To the Editor:

Re “A Vague, Vacuous TV Interview Didn’t Help Kamala Harris,” by Bret Stephens (The Point, Opinion, nytimes.com, Aug. 29):

I’m a supporter of Vice President Kamala Harris for president, but found her CNN interview with Dana Bash more than just “vague, vacuous.”

In addition to her meaningless deflection over changing her position on fracking (“My values have not changed”), I especially found her response to the Gaza crisis disturbing. She repeated President Biden’s goals of defending Israel’s sovereignty, getting the hostages home and ending the suffering of Palestinians while offering them a two-state solution, without once suggesting what policy change would help achieve these noble goals (since Mr. Biden’s current policies to do all this have clearly failed).

Focusing only on “my values” and noble goals is meaningless without more substantive discussion of what means as president she would use to apply her values and achieve those goals. She therefore disappointed me, even though I very much want her to succeed!

James Berkman
Plymouth, Vt.

To the Editor:

Re “7 Takeaways From Harris’s First Major Interview” (nytimes.com, Aug. 29):

The political writers won’t like it, but the presidential race really comes down to personalities. On the one hand, there is the man who, with his entourage, violated law and rules and desecrated Arlington National Cemetery for political gain, then savaged the government worker who did her job by attempting to enforce the rules (“Member of Trump’s Team ‘Abruptly Pushed’ Official at Arlington, Army Says,” news article, Aug. 30).

On the other hand, there is Kamala Harris, who was frank, informal, patient and even corrected herself when she mispronounced her CNN interviewer’s first name.

Beside those realities, differences in policy are next to nothing.

Jonathan J. Margolis
Brookline, Mass.