Freddy Gray, deputy editor at The Spectator, discusses Kamala Harris's rise within the Democratic Party and her prospects amid the ongoing convention bustle. Natasha Feroze shares insights from convention delegates and the public’s mixed reactions. They explore the controversial topic of classifying misogyny under anti-terrorism laws, questioning its effectiveness. The conversation shifts to chess, unveiling the rampant cheating culture and psychological motives behind it, along with an analysis of high-profile scandals that have rocked the chess community.
Kamala Harris's campaign is characterized by ambiguity and a lack of distinct policies, raising concerns about its sustainability as the election approaches.
The high rates of cheating in chess reflect a cultural phenomenon where competitive pressure often leads individuals to compromise their ethical standards.
Deep dives
Kamala Harris's Candidacy and Public Perception
Kamala Harris's candidacy has sparked debate regarding her position as a likely favorite for the upcoming US presidential election. Observations indicate a vagueness in her campaign messaging, leading to questions about her core beliefs and policies. While she is currently polling well, particularly in swing states, there are concerns that this momentum may not last, as her campaign appears to lack specific policies distinct from those of Joe Biden. This ambiguity and lack of clear direction raise the question of whether such a strategy can be sustained leading up to the election.
The Artifice of Political Conventions
Political conventions, often described as theatrical and artificial, are particularly scrutinized in the context of Harris's nomination. Observers note that this week’s convention had a particularly surreal atmosphere, fueled by the abrupt transition from Joe Biden to Harris as the Democratic nominee. Despite the enthusiastic atmosphere among delegates, there is skepticism about whether the wider public will embrace Harris as a legitimate candidate. As the election approaches, the effectiveness of the convention in providing Harris with a significant boost remains uncertain.
Debate Dynamics and Candidate Scrutiny
The upcoming presidential debate is anticipated as a crucial moment where Kamala Harris's performance could either affirm her candidacy or expose vulnerabilities. Historically, Harris has not faced intense scrutiny, leading some to question whether Donald Trump is the right challenger to press her during the debates. Preparations reveal contrasting expectations, with Republicans hoping to capitalize on any missteps by Harris, especially given her previous avoidance of deep critical engagement. This sets up a high-stakes environment for both candidates as they aim to sway public opinion.
Cheating in Chess and Its Psychological Underpinnings
An exploration of cheating in chess reveals that the motivation to win often trumps ethical considerations, prompting players to engage in dishonest practices. The advent of computer-assisted analysis has significantly increased cheating rates, particularly in online chess, where the temptation for shortcuts is greater. Experts discuss the psychological factors behind cheating, such as rationalization, where players justify their actions by downplaying the severity of their misconduct or focusing on perceived unfair advantages held by others. This ongoing issue underscores a cultural phenomenon where competitive pressure can lead individuals to compromise their integrity.
This week: All hail Harris! As the Democratic National Convention approaches its climax, The Spectator’s deputy editor Freddy Gray explores vice president Kamala Harris’s remarkable rise to the top of the democratic ticket in his cover article this week. Freddy joins the podcast from Chicago (1:30).
Next: live from the DNC. Freddy and Natasha Feroze, The Spectator’s deputy broadcast editor, have been out and about at the convention talking to delegates – and detractors – of the Democratic Party. What do these Americans think? And does Kamala Harris have ‘good vibes’? (7:56).
Then: should misogyny really be classified under anti-terrorism laws? In the magazine this week The Spectator’s economics editor Kate Andrews argues that the measure would do little to solve the fundamental problem. And how would ‘extreme misogyny’ be defined anyway? Kate and author Helen Joyce joined us to discuss their concerns (14:00).
And finally: why does chess attract so many cheats? In the magazine this week The Spectator’s chess columnist, and grandmaster, Luke McShane examines the history of high-profile scandals in cheating. Why do some players stoop so low? Professor Ken Regan, an expert and investigator in anti-cheating in chess, and psychologist Professor Sam Sommers, join the podcast (25:31).
Hosted by William Moore and Lara Prendergast.
Produced by Patrick Gibbons.
Get the Snipd podcast app
Unlock the knowledge in podcasts with the podcast player of the future.
AI-powered podcast player
Listen to all your favourite podcasts with AI-powered features
Discover highlights
Listen to the best highlights from the podcasts you love and dive into the full episode
Save any moment
Hear something you like? Tap your headphones to save it with AI-generated key takeaways
Share & Export
Send highlights to Twitter, WhatsApp or export them to Notion, Readwise & more
AI-powered podcast player
Listen to all your favourite podcasts with AI-powered features
Discover highlights
Listen to the best highlights from the podcasts you love and dive into the full episode