He usually does answer questions at all and when he doesn't, people tend to grill him on it. I haven't watched every interview, but I've watched a bunch of them (10?) and I've watched all the debates and I think it's rare for him to simply not give an answer on the basis that the NYC mayor doesn't interact with the issue.

I also think he probably couldn't afford to not give an answer because that would be a much stronger vector of attack on him than what I described before of simply saying "Whatever valid grievances we might have with Maduro, this opioid stuff is blatant lies and lobbing missiles at fishermen is abominable and an invasion of this country would be absurd and demonstrably only make things worse." As you said in the other comment, I guess we'll see.

[–] LeninWeave@hexbear.net 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

"Whatever valid grievances we might have with Maduro, this opioid stuff is blatant lies and lobbing missiles at fishermen is abominable and an invasion of this country would be absurd and demonstrably only make things worse."

Agreed, this would have been better than what he did say (which IIRC put much more emphasis on criticism of Maduro). Still not good, but better.

[–] hellinkilla@hexbear.net 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

In the chapo interview to didn't ave an answer about which ballot initiatives he supports... That seemed weird to me. Given they are totally relevant to his job.

[–] purpleworm@hexbear.net 4 points 1 month ago

That came up in the debates too, and I agree that it's weird.