It goes back to the fact that voters have all the wrong premises when looking at candidates and the media just drives the misconceptions. How did Reagan win 49 states? It was not by being a policy wonk or giving a lot of chapter and verse on policy detail, it was by persuading voters that they could trust his judgement to do things in the public interest. And even the worst things that Reagan did - starting down the trickle down path - he did in the belief that it would work for everyone the way he described it, so even though he was wrong, the public picked up on his sincerity that he thought he would lift all the boats with tax policy reform.
So a question like "will you embargo arms to Israel" is a fundamentally dumb one to ask a candidate. That's a level of situational detail that can only be assessed when the exact time comes that that decision is ripe to be made. It's not important that the candidate have a position on it now, it's important the candidate create trust in the public mind that they will make the right decision given the situation when it has to be made. The press complains, and a politicians opponents complain because it's much easier to play the 'gotcha' thing if a candidate allows themselves to be pinned down to what eventually becomes a "wrong" answer. It's fine that the opposition does this, that's their right, but the media misunderstands what people actually vote for if they think those position details are the core of what gets people elected and it's why the central mass of the public just tunes out on so much of the argument. Positions statements are useful to candidates only to the degree they help paint a candidate's philosophy at the broadest level, not the detail level. And of course for anything that has to be legislated it will be miles between the proposal and the finished product anyway.
I think the Harris campaign understands this and they are basically taking a page out of "Morning in America." They want the campaign to be about creating an emotional aura that forms a break with the vitriolic politics since ....well pretty much since Gingrich, but of course mostly since Trump.