, many of whom the Times has interviewed regularly over the last several months, they acknowledged that Ms. Harris seemed more presidential than Mr. Trump, and they said she laid out a sweeping vision to fix some of the country’s most stubborn problems, but they also said she did not seem much different from Mr. Biden and they wanted change. And most of all, what they wanted to hear and didn’t was the fine print. Voters said they were glad she has a tax and economic plan, but they want to know how it will become law when Washington is so polarized. They know she wants to give assistance to first-time home buyers, but doubted that it was realistic.’ And Jeremy, I ask you, is their answer Donald Trump? Because I guess — I guess I see the questions. I think there was only so much that she could do in that debate in order to be as effective as she was. And I agree, there are a lot more questions, of course. I would love to ask Kamala Harris about her leadership style and her plans and how she plans to execute. But are those undecided voters saying, ‘I’m going to kind of lean Trump here because I want change?’ I don’t get it.”
PETERS: “No, I don’t think that a lot of them are saying they’re leaning Trump. Some of them certainly would, but I think the risk — the bigger risk for her is they’re just going to stay home, that they’re not motivated, inspired enough by her. Because remember, people don’t really know her. You know, as we’ve quoted many voters saying and many Democratic strategists saying, she’s famous as vice president, of course, she has a very high name recognition, but she’s largely unknown as a candidate and politician. She was elected to the United States Senate in 2018. She’s hardly, you know, been on the national stage for a long time. And she has had, let’s not forget, a really truncated campaign period to introduce herself to voters. That’s what the next eight weeks are all about, and something, Mika, you point out is very correct, you can’t do in two-minute answers in a debate. So, there’s not going to be another debate, it looks like. In a way, I think that’s almost good for her campaign because they can continue to introduce her to the voters who still need convincing on their own terms in these large rallies, in these controlled settings. I think she’s eventually going to have to do some more interviews. She’s only done the one so far. But there’s eight weeks, and that’s an awful lot of time to convince people — there’s a sliver of people, really, that need convincing, that need motivating.”