From a political perspective, Nancy Pelosi made an important observation when calling for an open process should Biden drop out. If anointed successor nominee, without going through a competitive process, Kamala Harris’ candidacy will lack the imprimatur of legitimacy. She was handed the nomination and never earned it.
But as of now, it appears that Harris is the anointed one. As vice president, she is the natural successor to Biden, who endorsed her candidacy. She spent much of Sunday calling the Democrat elites to lock up their endorsement before it was known whether anyone would challenge her for the nomination.
As of this writing, Pelosi, Schumer, Jeffries and Obama have stopped short of endorsing her, But who would be so bold, or perhaps politically suicidal, to announce that they will challenge Harris for the nomination? Not only would this test other Democrats who jumped immediately on the Harris train, but it will violate the Democratic piety of challenging the vice president and purity of challenging a black woman.
To some, Harris’ race and gender are all they need to know to enthusiastically back a Democrat. To others, her race and gender wouldn’t preclude her from winning the nomination, but she would still have to explain who she is and what she believes in. Other than her support for abortion, she’s been nothing more than a loyal second to Biden. As president, what will she do about Israel, the border, equity, inflation and the myriad other issues facing the nation?
Kamala Harris has been a very ambitious politician. She was hardly a progressive prosecutor or attorney general in California, where was not particularly popular. And yet, when she became a senator, she reinvented herself as progressive. Does she have any beliefs other than she wants to be president and will say and do whatever it takes to get her there?
Even so, she failed miserably as a candidate in 2020, her smug and condescending manner playing poorly. And she continued to be exceptionally unpopular as vice president, where she accomplished nothing beyond proving her poor management skills. Her speech softened, but also tended to devolve into gibberish.
Who is she? What is she? A competitive process would give Harris the chance to tell us why she should be president, and would give us the chance to see her claims challenged. Would she survive the challenge? Speculating is a fun game, but the only way we get a real answer is for it to happen.
As of now, Harris has two pretty strong arguments to win the election against Trump. One, she’s young, relatively speaking. Two, she’s not Trump, relatively speaking. Will that enable her to pick up the independent voters, the swing state voters, who will decide the winner?
While I have no fondness for Harris stemming from her actions as district attorney and attorney general of California, and have not been moved off that bias by anything she’s done in Congress or as Vice President, I am open to hearing her out, to learning what her positions are, to being persuaded that she’s sincere and not merely another ambitious politician willing to sell her soul for winning an election. It’s too early to know whether she can beat Trump, as she has yet to be subject to the scrutiny that comes with running for president.
Neither her race nor gender mean anything to me. They will not prevent me from supporting her, but they will not compel me to support her either. If Kamala Harris wants my vote, she will have to earn it. The best way for her to do so is to compete for the nomination against viable candidates who will mount a serious challenge to her anointment as Biden’s successor. Whether she will get the chance to earn the nomination, and whether she will earn the nomination, remain to be seen.
Democrats, give her the chance to win it or lose it. And give us the chance to choose a candidate we want to vote for, whether that’s Kamala or someone else. You have an opportunity. Don’t squander it on your pieties and purity.
With Bide’s Harris endorsement, the Democrats have gone from someone who is too old and obviously failing to someone who is manifestly inexperienced to deal with national and global problems (no matter how well she may be seen to have done as a government official in California) and who is also seen as little more than a cut-out (i. e., shallow figure) to fill a DEI spot.
If she’s too inexperienced, she’s at least much more experienced than either Trump or Obama were when first elected president. If you or someone else doesn’t want to vote for her, okay, but no pretextual reasons please.
I dislike her primarily for reasons given by OP (California history etc.), but will still vote for her assuming she’s the nominee. I fear that she’s not a candidate who motivates people not inclined to Trump to make the effort to vote, in part because of her political history, but hope I’m wrong.
OK — but to me she demostrated her inexperiece by her meanderings when assigned to deal with the border crisis, she more or less disappeared into the wilderness; also her daycare like events, and I’ve never heard her make an intelligent, cogent speech. Biden at least had the excuse of semi-senility. Harris’ excuse is that she is in way over her head.
AFAIC, the race just changed from a choice between two elderly guys in clear cognitive decline and equally unfit to serve, to one between a deranged and corrupt elderly guy and a woman I don’t much are for, but who is not incompetent/ incontinent.
JMO
Seems unlikely the Democrats will leave things up to the whims of the people, what with democracy on the line. Their input can wait for a less important election.
They will likely steamroll Harris through, and chalk up criticism of it to right wing messaging and Russian propaganda. MSNBC will be wall to wall coronation, with occasional breaks to give a platform to the dregs of social media and the tsunami of racialized misogyny it will hurl at her, to paint opposition to her with that brush.
As for her baggage, look what they were able to pull off with Biden. They were able to take a clownish demagogue with the sort of racial baggage they would love to find in their opposition and reinvent him as a paragon of Democratic truth and virtue. If Harris is capable of acting normal she will be a comparatively easy lift, and they have identity gold in their corner.
We’ve already seen that the Democrats aren’t going to let democracy get in the way of Our Democracy when they changed the rules of three of their primaries to ensure that RFK Jr. couldn’t be the nominee. I think he would actually have a pretty good chance of beating Trump if he were nominated but that would be even worse for the people in charge of Our Democracy than Trump winning again, so it will never happen.
From all appearances, Harris has gotten the endorsements of those would-be challengers and she will be the anointed one. Game, set, match.
Just saw that Manchin won’t challenge Harris. I believe he was the last potential challenger. It’s over.
It strikes me that the Dem convention will either be a coronation snoozer or an “open” eye-scratching cat fight. Rooting for the latter entirely on the basis of entertainment value.
Where were the calls for Biden to earn the nomination in 2020? or 2024? The elites within the Democratic party engaged in every legal and political trick to clear the path for Biden’s succession. Sorry Bernie, sorry Kennedy. West and Stein, GTF off the ballot in those swing states in 2024. If Biden was anointed and appointed, why not Harris? Expediency demands an appointment and pronto. After all, “our Democracy” is on the ballot in 2024. Democratic processes cannot be trusted to produce the outcome “our Democracy” requires.
IIUC, Harris now has over half the delegates she needs and, in less than 24 hours, has raised > $80 million.
I don’t know what the criteria for “earning” the nomination are/ should be, but it’s hers unless something extraordinary occurs.
I cannot support Kamala Harris because of Celeste Guap.
If any SJ readers aren’t familiar with that name she’s the underage girl doing sex work who got raped by so many cops in the Bay Area three police chiefs resigned in nine days.
Kamala was AG of California. All the cops walked.
She’s unfit to serve as president.
Harris behavior in this instance was “sickitating and disgustifying”. If this is at all indicative of her overall behavior it’s deeply concerning. I can only hope she learned from the experience.
Perhaps it’s TDS, but I’d still prefer her to Il Douche and I’ll echo Scott’s comment to the effect that “the alternative to bad isn’t always good”. Harris wouldn’t be my first choice, but I’d certainly choose her over the Orange Menace/ 2025 Agenda Mafia. YMMV
Hear, Hear!
Not my first choice either, but neither is anyone named Trump, Vance or who remains silent when supported by Groups who chant, ” We love Hitler. We love Trump.”
That she in NOT actively trying to burn down the Republic is all I need right now!
It’s not as if the Dems would offer no candidate for the presidency, so there would always be an alternative to Trump. The question was whether that alternative should be Harris or someone else, although it now appears that the question has been decided for us.
Remarkable. When the house of cards collapsed on the fiefdom-holders, it was sudden and dramatic. Actually going forward with the widely-hated Harris shows the profound depths of Democrat desperation. I am surprised.