The Democratic Party has problems and replacing a candidate this late is not ideal. But it’s hard to see how Harris makes the situation much better.
The Democratic elites have spoken: Kamala Harris for President.
The California Democratic Party apparatus has coalesced behind the Vice President. National Party leaders have as well.
But as I wrote earlier this month: If Harris is the answer, you’re asking the wrong question.
I get it. In the wake of President Joe Biden announcing he won’t seek a second term, Democratic leaders are trying to head off a nasty fight at the upcoming convention, continue fundraising and wage a campaign. Replacing a candidate this late is not ideal.
One hand, the plan seems to be working. Harris seems to have locked up the nomination and has even raised an astronomical amount of money in a very short time.
On the other hand, it makes no sense. Harris is a really bad candidate. And forcing an unwanted candidate upon voters dissatisfied with the establishment seems like a recipe for failure.
How do I know she’s a bad candidate and voters aren’t keen on her? The results of the 2020 Democratic Primary should be convincing enough. It was a crowded field, sure, so she can be forgiven for not coming in first. But she was more of an also-ran than a real competitor.
Harris started that campaign with all of the momentum her team and the press could muster and by all accounts it was a smashing success – but unfortunately campaign launches are just the beginning.
If history is any guide, this time is shaping up about the same. Harris is starting well, though her fundraising is likely more of a reflection of both pent up demand as Democratic donors had been holding out as long as Biden was atop the ticket and the fact that there’s no one else to give to.
And her sympathizers in the media are already gearing up. Many in the media seem to love the idea of Harris, so they come ready to defend her. For example, Politico’s Eugene Daniels chased down what he saw as a massive conspiracy recently when he challenged New Hampshire’s Republican Governor Chris Sununu on whether his mispronunciation of Kamala was part of a widespread Republican plot to disrespect Harris.
“I hear Republicans often mispronouncing Vice President Kamala Harris’ name, you’ve done it a few times. Is it a tactic? Or do you guys… is it just a tough name to pronounce?”
GOTCHA!
Sununu looked surprised and said he had no idea he was mispronouncing Kamala as Kamala. Maybe Sununu was lying; maybe he was just covering up the conspiracy.
Or maybe it’s possible that most people simply read her name and don’t hear it pronounced that much.
But there’s only so much party leaders and media defenders can do. Sooner or later Harris will have to hit the campaign trail and then everyone will quickly be reminded why she’s not a good candidate.
Harris’ vice presidency has been nearly four years of Dan-Quayle “P-O-T-A-T-O-E” moments, like when she opined on the progress society has made now that NCAA women’s basketball teams are “allowed” to have tournament brackets since 2022 – nevermind the fact that such brackets have been around for a long time and she even tweeted out her own husband’s bracket from before 2022.
Or when she argued with NBC’s Lester Holt about the Administration’s lack of attentiveness to the country’s southern border. Harris was arguing that criticism against the Administration was false, to which Holt replied: “You haven’t been to the border.”“And I haven’t been to Europe,” Harris said in what might have seemed like a mic drop moment to her and her only. What does Europe have to do with the Southern Border? And has she really never been to Europe? So many questions.
The point is that soon she’ll be the lone candidate, responding to countless media requests and Republican attacks, and these examples and many more suggest she’s not up to the task.
Don’t get me wrong, she might win the presidency: In a two-way race, someone has to win. But with this choice Democrats are making things much harder for themselves.
It’s hard to remember at this point since each newscycle is an eternity, but Harris’ prior campaign was largely destroyed by then-Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard, who noted Harris’ widespread prosecution of marijuana cases as California’s Attorney General. Gabbard dropped a few other bombs that drove a wedge between Harris and the Democratic base and her campaign never really recovered.
This highlights the fundamental flaw in Harris’ candidacy: As AG she pretended to be tough on crime, as Senator she played progressive. Since she can’t be both she’s going to constantly be running away from herself, which is never good.
Allegedly she’s evolved (which is what all politicians do when they have no other choice), but what she’s evolved into is unclear.
Harris’ choice of running mate will be telling. Traditionally the VP pick has been someone who addresses weaknesses, like providing regional balance or bringing experience or youthfulness or whatever contrast is necessary.
So for Harris, her VP pick will have to be both moderate and progressive, appeals to non-coastal elites, articulate, and with good management skills since her career has been plagued by staff turmoil.
Oh, and according to CNN’s John King, Harris’ running mate can’t be Jewish, which he suggested recently when discussing the possibility of Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro.
“He’s Jewish, there could be some risks in putting him on the ticket,” King said, briefly acknowledging the Democratic Party’s growing problem with anti-Semitisim.
The whole thing is a mess. The Democratic Party has problems and replacing a candidate this late is not ideal. But it’s hard to see how Harris makes the situation much better.
Matt Fleming is opinion columnist for the Southern California News Group and CEO of Sower Strategies, a digital marketing and public affairs firm.
