Kamala Harris’s California Non-Endorsement Shows Why She Still Lacks Presidential Qualities
A chaotic gubernatorial election in Harris's home state demonstrates the former VP's lack of leadership
California is the most fifth-most Democratic state in the nation. It’s one of the last places in the country where you’d expect the country to struggle to nominate a gubernatorial candidate who will serve as the state’s Democratic flag-bearer.
But the California Democrats seem to be uniquely politically incompetent. Their flagship candidate, Eric Swalwell, not only dropped out of the governor’s race but also resigned from Congress following a series of allegations related to harassment of women.
Katie Porter, the once-promising Warrenite economic populist, hasn’t been able to consolidate the field (her history of abusing her staff might be one reason why).
Meanwhile, Republicans have a small chance of shutting out the Democrats altogether. California uses what’s called a top-two primary — meaning that everyone of every party competes in the same primary contest and the top two contenders advance to the general election. If two Republican candidates get the most votes, Democrats will find themselves without a candidate in one its masthead state.
One way to sort out this problem is for Democrats to unite around a candidate for governor who can beat back the Republicans and help solve the state’s longstanding problems — like its unaffordability crisis and pervasive chronic homelessness.
Some had hoped that former Vice President Kamala Harris would be the solution here. She had been considering running for governor, which would have instantly cleared the field; she almost certainly would’ve assumed the awesome duty of managing one of the largest economies on earth.
But Harris not only whiffed on running for that office, she seems to have no public opinion about who should be governor of her state.
On Monday, Harris released a list of endorsements for California races. Perusing the list, you’ll find plenty of incumbents — like Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass — but what you won’t find is Harris’s choice for the governor’s race.
Why did Harris refuse to weigh in on the most important race in the state? My guess is it’s the same reason she refused to weigh in on a referendum back in 2024 that increased penalties for some crimes.
She’s simply averse to leading.
Now, to be fair, I’m a biased party. The one time I chatted with Harris in person, she spent the whole time dodging my question.
But dodging difficult choices is more or less Harris’s forte. In her long career as a Democratic politician, it’s difficult to ever locate a time when she actually led the party on any issue in particular. She typically waits for a position to become politically safe before adopting it — that is, if she adopts any position whatsoever. Simply dodging the difficult question is her usual approach.
Does that sound like someone who should run for president to you? Does that sound like someone who could manage the entire country?
Harris has told us time and time again that she lacks presidential qualities. The question is whether Democratic primary voters are listening.
One thing that has become clear in this gubernatorial race is that the Democratic Party, at least in California, has basically no coherent ideological leaders; the whole thing is a bunch of lobbyists and consultants all scheming and stepping over each other in pursuit of power, and Harris is the worst of them all. She made this clear when she consolidated the donor class and demanded to be the 2024 nominee even though she had little chance of winning, while kneecapping anyone who might have had a better chance- she was willing to roll the dice on the fate of the whole country all for her own completely selfish pursuit of power. Then she apparently decided that the governorship of the most powerful and important state in America was too small for her, in spite of never having accomplished anything in politics. Now she's demonstrating complete indifference to the fate of her home state while she plots another failed run at the White House. It's (almost) hard to imagine that these people could be so self-involved yet indifferent to the actual concerns of voters- this is seriously Veep territory.
"Harris has told us time and time again that she lacks presidential qualities. The question is whether Democratic primary voters are listening."
Voters? We didn't pick her to run for President in 2020 or 2024.
The question (and, given the course of events in 2024, it DOES need to be asked) is whether the leaders of the Democratic establishment will actually listen to the party's voters. Or is that not a thing anymore?