Harris Exposes Biden’s Failed Re-election Attempt in New Memoir

Kamala Harris, the erstwhile Vice President, points to ‘imprudence’ by the Democratic party when they allowed than President Joe Biden to contemplate his reelection in her recently issued memoir. Harris expresses her disapproval of this move in an excerpt from her new book ‘107 Days’, unveiled in The Atlantic. In her view, Biden’s decision, should it have been influenced by personal reasons such as pride or overambition, should not have been taken independently. Harris’s criticism of Biden’s ill-conceived bid for reelection, a first-time public disclosure, ended abruptly in July 2024 when a catastrophic debate led him to withdraw from the race.

In Harris’s reflection, Biden’s attempt to remain in the race was ill-advised, leading to a rather regrettable turn of events. She was left to front the Democratic ticket and saw defeat at the hands of Republicans, led by Donald Trump. Harris’s commentary on these events strives to paint the situation as a dire consequence of leaving such a pivotal decision to an individual’s whim that, quite inevitably, led to disaster. Biden’s office, however, chose not to release any comments on this matter.

While Harris insists on maintaining a semblance of loyalty, her criticism of her former partner is not without subtle disparagement. Prefacing her critique with platitudes about Biden’s vast knowledge and empathy, she then reduces him to an aged, weary figure as he stumbled through his presidential duties. The exposé of Biden’s disappointing performance in the 2024 debate reflects on Harris’s portrayal of him as ‘exhausted’, seeking to emphasize the physical and verbal missteps revealing his age.

Harris further alleges that Biden’s inability to perform effectively could be traced back to back-to-back travels to Europe and a subsequent fundraiser on the West Coast. Proposing these international treks as the primary cause of his ‘debate debacle’, Harris carefully avoids labeling this as incapacity. However, by offering such explicit insinuations, an underlying critique of Biden’s physical and mental stamina post 81 years of age is clearly conveyed.

Harris attempts to justify her critique of Biden with carefully worded assurances. She insists that her loyalty to the country would have compelled her to speak up had she perceived Biden as incapacitated. The tale, thus spun by Harris, gives her room to pose as the loyal subordinate. However, this comes across as mere rhetoric – a thinly veiled attempt at saving face while subtly undermining Biden.

Moreover, Harris’s narrative casts necessary suspicion towards those within Biden’s circle. Accusing them of underhanded tactics to boost Biden’s standing at her expense, Harris claims to have been the victim of a targeted campaign orchestrated by her former partner’s confidants. ‘The president’s inner circle seemed fine with it,’ she remarks, painting a picture of Biden’s team seeking her downfall.

Harris reveals her discontent regarding the adverse headlines and narratives that perpetually surrounded her stint as Vice President. She lambastes Biden’s party, alleging they perpetuated an atmosphere of disorder and extreme flux in her office. Such allegations paint a grim picture of intrigue and dismay in the Democratic ranks, suggesting an internal struggle for power and control.

The narrative conjures an image of a team that was more invested in keeping Kamala Harris in the shadows rather than let her sparkle outshine that of Biden. Illustrating this point, she recollects a discourse she delivered in Selma, Alabama, demanding an urgent ceasefire in Gaza. The speech, which rapidly gained popularity, was seemingly not well-received by the West Wing, adding to a growing list of grievances amid Harris’s time as Vice President.

The West Wing’s supposed displeasure at Harris’s popularity after her speech in Selma only seemed to verify Harris’s belief that Biden’s team was unnerved by her success. Notably, she criticizes Biden’s team, insinuating ‘His team didn’t get it,’ that she was an integral part of his success, not a rival. However, the narrative does more to feed into the idea of discord within the Democratic party than put the spotlight on Harris’s potential leadership prowess.

Harris asserts that her triumph would testify to Biden’s sound judgment and offer assurance to the public that she could assume presidential duties if required. This assertion appears to be an attempt to clothe her ambitions in the guise of public service, turning Biden’s perceived weaknesses into an argument for her suitability for presidential office.

Harris frames her potential for success as a boon for Biden, spinning it as a means to assuage public concerns about his advancing age. Her narrative leaves the impression of a team that failed to understand the symbiotic nature of their relationship. The underlying criticism of Biden’s party seems to be that they failed to see how her success could be a testament to his ‘good judgment’.

Serving as the first female Vice President may have been an onerous task for Harris, but she skirts candid discussions of the complex issues inherent in such a role, choosing instead to focus on negative experiences. Her book seems less an exploration of her experiences in a landmark role and more an instrument of antagonism towards Biden and his team.

The remarks highlighted in Harris’s book, slated for publishing on September 23, underline a rocky tenure as Vice President. Framing her experiences in a manner that puts Biden and his team under a harsh spotlight, Harris appears determined to rewrite her narrative. Her attempts at doing so however do little to inspire confidence in the Democratic party, hinting at deep-seated divergence and lack of harmony.