Kamala Harris, the former vice presidential candidate, found herself on the receiving end of some hefty criticism, courtesy of American anchor Megyn Kelly, following her sudden appearance at an Australian event. The event in question, named the 2025 Australiasian Real Estate Conference, occurred on the Gold Coast and surprisingly featured Harris as a guest speaker. This is peculiar, especially considering Harris’ unsuccessful run in the American election against Donald Trump, painting a picture of an individual trying to remain relevant in international contexts.
During her address to the conference delegation, hosted at the Gold Coast Convention and Exhibition Centre in Broadbeach, Harris seemed bent on disparaging the Trump administration. She also managed to squeeze in a sneaky jibe at Elon Musk, founder of Tesla. But Harris’ words fell flat as they came across as vague and lacking in substantial meaning.
Harris skated around issues, expressing worry about the current state of world affairs in a veiled allusion against former President Trump. She also emphasized the need to remember the experiences of the 1930s and propagated the concept that isolation does not provide insulation. These reflections came interspersed with forced sentiments about the importance of trust, honesty, and integrity.
Megyn Kelly could not let this slide and dished out a tongue-in-cheek reproach against the event organizers for their apparent lack of discernment in extending invitations. She presented a fair question, asking what meaningful insights Harris, who lacks any notable experience in real estate, could deliver to such a conference. A vital part of Kelly’s argument stemmed from the observation that Harris has never been a salesperson — a critical trait for any successful realtor.
Kelly noted that exemplary sales skills should be a prerequisite for a forum focused on real estate. Yet, they decided to bank on a speaker who has practically zero experience in this sector or has never held any public position that involves sales — aside from her time at McDonald’s. This showcased the apparent lack of thought process behind the selection of a guest speaker for a real estate conference.
Kelly cast further doubt over Harris’ so-called expertise by analyzing parts of Harris’ speech. After watching online excerpts of Harris’ appearance, Kelly noted it was ‘more saying absolutely nothing about anything,’ underscored by a drawn-out preamble to each insipid ‘point’. This marks a definite pattern in Harris’ speaking strategy, burying listeners in heaps of words, only to find sparse, meaningless nuggets amidst the rubble.
The challenge, as Kelly pointed out, lies in the laborious task of wading through 500 words of Harris’ grand assertions to uncover the paltry elements of substantive import. Yet, the final realization dawns that even these nuggets of ‘meaningful’ points are far from profound but rather, hopelessly hollow. Kelly’s observations serve to highlight a proclivity for verbosity over vison.
The fact that Harris would be speaking at such an event in Australia, according to Kelly, was a telling sign of her dwindling demand back in the United States. The notion that ‘literally no one else wanted her’ may be seen as a bitter truth which speaks volumes about her unpopularity. Granted that public appearances command substantial fees, it is distressing to consider the possible sums involved to have someone of Harris’ reputation appear.
Kelly questioned Harris’ ability to deliver value in an industry in which she seemingly harbours no knowledge or experience. If she failed to market herself successfully during her presidential run, why would anyone believe she would have insightful advice about sales, a vital aspect of the real estate business? Consequently, the inherent wisdom of the event organizers to invite a speaker who couldn’t win the nomination or gain substantial traction during her political run has to be questioned.
In Kelly’s view, Harris might not have the right credentials to provide useful insights to an audience interested in real estate. She didn’t clinch the presidency, which suggests that she couldn’t even convince voters of her own merit. Therefore, how could she be expected to provide guidance on sales, the fulcrum upon which real estate revolves?
Commenting further on the decision to involve Harris in such an event, Kelly highlighted the simple yet powerful fact: Kamala Harris did not win the presidential race. The implication here is that Harris might be considerably out of touch with the general public, and indeed, even out of sync with her own political party. It’s hard to imagine she would then have anything useful to offer to the sales-driven, people-oriented world of real estate.
Kelly ends her critique with a potent condemnation: Harris has time and again been unable to successfully sell herself to the general public. Not only did she fail in her bid for presidency but also failed to secure the nomination. This string of failed attempts to negotiate her way into better political positions reflects an individual who struggles with persuasion and sales — two pivotal requirements in real estate.
The rhetoric shows that if you lack the ability to sell yourself, as Harris undoubtedly did in her election campaign, then there’s a strong reason to doubt any claim of expertise in sales. This leads one to question the wisdom of having her speak at a conference centered around a field that heavily relies on excellent salesmanship.
In conclusion, Megyn Kelly’s criticism sheds light on what seems to be an inappropriate and ill-considered decision by the organizers of this event. Her observations have only served to confirm existing doubts about Harris’ credibility and relevance in such a context.