The case for candidate Kamala Harris

She has name recognition, experience, and perhaps most importantly, money.

Hi! Independent journalism is more important than ever. Become a Premium Subscriber to The Handbasket and help me continue producing quality journalism and holding the powerful to account. Click here to upgrade. And you can support my work here as well. Many thanks.

What was once unthinkable is now being said out loud by the standard bearers of the Democratic Party: Joe Biden may not be the Democratic candidate for president this November. 

A CNN post-debate poll published Tuesday takes it a step further: Voters believe the most viable Democratic option to replace him against Donald Trump is Vice President Kamala Harris. If Biden is to step aside—which voters believe he should—Harris, according to this poll’s results, would fare better than alternatives like Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer, California Governor Gavin Newsom, and Pete Buttigieg. 

“We should be very cautious about reading too much into one poll. That’s always true, and certainly in a moment when things are so unsettled,” Washington Post’s Philip Bump warned in his column Tuesday. “But the CNN poll, conducted…is worth considering seriously for a few reasons. First, it was conducted entirely after the debate. Second, it is a quality, well-regarded poll. And, third, its findings are less useful in establishing certainty about how the party might move forward than they are in demonstrating that any such certainty is unwarranted.”

I’ve long been a firm believer of not putting too much stock in polls, and now is no different. But an American Prospect story also published Tuesday is what’s really got me warming to the idea of candidate Harris. The piece from Executive Editor David Dayen explains that, as with all things politics, the choice really comes down to money. He writes:

But all of this talk, and everyone’s feelings about Harris’s chances in a general election, is missing something: the main Biden campaign committee has raised hundreds of millions of dollars for the presidential election, invested in staff and booked airtime across the country. And the only person under campaign finance law who would be able to seamlessly continue to use that money for the general election is his ticket mate, Kamala Harris.

There’s been mostly handwaving about how difficult it would be for another candidate to come in and run his campaign from a standing start, with zero dollars and no campaign organization in late August. But it’s the primary reason why, practically speaking, Biden and Harris are really the only two choices available at this late stage of the campaign.

And if that’s not enough to sell you on the idea, a polling memo leaked to Puck News on Tuesday morning also showed Harris with an advantage over Biden in a matchup vs. Trump in every battleground state. The same poll also found Biden losing ground against Trump in each of these states. Per Puck:

While the debate may have barely registered in national data, in their surveys of key Electoral College states where voters are paying closer attention to the campaign, Biden is doing noticeably worse. In a poll including third-party candidates, such as Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the president has fallen by around 2 points in every single core battleground—and also in states that were not even on the 2024 map last week.

RFK Jr., for his part, is busy fending off accusations of sexual assault and eating a barbecued dog. 

To be sure, I’m hardly the first to suggest or endorse the idea of candidate Harris. As New York Times columnist Jamelle Bouie has said since the conversation began swirling about replacing Biden in light of his abysmal debate performance, there should be no option other than the veep. 

“I am not some big harris booster by any means,” Bouie later added, “but as i have been saying i think people are fooling themselves if they think that there is any outcome to ‘biden steps down’ other than ‘Harris becomes the nominee’.”

Lydia Polgreen, Bouie’s colleague at the Times, agreed in an op-ed published Friday entitled, “Kamala Harris Could Win This Election. Let Her.” She wrote: “The obvious, logical path out of the mess President Biden created with his disastrous debate performance is for him to bow out with honor and endorse his young, vigorous and talented vice president to stand in his stead.”

And in an appearance on MSNBC Tuesday, Polgreen reiterated her faith in Harris as the top of the Democratic ticket, calling her a “uniquely good candidate in this particular moment in this particular race.”

From my perspective, one potential risk of making Harris the nominee is dredging up the bitterness sowed in the 2020 Democratic primary. I myself traveled to New Hampshire twice to volunteer for Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s presidential campaign because I genuinely believed she was the best candidate for the job. I defensively sparred online and in person with supporters of other candidates, and Harris’s supporters specifically—or the #KHive, as her online army was called—over legitimate policy differences as well as campaign minutiae.

But as the 2020 primaries advanced, it quickly became clear all the infighting had been for naught. Former Vice President Biden, who’d consistently been performing behind other candidates, was the party’s choice. And so all of us across the Democratic ideological spectrum were instructed to fall in line—with a smile. And we did, many of us with the express goal of evicting Trump from the Oval Office. 

Some may resent being told yet again to fall in line, now behind Harris. But this time the stakes are concrete. Donald Trump has already orchestrated a coup against the United States government; Donald Trump has already tried to overturn a free and fair election; Donald Trump has already been convicted of a felony; Donald Trump has already rigged the Supreme Court in his favor to ensure immunity from criminal prosecution. Add to that his promises of a “blood bath” should he lose this election and the use of the National Guard to illegally expel millions of migrants during his next administration, we know exactly what we’re facing: tyranny. 

Any concerns about supporting someone who wasn’t your first choice in 2020 or cringing at being considered part of the #KHive are purely aesthetic as compared to our country’s existential threats. This is an emergency situation where egos and baggage must be put aside in order to serve the ultimate goal of making sure Donald fucking Trump never gets back to The White House. 

This is not to say put away any disagreements with Biden or Harris as people or candidates. This is not to say ignore their administration’s continued support of Israel’s genocide in Gaza, or their increasingly right wing stance on immigration. This is not to say “blue no matter who.” No, this is to say that we are in a uniquely perilous position that, absent a time machine, has very few options to be remedied. It’s to say that if we don’t at least try to put forth someone more vital than the current president, we are likely going to lose. To a fascist. 

As Axios reported Tuesday morning, “Former President Trump, if re-elected, plans to immediately test the boundaries of presidential and governing power, knowing the restraints of Congress and the courts are dramatically looser than during his first term, his advisers tell us.” There is no mystery about what comes next.

White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said in a briefing Tuesday that “[Biden’s] not a young man; he’s a little slower than he used to be.” What great luck then to have a considerably younger, quicker counterpart at his side to step in at a time of such profound angst and anxiety. 

Kamala Harris may not be the candidate primary voters chose, but she may turn out to be the candidate we need. 

Reply

or to participate.