Kamala is Far From the Best Candidate…But She Can Win

Now that Joe Biden has allowed himself to be dragged off the stage, his fingernails scraping the floor, Democrats can turn their attention as to whether Kamala Harris, his presumptive replacement, can yield a better result in November. 

There are many reasons to assume she will not.  The most obvious is her failure four years ago to mount a campaign that was even remotely capable of capitalizing on the fervor that greeted her entry into the race.  Rather than the dogged, self-assured prosecutor with the compelling life story who had eviscerated Brett Kavanaugh during his confirmation hearings, almost from her first fumbling day, Harris showed a stunning inability to enunciate either policy or a vision for the nation.  She then proceeded to commit some unforgivable, totally avoidable blunders, such as defending Jussie Smollett, who was later found to have staged his supposed mugging.  Add to that the widespread feeling that she could not manage a staff, leaving far too many decisions to her sister, and was shrill and dictatorial, and her run for the presidency evaporated faster than Donald Trump’s commitment to tamp down his hateful rhetoric.

The situation did not improve during the early years of her vice-presidency.  Staffing issues continued to bedevil her, and rumblings of her lack of ability to do the job properly were rife among fellow Democrats.  Despite Biden’s denials, the feeling was widespread that she had been shunted to the sidelines and in no way played the “last person in the room” role that Biden had played for Obama.

Finally, Republicans will attack her fiercely, as they have already begun to do, as the DEI candidate and a person who helped cover up Biden’s growing cognitive issues, thus making her untrustworthy to occupy the Oval Office, as opposed to that paragon of truth and virtue Donald Trump.

Whether or not any of these criticisms remain damaging, or even valid, many Democrats, including this one, would much rather see a candidate with less baggage and more regional appeal head the ticket.  Gretchen Whitmer, Josh Shapiro, or Andy Beshear, for example, would all improve Democrats’ chances of winning the Pennsylvania-Michigan-Wisconsin trifecta that would almost assure victory in November.  Each is young, articulate, personable, and in Whitmer’s case, visibly tough—she also survived an assassination attempt, after all—and each can communicate the needs of the center of the country far better than Trump or middle-class turncoat J. D. Vance.

But dislodging Harris will not be easy and has the potential to be so messy as to leave the party back where it was before Biden yielded to the inevitable.  Any attempt to keep her from the nomination in favor of a white candidate, man or woman, risks serious backlash among Black voters, whose passionate support is crucial in those very three Midwestern states.  In addition, Harris’s candidacy might well put Georgia back in play, and make North Carolina winnable as well.

Then there is the money—tens and millions of dollars earmarked for Biden-Harris that can either only be used by Harris or would require a certain amount of fancy footwork to be available to another candidate.  For Harris’s competitors to begin a fundraising operation this late in the election cycle will require an allocation of resources away from the ground game that will be essential in swing state races that promise to be decided by a mere tens of thousands of votes.

Finally, with Biden’s endorsement in her pocket, it is distinctly possible that Democratic convention delegates will simply adhere to his wishes and rebuff calls for an open convention.

But Harris’s many detractors are underestimating other crucial factors that may turn out to be telling.

The first is that by all accounts, Harris has matured.  Bakari Sellers, a vocal Harris supporter said, “She now has a team of people around her that have strengthened her, and the stories that are coming out of D.C. are changing. The narrative has changed.”  Given his advocacy, Sellers might not be the most reliable narrator, but there have been a number of similar accounts of Harris having grown into the vice-presidency and becoming both more effective and more assertive.

What gives Harris her best chance of being elected, however, is, as was the case with Biden, her November opponent.  Biden tried to campaign by stressing his policy achievements but, to go against Trump, a candidate needs a lot more than reason.  This campaign will be a gutter fight and Biden gave every impression of not being able to find his way to the curb.  There is no guarantee that Harris can outpunch Trump, but if she can again be the Kavanaugh cross-examiner rather the mixed-race, female Hamlet, she can bloody him up plenty, both on the stump and in a debate, if Trump is sufficiently foolhardy to agree to one.

But Harris’s biggest advantage is an intangible, what in economics would be called pent-up demand.  There are two prominent examples.  After the ravages of the Black Death in the fourteenth century, the survivors attacked life with giddying energy. They began new businesses, traveled, modernized, and, most significantly, learned to read, thus prompting the thirst for mass produced books that Gutenberg’s invention helped satisfy.  Much more recently, in the aftermath of the Covid epidemic, a similar phenomenon could be observed (although, alas, not in reading). Airlines were overbooked, restaurants full, and money spent, so much so that inflation was the inevitable result.

Democratic and undecided voters are almost certain to have much the same reaction, many euphoric at the renewed prospect of defeating Trump and others relieved that Biden is not the only other choice.

If Harris is deft all, she can ride that explosion of energy right into the White House.