This Thanksgiving, the knives are out for Kamala Harris. This week, she became the first woman to serve as acting president, when power briefly transferred to her while Joe Biden was under anesthesia. Nevertheless, rumors are swirling that Biden wonât seek re-election (he and his team vehemently insist he will), and thereâs growing concern that Harrisâwho has had more than her fair share of gaffes and misstepsâlacks the political instincts to lead Democrats into the promised land.
Bidenâs selection of Harris to be his running mate in 2020 made some political sense. She helped unite the party and balance the ticket. Indeed, they won. But in late 2021, Bidenâs needs have shifted. The Virginia gubernatorial election, coupled with subsequent polling, suggests that many suburbanites are turning against a Democratic Party they perceive to be too progressive. At the same time, Biden faces serious challenges, including rising inflation, a border crisis, supply chain troubles, violent crime rates, and more.
The things he has tried to get help from Harris on, starting with immigration, have not panned out. In general, Harrisâs performance has only contributed to the sense that this is an administration that isnât quite ready for primetime. If Harris is the bridge to the future, that bridge isnât holding its weight.
But is the criticism fair? During a recent discussion for Bloggingheads.TV, my friend Bill Scher, a liberal columnist for Washington Monthly and Real Clear Politics, reminded me that being vice president is a tough gig. As John Nance Garner famously quipped, the job isnât worth a âwarm bucket of spit.â You donât want to overshadow the president, and you canât really differ with him, so itâs almost, by definition impossible to look like a strong leader. You go to funerals. You get handed thankless projects. This is why, although veeps often ascend to the presidency (think LBJ or Gerald Ford), they generally arenât elected to immediately succeed their boss.
The most recent exception was George H.W. Bush, who basically just won Ronald Reaganâs third term. But is he a helpful model? Sitting at a less than 40 percent approval rating (and Harrisâs is lower than that), Biden doesnât look to be in the same league as the Gipper. But if somehow things turn around the way they did for Reagan after coming through a recession and having a rough midterm election in 1982, Harris might be in a good position to try and replicate Bushâs feat in 2028.
But even in the highly unlikely event history were to repeat itself, itâs worth noting that Bush still had to fight for the Republican nomination in a fairly crowded 1988 primary, still had to overcome the âwimpâ factor the media labeled him with, and still had to run an aggressively negative campaign against a less-than-charismatic Democratic opponent, all in order to defy history.
But thatâs not Harrisâs only challenge. Scher points out that there are basically two models for veeps. The first is an old D.C. hand who provides âinsiderâ cred and experience to the ticket. The second is the inverse situation, where the president is the insider and the running mate balances the ticket by virtue of some other qualities, such as age, identity, or charisma.
In recent history, the former model has been much more common. Walter Mondale, Al Gore, George H.W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Biden himself, and Mike Pence all had more D.C. experience than their respective principals.
This model also seems to be the better model, in terms of boosting the image of the vice president. In this scenario, the veep generally has built up lots of friends and contacts in the media and the bureaucracy. When the president slips up, other elites can fantasize about how much more competent and sane things would be if (fill in the blank) was running the show.
The most recent example of the Harris model was Dan Quayle. Now, in 2021, we can look at Quayle as the man who saved democracy by telling Mike Pence he didnât have the power to refuse to certify Joe Bidenâs electors. But for most of my life, Quayle has (unfairly, in my opinion) been a political punchline.
Quayle had been a rising star in the U.S. Senate prior to becoming Bushâs running mate. Even when Quayle sought the Republican nomination in his own right in 2000, his old bossâs formerly deadbeat son, âDubya,â swooped in and took away the only card he really had to play: the notion that he was the next in line and rightfully 41âs heir apparent.
Since modern history offers a small sample size for this model of vice president, the other (similar) recent example is John McCainâs selection of Sarah Palin. McCain, like Biden, had a ton of insider experience. What he needed was some youth and energyâand conservative cred to keep the base happy. So he picked Palin.
The point to all of this, of course, is that Kamala Harris is (a) in a job that is inherently thankless, and (b) represents a model of vice presidents that has historically not worked out well for the person occupying the position.
The deck is stacked against her. Further complicating things is the fact that her boss is seen as old and possibly on his way out the door, meaning the expectations for her to mature are high while the learning curve is steep.
While this might help you sympathize with her plight, it does not mean that Harris was a good pickâor that she is suited to inherit the mantle of leadership. Biden boxed himself in by promising to select a woman, which eliminated something like half of his options from the start. Harris has not had a long and distinguished career in the U.S. Senate, and her 2020 presidential campaign was lackluster.
Harrisâs main problem strikes me as being mostly indescribable. Itâs almost impossible to define why she turns so many people off. Yogi Berra, that great baseball philosopher, once had a line about how âIf people donât want to come out to the ballpark, nobodyâs gonna stop âem.â That may be the best way to sum up Harrisâs fundamental problem. No matter how hard they try to package the Kamala product, peopleâincluding Democratic voters in the 2020 primaryâjust havenât been buying what sheâs selling.
Yes, Iâm sure there are some racists and sexists who oppose her for those reasons. Generally, though, to the degree her identity harms her, itâs because people have high hopes for her to be a transformational leader. There is a lot of pressure on Harris to be this amazing historical figure, and thatâs a lot to live up to.
In todayâs media environment, it helps for a president to be a true political athlete, and it just may be that Harrisâdespite having been given so many opportunities to shineâjust doesnât have it.
This reminds me of the NFL, where having an âeliteâ franchise quarterback seems to be key to winning, and yet, the track record for identifying which college QBs will rise to the occasion seems to be mixed, at best. Harris is like one of these players. She showed flashes of brilliance on occasion, and there was a hope that with some time on the sidelines holding a clipboard, coupled with lots of practice and reps, she could mature into the future. For now, though, sheâs starting to look like a bust. And some of the fans are already looking around for a better draft pick.
Maybe theyâll be proven wrong. As Iâve just described, there are a lot of obstacles in her way. These obstacles could be obscuring our vision. But I wouldnât bet on it. If Kamala Harris is the last, best hope for the Democrats, the last obstacle standing between us and another Trump presidencyâand she may beâthen God help us.