Kamala Harris – More of a Trivia Than a President

William Henry Harrison, holding the ninth position in the illustrious presidency line-up of the United States, had multiple unique distinctions to his name. His use of a British passport at birth, being the initial advocate of the Whig Party to occupy the White House, and his lengthy inaugural discourse, are some of the trivia linked to this former leader. Deemed the lengthiest in annals, his opening discourse flowed unabated for almost two hours, overshadowed only by the abrupt end of his stint in the presidency that lasted merely for 31 days, the shortest in history. This dramatic exit saw him depart life, while still on the hot-seat, setting another unfortunate record.

Harrison’s political life saw him go through the grind, losing before getting his hands on the ensuing electoral success. A unique circumstance, replicated only by the likes of Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson. Richard Nixon, a similar victim of political decadence, managed to get back on track only after a prolonged political journey. Quirks of history have it that only Grover Cleveland and Donald Trump managed to taste success amid series of wins and losses. Those following Harrison’s footsteps, facing defeat in the first political run, found it challenging to stage a comeback in the immediate election.

Lessons from history don’t bode well for Kamala Harris. Her sudden declaration of staying out of the race for the governor’s office in California stirred up conjectures about her White House aspirations. The Democratic Party’s soaring unpopularity doesn’t add to her prospects either. Tipping towards the unpopular end of the scale with minus 30 points, the party’s image has slid down to its lowest ebb in the last three and a half decades.

Democrats face an internal crisis. A failure to resist Trump both during his tenure as well as after their loss to him has caused internal factionalism. Harris’ position in this drama seems quite unflattering. She came to embody the discord within the Democratic camp, a symbol of their internal dissatisfaction. Yet, it’s essential to clarify that this discontent isn’t uniform across the board.

The dividing lines within the party are quite apparent. The progressive section bemoans the lack of a spirited fight, blaming their leaders for their tepid response in challenging times. On the other hand, the centrist constitutes hold different grievances, accusing the party of plunging into the wrong battles. According to them, the party has strayed too far from its oriented path, swerving into an excessive emphasis on culture and identity politics.

Despite this division, they seem united in their quest for victory. Curiously enough, Harris’ potential candidacy in 2024 was largely due to her symbolic value as a diversity figure. Biden’s upfront declaration about his preference for a female, preferably African American running mate, catapulted Harris into the fray. This situation presents a real dilemma for Harris. Her problems stem not from her racial or gender identity; instead, they arise from her lack of ability to extend the Democratic follower base.

To bring about a decisive Democratic victory, a candidate needs to appeal to the previously staunch Trump supporters. Harris’ unconvincing approach during her previous run didn’t exactly drive voter turnout but highlighted her inability to speak to the dynamics of the changing electorate. Framed within the lingo of a liberal art college’s dean of students, her rhetoric fell flat in rousing voter enthusiasm.

Minus the topic of reproductive rights, her agenda seemed artificially created, too polished and tailored by focus groups. This approach clashed with the desires of the electorate at a time when sincerity was the most valued trait. Compounding her problems, she fell into agreement with Biden’s demand for loyalty and alignment, failing to carve her distinct political identity.

As questionable as her decisions were, her choice of platform for her maiden interview after stepping down was even more so. Opting for ‘The Late Show’ with Stephen Colbert might have seemed like a wise choice for outreach, but it inadvertently signals playing to the gallery of dedicated ideologues, not the diverse mass that the Democrats need to win over.

It’s this penchant for missteps that brings Harris’ chances of being the Democratic nominee under deep scrutiny. Will she be the Democrats’ choice again? If so, it is more likely she will be remembered as a curiosity in political trivia, rather than the holder of the 48th president of the United States office.

All this points to a challenging path ahead for Kamala Harris. Her rise as a diversity candidate seemed promising initially; however, her actions since have displayed an unmistakable lack of political discernment and an inability to gain widespread appeal. Thus, her prospects of another run for the presidency seem dim, more so due to her perceived lack of authenticity and limited political vision than her gender or racial background.

Democrats are in a sticky situation. Their current unpopularity, combined with their seeming inability to mount a significant challenge to Trump’s influence, leaves them in disarray. Harris, as much a symbol of their internal discontent as any other, is faced with the difficult task of trying to unite a divided party and appear as a compelling candidate to an ever-changing electorate.

Judging by Harris’ past actions, it seems increasingly unlikely that she’ll be able to successfully pull this off. Her rhetoric, more fitting for a college dean than a presidential candidate, seems hollow and inauthentic to many potential voters. Furthermore, her decision to toe Biden’s line displays a lack of individualism and discernment, further damaging her appeal.

The fact that she’s considered a diversity choice also doesn’t do her many favors. While the Democrats’ desire for a diverse candidate is commendable, it means nothing if the person in question lacks the necessary attributes to win over voters. Harris’ failings in this regard are glaring, and it’s beginning to seem unlikely that she’ll be able to overcome them.

Unfortunately for Harris, and perhaps for the Democrats as a whole, it seems history is likely to remember her more as an answer to a trivia question than as a successful presidential candidate. Whether the Democrats will nominate her again remains to be seen. However, if they do, given her lack of appeal and unsuitability for the role, they can probably expect to see history repeat itself, and not in their favor.