Kamala Harris, with her Democratic establishment and Silicon Valley connections and her uncanny ability to mask liberal policies behind the veil of “pragmatism,” was the safest route for Joe Biden’s presidential campaign. But she was also supposed to be the game changer — the trump card that would fire up the voters who have no real enthusiasm for Biden.
So far, this strategy seems to have worked. The hour following Biden’s announcement that Harris would be his running mate was his best hour of fundraising yet. That day alone, he brought in nearly $26 million. And even though running mates usually have little direct effect on voters, more than 20% of Democrats said they are more likely to vote for Biden because he picked Harris, according to a recent poll.
Recommended Stories
This is what Harris is good at: She uses specific moments to drive political momentum and stir up viral enthusiasm. Think back to Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearing. Harris implied that Kavanaugh was in cahoots with President Trump during former special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation because of a meeting that had allegedly taken place between Kavanaugh and Trump’s personal lawyer Marc Kasowitz.
Clips of the exchange were everywhere. Democrats praised Harris and argued that her prosecutorial background would help the Democratic Party take down the Senate Republicans once and for all.
But that moment ended as soon as Harris’s time came to an end. She didn’t bother to follow up, nor did she explain what meeting she was referring to or how she knew that a meeting had occurred at all. There was no substance to her allegation. It was just a bombastic accusation that led nowhere — another bad habit of bad prosecutors.
The same can be said of Harris’s infamous debate performance during the primaries. From the get-go, she targeted Biden, who was the front-runner of the race even then. One moment in particular, in which she accused the former vice president of cozying up to segregationists and opposing policies that would have furthered racial equality, specifically federally mandated busing, boosted her campaign significantly and made her an early favorite.
But Harris couldn’t maintain that momentum. When asked why she disagreed with Biden’s decades-old opposition to busing, Harris flip-flopped and argued that busing should be a local choice, not the responsibility of the federal government, which had been Biden’s position. Now, she’s running on the same ticket as a man she suggested was a racist.
Harris’s problem is quite simple: She has no follow-through, as Commentary’s Noah Rothman put it. Her presidential campaign was a bust not because she was unpopular but because she lacked the foresight to adopt a specific platform and bring it to life. By the end, all she had left was a series of quick highlights and catchy cliches.
This is bad news for Biden’s campaign, which needs more than short bursts of energy if it’s going to bridge the enthusiasm gap between his and Trump’s supporters. But Harris’s inability to see past the present moment could be good news for the conservatives rightly concerned about her authoritarian streak.
To be sure, Harris would not hesitate to use her position to quash conservative policies and values if given the chance. She’s already made it clear that she aligns with the far Left on most issues. Harris co-sponsored Medicare for All, endorsed the “Green New Deal,” advocated for higher taxes, and even proposed a religious litmus test for Catholic judicial nominees. So there’s ample reason for concern.
But again, is Harris’s bark bigger than her bite? Her voting record in the Senate is second only to Sen. Elizabeth Warren in terms of how far to the left she voted, but she did not hesitate to join the campaign of the most milquetoast candidate in the race. And even though she co-sponsored Sen. Bernie Sanders’s Medicare for All proposal in the Senate, Harris waffled back and forth when asked about the policy on the campaign trail, refusing to say one way or the other whether she’d adopt a single-payer system if nominated.
Clearly, Harris cares more for political opportunity than policy. And given her record, voters should ask themselves: How much of this is all talk?
