She can't run a campaign, and she thinks she can run the country? We want competence. We are not voting to meet some gender and racial quota for the Presidency of the USA. She needs to bow out of the race as soon as possible.
39
Julian Castro is the candidate the democrats need.
9
She has no message.
20
Kamala Harris came across as a “party operative”—kind of like a Debbie Wasserman-Schultz.
We don’t want a party operative this time around.
28
Too many candidates.
8
Nepotism never works.
11
Does Kelly Mehlenbacher her really think she’s that important?
News for her.
4
As impressive as she is it’s obvious, time to winnow the herd. Not a sign that she’s irrelevant and has a good message, but time to see the writing on the wall.
9
Contrast this with Elizabeth Warren.
8
Kamala Harris was well-packaged by several wealthy individuals (including The Getty Family), and politically guided by well-connected politicians (including Willie Brown). Between her handling of the police lab and the church pedophile scandals during her stint as DA, I have little faith in her ability to morally or intellectually lead the US in the proper direction.
23
She played the black card hard. But having a black father in her early years and an Indian mother as professors is not the same experience as she is trying to identify with.
Raised by an Indian mother and spending summers in India I’d say tips the scale as being more Indian than black which she hardly ever mentions.
Brown skin does not go far enough.
19
Her demagoguery and her fakeness and her horrible actual record may also have something to do with it.
28
Stop tearing women candidates down. The media is the problem in this situation.
22
for me, it all began when she hit Biden under the belt in the first debate. Before that, I'd hope that she wd be his VP nominee....she kinda repulses me at this point and I'll probably have a hard time voting for her to be a senator again.
16
Her campaign is supported by the likes of “Charlamagne tha God” and we’re really supposed to wonder what went wrong?
15
When Kamala Harris committed the unforced error of trying to take Biden out of the race prematurely, it was obvious she was playing checkers, not chess. She would have still won that first debate easily without taking that arrow from her quiver and many of us knew it would boomerang back on her. The real question is why couldn't she see that?
Harris and Warren have shown they haven't got a clue about how to campaign in purple states. And Warren has done all of Bernie's dirty work for him. No wonder Biden is ticking up in the polls again, along with Buttigieg.
8
Kamala is proof of Stanislavsky’s adage that when you lie the audience knows it. By ‘lie’ I mean any obfuscation of your true self. Just as acting is, paradoxically, not acting, Kamala needed to have the self confidence to show up as her authentic and vulnerable self.
“Speak the speech as I told it to you, trippingly on the tongue...” and not in a pasted-on imitation of African-American speech patterns.
Her bombing in the campaign is no mystery to performing artists. The biggest irony is that her authentic self is bright, warm, and committed to progressive causes. I support her though, like a parent, I wince at her stumbles and hope she learns and carries on.
14
She made crucial mistakes with the proverbial “race card”.
She needed to give equal time and attention to all of her background.
And then she finally unwound herself by lurching all over the place. Voters want focus, plan, cohesion.
9
And this is why we have primaries and why we need primaries. Hilary Clinton ran a terrible campaign in 2008 and the result was Obama and his two-terms as president. In 2016 Clinton ran another (!) terrible campaign but this time there was no real primary contest and her failures as a candidate weren’t fully exposed until she went up against the Republican, which gave us the Trump disaster. The Democratic establishment’s efforts to squelch competition in 2016 is an ongoing fiasco.
19
Borrowing a trick from the movie “A Time to Kill,” close your eyes and visualize and judge Ms. Harris as you would if she was a man. Would his ambition be less offensive? Would his attack on Biden and reluctance to give specifics on his policies be considered just politics as usual? Ms. Harris’s candidacy is definitely flawed but is she being viewed fairly in that women must always be more perfect and humble?
16
When Harris viciously attacked Joe Biden with a false assertion that he was a racist because he did not support busing years ago,I knew she was doomed. That action told me she would do anything to win, even turn on a former ally. Harris came off as an opportunist. She lost all of us---African American and other races---who can't stand low, dirty tactics.
Like so many of those in the Democratic contest, producing a plethora of programs is not what is needed. The campaign issues should be about Trump and the Republicans. Steyer has it right.
20
I think Harris has now exposed her weakness' to the point when she is up for Senate re election she might have trouble keeping her seat.
18
Sen. Harris was an early favorite of mine. Her inability to operate a viable campaign indicates she probably would not be capable of operating a functional Whitehouse. So sad.
14
It doesn't seem worth noting particularly at this point, after 1100+ comments; but really. Talk about "an empty dress" (suit)! As noted previously, what does she really know? What is the claim to fame on which she hoped to build her campaign for President of the United States? I don't recall hearing much about it. The quote from staff referring to a frequent use of different campaign slogans speaks volumes. Of course! She knows not what she's about and is totally disconnected from her campaign. Who told her to run anyway? Her sister? From the start, she's presented herself as rather vain and empty-headed. A panderer. Always opting for trite overused symbols; contrived concerns and issue-related statements and the unserious one-liners, i.e., the Biden and Barr-shots are two good examples of a common fall back in her communication style. A style that conveys just how little she knows and an overall lack of depth on subjects. She needs to end the chaos and return to the senate where she belongs to serve out her first term as junior senator from CA. She's needed in the senate and not on the campaign trail presenting herself as something she is not; that is, a well qualified, prepared and serious candidate for high office.
18
She had a strong path in the middle as a liberal law and order candidate who was a Boss. She let the progressive fever drive her left beyond her comfort zone and the resulting inauthenticity was palpable. A real shame.
12
Her message lacks clarity and vision much like her campaign. Other than that very first debate where she took shots at Biden, she has yet to find her groove.
If she’s to avoid being relegated to the lowest tier, she’d better fire some of her staff and shake things up.
7
She doesn’t stand for anything beyond campaign slogans. Very disappointing.
9
"Health care policy ..., but she had never given the details extensive thought as she rose ... to the Senate. "
If you don't have a policy on health care and haven't thought it through, you're out of the race as far as I am concerned. Finished.
I spent Thanksgiving trying to pick a new insurance policy on the health care exchange. There is a major difference this year. There are no PPO plans available in my neck of the woods. Just EPOs and HMOs, no PPOs.
What's the difference? A PPO includes coverage for out-of-network (OON) doctors with a big ($25k in 2019 on mine) deductible. $25k would seriously hurt me, but not bankrupt me. HMOs and EPOs do not cover you OON. Hello bankruptcy. If I can't find a PPO for next year I really don't know what to do.
If she can't be bothered to learn anything about my most pressing problem, thanks but no thanks.
13
I understand what you mean, in reference to Pete Buttigieg, by “as a country we are not there yet.”
However, a Times article recently reported that if Democratic voters in Iowa mention his sexual orientation at all, they do so with a shrug.
Twelve years ago, we supposedly were not at the stage to elect a black president. Then we did. The trouble with Pete is starting to look like another of those things that matter very much until, suddenly, they matter very little.
5
She was never a contender, but hey, I like her a lot.
Try again in 20 years.
5
Senator Kamala Harris's attack on Joe Biden must have triggered her political decline. Any candidate that takes on Joe Biden is sure to decline immediately.
5
Could it be possible that she simply deluded herself into thinking she could be President?
Yes, that is definitely it.
7
Men are committing suicide at record numbers.
90% of all civil workplace fatalities are men.
Men's health is vastly underfunded.
Men get 63% more jail time for the same first time offense.
Male genital mutilation is still legal.
Yes Harris continues to focus on women's issues.
She advocated spending in excess of 100 million to test past rape kits; but not one dime for DNA testing for the Innocence Project to get falsely accuse men out of jail.
Is it any wonder she is losing? And Warren and the others are close behind until the Democrats do something.
But me my guest: respond by calling me an incel or MRA;it will not change anything.
6
The blame rests squarely on Kamala Harris herself. She is phoney.
17
Senator Harris has run the best campaign she could. Without question, she's made some mistakes and funding has been a problem, but she's a worthy candidate.
I'm not sure our country is ready for a female president. There's an enormous amount of misogyny swirling around all the female candidates and it doesn't help that foreign actors are constantly manipulating the media.
We must also consider the hateful, racist and misogynistic tweets and comments of our president. His actions are those of a mentally ill man with, perhaps, the early signs of dementia. Nothing good is going to come from anything he says or does.
Senator Kamala Harris' fall from the top tier of candidates is more of an indictment of our culture of misogyny and cowardice than it is a statement of her qualifications.
9
No message, no surprise.
4
When she took over as DA in San Francisco, Harris abandoned pending prosecutions of police officers for various alleged crimes against suspects. Her coziness with the SFPD then has disabused me of any thoughts I had of supporting her.
7
When you run out of money, desperate measures need to be taken. Ms. Mehlenbacher, it seems you backed the wrong horse. You aren't the first.
Despite our crazy and extremely long presidential campaign to select foes to duke it out in November it does one thing: It is such a long grind that it shows the temprament and resolve of the candidate to go toe to toe against the other party from July through the general election
By making the fight for the Democratic Party a two year marathon it allows all of the warts and beauty marks to be exposed and each candidate can then pimple-pop each other and look for an acceptable running mate.
The dissapointing thing is that the candidates who already have politically elected jobs are drawn away from doing the jobs they are paid to do. I think it might be worthwhile to have any candidate for POTUS give up their elected position the first day they file for ANY state primary.
It appears a lot of these offices are bueracracies that run themselves without a political hack at the top.
That way we the voters won't have to put up with flakey candidates and political consultants won't have to cry in their beer when the horse they backed goes lame.
4
1) Poll-tested triangulation
2) HRC/big donor choice from before launch
3) indecisive; affected speech (That 'That question made me uncomfortable and I need time to think" laigh is s real disadvantage.)
4) Doesn't seem to believe in anything strongly
5) "Trump bad!"
Not a good candidate. She's going to hurt her political career in Cali if she stays in much longer.
But, good grief - and I never thought I'd be in this position - the last bit of the feature article makes me need to defend her. Those interviewed voters are jumping ship because Buttigeig has more specific proposals?!? He has mountains of words, but specifics he has not. (Other than "1992 status quo is just fine. Fine.") May be time to resurrect the word "craughing" for this primary season.
8
Presidents should have administrative experience, like what you get from being a governor. Charlie Baker, current Massachusetts governor, would be an excellent Republican substitute for Trump. Baker is popular with Democrats, he is free of even rumors of corruption, and he has experience with healthcare management.
5
“You can’t run the country if you can’t run your campaign”
That about says it.
As chaotic and disorganized as the Trump campaign and presidency have been, it will require a perfectly executed campaign to beat him next November. Sen. Harris' campaign's performance and now this article strongly indicate that she should bow out gracefully and quickly.
4
The bottom line is, if you can’t run a campaign, you can’t run the U.S. government. All indications from seeing this ineffective and disorganized campaign are that she would have an ineffective and disorganized Administration. She should either take radical steps to break out of the morass she is currently in, or she should drop out. But the shortcomings that got her into this place likely mean she can’t really get out of it.
5
In 2016, I voted for Bernie Sanders in the primary, then Donald Trump in the general election.
Why exactly? For one thing, Hillary Clinton seemed to be arguing for open borders in some of her campaign events. For another, I felt that feminists had abandoned due process in trying Bill Cosby in the media instead of letting the courts follow usual procedures. Then I saw Gloria Allred at events for Hillary. Finally there was the emphasis on the Access Hollywood tapes. Yes, Trump exhibited repugnant behavior. But Clinton tried to make this into an issue when Bill Clinton had had an affair with Monica Lewinsky in the White House.
This seemed hypocritical to me. And Clinton had marched too far to the left.
Voting for Trump was a mistake. But many people still support him. The only way he can possibly win in 2020 is if Democrats make even bigger mistakes of this nature.
Kamala Harris talks about further investigations of Brett Kavanaugh on the Rachel Maddow show. This strikes me as the same mistakes made by Clinton.
Democrats made the inflammatory charge that Kavanaugh had committed attempted rape in high school 35 years ago.
But the only evidence of this event was the accuser's statement. Nevertheless, it appeared that Democrats were engaged in a politics of personal destruction to achieve political ends. The vote was almost exactly along party lines.
We need a presidential candidate who, unlike Harris, is interested in healing the nation, not dividing it further.
6
With the continuing impoverishment of the multi-racial, multi-national, American working class, suffering through a long term "recovery"--an "upturn" featuring 40 million living in poverty, a half a million homeless on the streets, rows of empty stores even in posh areas, mass opioid addiction and suicide rates soaring and life expectancy declining--what will the inevitable economic downturn look like? . . . . At that point, if not before, ethnic identification will be less important than economic survival in motivating voters of all colors and the candidates they choose as President.
3
She has attitude and while attitude can be good, hers just isn't. So far all we've heard is a lot of nothing and her ratings have taken a nose dive.
If the Democrats can't come up with a viable candidate we could possibly be doomed with trump for another term. The field must be narrowed. The debates are a joke with too many cooks in the kitchen. We need thoughtful messages and not frantic answers to the questions in the short time allotted.
8
I thought Harris would be a strong candidate based on what I'd read about her before her entry into the race.
The first time I really saw her speak was after the El Paso shooting, when CNN's Jake Tapper spoke to several politicians during his show including Beto and Buttigieg. Harris stood out because she came across as so shockingly insincere (trying not to say "fake"here) and rehearsed in her words, body language and voice that I just had to switch off, and wondered if American voters would have as strong a negative reaction as mine.
Reading this article it seems that Harris's apparent insincerity is just one of several factors contributing to her fall. Blaming the campaign manager for the candidate's missteps seems quite Trumpian to me... everyone's fault except one's own.
12
She has the what it takes. Unlike Trump, but more like Klobuler, Booker & Castro; she seemed to me inclined to be overly cautious or safe in speech. They obviously possessed critical thinking skills and amiability.
But could they defend themselves or complexity. Defense meaning the information being shared not one’s self. If someone else has better reasoning or ideas it’s okay to disagree. But if one does not like the timing of implementation or its expensive those are conditions separate to the terminal objective being sought. For example, Medicare for All (MFA) Vs MFA with an option to own a private plan. What’s the difference both mean MFA.
If you’re campaigning for office you can’t hide from controversy (public mistakes or errors in judgement). Imagine the ‘silent’ era in movies the actors still provided stories. They weren’t ‘political’ stiffs. Politics is the public exchange of ideas whereas governing is the official execution of ideas.
1
For some time now, I have considered that Kamala Harris was biding her time. This seems to be reinforced by this quote from the article: "One official recalled that during the flight from Oakland to Iowa on the night she announced her campaign in January, Ms. Harris told senior members of her campaign team that she wanted to 'go stealth.'"
The other candidates are spending a great deal of money fighting each other. This is money they cannot use to fight President Trump. The DNC (Dinosaur National Committee) holds most of the cards right now, but that will likely change after Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina.
In the spirit of full disclosure, I sent $100 to Jay Inslee's campaign and then sent $100 to Elizabeth Warren. I will have no problem sending money to Kamala Harris if she does well in the early primaries. If you support other candidates, put your money where your mouth is and send them a donation.
4
"Unraveled" is a bit strong. She's no longer at the top, but I predict she will be a chosen as a vice-presidential running mate, especially if Joe Biden is the candidate.
4
When we observe numerous candidates who are unlikely to receive the nomination and wonder why they’re running, we forget that they may want a prize as a seat in the new presidents cabinet.
If they can bring over votes from their supporters they can claim a reward in the new administration.
It’s amazing that so many seemingly intelligent people want to spend their precious lives in a corrupt political system.
1
I initially thought she had the potential to go all the way, and envisioned a Harris/Buttigieg ticket. I was wrong - she's done.
3
I am not prepared to write off Senator Harris just yet. She has more charisma than most of the other candidates but for Mayor Pete and perhaps Ms Williamson.
I am at a loss as to why people say she is short on policy issues, she is perhaps not quite Senator Warren in the department but none the less I find that Senator Harris does have a cohesive plan as to how she would govern.
I hope that if Gabbard makes the next debate that Sen Harris takes every opportunity to lay into her. Gabbard is easily the most unlikeable of all the candidates so going after her is a no brainer.
However I do feel that if you are running for office to have your sister or any family member running your campaign is a big misstep, and one that the Senator needs to address.
3
I know it's easy to pile on Senator Harris, and yes, she made a lot of mistakes. For starters, she never should have hired her sister to be the campaign Chairwoman. She made a number of strategic errors that many commenters on here already mentioned.
I have no favorite in this primary and will support whoever the nominee is. Heck, I'd vote for one of the muppets on Sesame Street at this point before ever voting for Trump, but I digress - here is my point:
I was a volunteer on Sen. John Kerry's campaign back in 2003 and 2004. He was polling around 10% before Iowa and had a number of campaign problems, much like Kamala. Many people didn't think Senator Kerry would even make it to the Iowa caucus. There were whispers he would drop out. His campaign was basically out of money and he had to mortgage his home to infuse his campaign with more cash. He fired his campaign manager, several staffers resigned on their own and things were a mess for awhile. The media (and Democratic insiders) basically wrote him off. Then Senator Kerry won Iowa and the rest is history.
I'm just saying that many of the comments I am reading on this thread about Kamala is similar to what was being said about John Kerry leading up to Iowa.
Don't count her out.
7
What this really shows is how little competition there is in California for political leaders like Senators. The Democratic Party in one-party-state CA essentially selects the winners of most elections. Republicans no longer ever win state-wide races, so whoever the party endorses in the primary is basically a shoe-in.
This is not a way to groom candidates for competitive races such as President. Democrats in California are used to it being "their turn" to get elected to whatever is the next office up the chain. They are not used to having to fight for anything since everyone in the state basically just selects whichever name has a "D" next to it.
9
All politicians are inherently ambitious and most are willing to shape their image to appeal to the greatest number of voters. But Ms. Harris is the extreme in that regard. She resembles a piece of tofu - devoid of character on its own but capable of assuming the flavour of anything with which it comes in contact.
America already has an amoral president; it doesn't need another. She exhibits little evidence of core principles on which she is willing to stand or fall. Her prosecutorial record moreover suggests a willingness to make decisions that serve her ambition more than they do either the public good or the rights of the individual.
Contrast Harris, for example, with Warren or Sanders. You might not like where one or other stands on policy issues, but you can't deny they exude compassion, passion and integrity. Nor are they willing to abandon their core values should they prove unpopular with some elements of the electorate. Sure they're ambitious but their ambition is borne of an intense desire to serve the public good - not merely their own self-interest or political ambition.
9
"Thats where the buck stops" in reference to Mr. Rodgriguez. No sir it starts and ends with Ms. Harris. It's her responsibility to provide clear direction to her staff. If you cant do it during a campaign how can you be expected to lead the country. Her equivocation on issues such as medicare for all remind of John Kerry's infamous " I was for it before I was against it" response to his support for the Iraq war. Just another politician to scared to say the wrong thing and let voters decide for themselves on whether they agree. Say what you want about Sanders and Warren(neither of who I support). They say what they think and let the electorate assess it's appropriateness. Ms. Harris's campaign represents the worst aspect of politics where it's more important to win than to clearly state your positions. I could just imagine going to job interview and performing like that.
1
Kamala soared to her presidential run on the coattails of high profile, wealthy, liberal Californians. She is not ready to lead our nation. Her opinions waver. She has become abrasive in the debates in a sorry attempt to demonstrate leadership. Kamala needs to retreat and focus on the job she was elected to do in the US Senate. The presidency could benefit from having a female in office. Or a person of color. But that's not enough. Consistent ideals, leadership, and a real record take precedence. Drop out now so we can ensure a united Democratic opposition to Trump.
2
How could've the money mangers not know the money was going out faster than coming in...It isn't rocket science.
1
Some candidates you have to ponder over. Many are pondering over Ms. Harris. I was done with her in 10 minutes. I didn't get to her race, her campaign or her message. In the first debate I saw, she said that if the Republicans tried to bully her as president, she'd do what needed to be done on her own. I'm sure it was just bluster but a President can't do that and I thought it was pretty basic. Then I went online and found out she failed the bar. And that closed the deal. A President should be above average. And Kamala Harris is not.
5
Kamala Harris will rise again. She has my trust and I have been wowed by her office staff when making Indivisible phone calls— out of all Senators hers was the most genuinely responsive. She, to me, is solidly progressive.
I agree with many others here that she ran too soon, though I understand why she did. What I despaired of was the false persona she seemed to adopt, particularly a drawl that I never heard from her before. As an aunt to biracial nephews, I think African Americans will accept her just fine without trying so hard to fit in.
A good Method acting coach would help her have confidence in her authentic self. Meanwhile, we need her advocacy and moxie in the Senate. I look forward to a long constituency under her care for my San Francisco home.
Still love, believe in, and need you, Kamala!!!
4
It is a shame but that is the way it goes. It would have been enjoyable to watch her tear into Trump during the debates.
It seemed to me that after the first debate the bottom fell out of her campaign. Joe Biden is an affable guy. Bringing up a decision that was made 40 years ago may have brought her attention during the debate yet it certainly backfired on her. Biden's decision on busing has nothing to due with the issues that are present today. She should have taken the fight directly to Trump. Her tirade against Biden made him the focus instead of Trump. That first debate was her opportunity to introduce herself to the voters and she blew it. Now she is at a crossroads. Does she further waste her time & resources on a quixotic quest? Questions surrounding her tenure as SF AG and Calfifornia AG leave open so many questions that if a Democrat wins she will probably not be selected to be AG. It would be better for her to concentrate on her Senate career & winning reelection. She has the opportunity to carve out an outstanding Senate career and perhaps run again in 4 or 8 years. She could be the next senior senator from Calf. as it seems that this is Finestein's last term. Harris can bring a lot to the table that is positive but not this time. She needs more time to balance out the prosecutorial mode with being an effective legislator.
Hopefully she will realize this and soon before it is too late.
Then again pride goes before the fall.
3
What is not really mentioned in this article is that Senator Harris is decidedly NOT quick on her feet and seems to have a shallow understanding of issues and her policies with respect to such issues beyond a talking point. As a former prosecutor I expected her to be in,blue on thought and response.
These qualities may highlight that her political advancement in California was more a result of her personal relationship with the California house speaker and boyfriend than any political skill on her part.
3
My first introduction to Kamala Harris was the Kavanaugh hearing. She impressed me. Until I learned that she had prosecuted marijuana cases, and only changed her position on marijuana when politically necessary for a senate and then presidential campaign. Her past with marijuana prosecutions, the laughter she shared when questioned about her own use, the hypocrisy of using and prosecuting, the political nature of her evolving positions on legalization and/or decriminalization have all turned me away from Senator Harris. As Molly Nelson writes in Canna Law Blog, "Her past opposition to legalization as an attorney followed by inaction during the early part of her career as Senator does not and should not inspire confidence in Harris as an advocate for legalization."
I was surprised to find no mention in the article and only one comment on Harris' position on marijuana legalization. She has recently sponsored the Marijuana Justice Act of 2019 and the MORE Act, which shows that her position is evolving to align with the majority of Democrats.
2
This factoid says it all - an impending demise of Ms. Harris candidacy :
"...Extensive polling led her to believe that there was great value in the word “truth,” so she titled her 2019 memoir “The Truths We Hold”.."
And our POTUS - with zero polling had a winning message MAGA.
To me, that's symptomatic of many of these candidates - poll first and then come up with a message.
The problem with polling is, well, they are often wrong and that too, spectacularly.
POTUS winning against Hillary being a poster child of polls go e way wrong.
And many saw that Hillary was parroting what polling told her - not what she believes. In that regard, I admire Bernie and now Send. Warren.
I think - even as a Republican - I was not earlier enamored by Mr. Trump - but his staying on the message helped convince many of us - he is our man.
And of course, he has delivered.
To me, Ms. Harris has even less likeability factor than Hillary.
And if she is speaking truths that pollsters told her - most can see when it is not an authentic message.
It's like saying I love KFC because most of my potential voters love chicken.
It just don't cut it.
8
Her problem was threefold.
1-Identity obsession.
2-Identity obsession.
3-Identity obsession.
She ran as a black woman dividing people instead of like Obama who ran as an American and not a black man and united people.
She did not learn from Hillary who snatched defeat from the jaws of victory with identity obsession, ie big liberal states cannot do anything wrong, especial women but many republicans (instead of a few) are deplorable.
Americans, whether it comes from Hillary or Trump are sick of identity politics.
1134
@SGC Yes, I know the type; I had Thanksgiving dinner with one of them. All principles are ad hoc and unsurprisingly eliminate candidates whose positions cause them discomfort and therefore they are forced to vote for Trump.
44
@Paul
An argument that says "Let's focus on the needs and concerns of the white working class" and "Let's nominate a candidate that white people in the Rust Belt find acceptable" is also an obsession with identity.
All politics is identity politics. The only question is which identity you place value on.
322
@SGC -Thank you for you reply. You are right because I am correct. Female candidates are making the same mistakes black candidate made for president since the first one ran.
Obama finally got it, he ran as a uniter.
75
How a Presidential candidate's campaign is run and led is telling as to how a candidate will operate if they win. Sen. Harris seemed to have standout qualities on paper but since entering the race has failed to differentiate her positions from the other leading candidates. Her message is muddled, scatter shot as if she is still trying to find it. Ultimately, a campaign staff is cobbled together in a hurry, typically novices mixed with consultants that along with the candidate to push out the message on her position. Sen. Harris needs to quickly delegate and trust that her picks will support her properly and if everyone is in sync. SInce she doesn't a defined position and has a dysfunctional campaign, she clearly will fade away.
8
"Some of her problems have been beyond her control. Health care policy and the identity of the Democratic Party became much-debated issues this year, but she had never given the details of either matter extensive thought as she rose from local prosecutor to California attorney general to the Senate."
Huh? What's wrong with Kamala Harris is not that she does not know how to project a consistent message. It is that she does not stand for anything at all. No one will vote for someone who does not appear to have any core beliefs, other than a desire to be president. Moreover, Ms. Harris's tenure as California Attorney General shows that she is not a progressive. Most Democratic primary voters are. End of story.
13
She had me, living in San Francisco I was a fan. However, when she announced the run for president, I often was left wondering what she was doing. She seemed to spend far, far too much time in California, and in fact was in Oakland and San Francisco out of the gate. We already knew who she was, why did she come here? It was odd, and I am no political pundit, trust me. When I watched other stops on the seemingly lost campaign, I couldn't get a good feeling about what she was saying. She lacked conviction, to any one position and was all over the place. I don't know how so many mistakes were made in a campaign for president. I suppose she didn't understand how different running for president would be compared to running for office in a passive California. Here, if you can get your face out there enough, everyone votes for you. It is not an intellectual exercise. A presidential campaign is obviously entirely different, you better know what you have to say and have a clear message. Maybe if she tries again she will hire a proper team that can lead her in the right direction. But maybe she missed her moment.
9
I know Harris well. She is an excellent thinker, speaker and a leader. But Presidential campaigns require a lot more. And constantly begging for money can get exhausting. It wasn't her time. She also needs to work on her body language and voice in the debates. It is not attractive to people who don't know her. In person she is warm, kind and genuine. Her mother raised her well. I also wish she'd speak more about the Indian side of her. In politics, because of bias, she seems to repress that side. She'd make an excellent Senator. I see a very bright future for her. It is not her time for the Presidency. But she is a fast learner.
26
You said, "She'd make an excellent Senator." The Honorable Senator Kamala Harris already IS a Senator... one of California's (two) Senators. So...are you suggesting she focus on her current job as a Senator? or run for Senate in a different state? Your statement doesn't make sense, given that she's already a Senator.
1
I believe Tulsi's questions regarding Kamala's record in California as a prosecutor and as attorney general were serious blows to Kamala's momentum. But the killer blow was one that Kamala herself wielded: when she told Anderson Cooper that she didn't need to respond to Tulsi's questions as she (Kamala) was a "top tier" candidate...that I believe was the moment.
49
@jack Top tier candidate with 3% rating.
3
The comments here keep referring to her “privileged upbringing” and her “attack on Joe Biden” and “identity politics.”
No black person is privileged because they were bussed to a white school. She is still identified as “black.”
As to her comment with regard to Biden - she was showing that she could go tow to toe with Trump’s horrific bag of dirty tricks when need be. That is exactly what we need to beat him.
And then there is the “running on identity politics.” She is certainly qualified to do so as she is White, Jamaican, Indian and, most likely Asian. Incredibly, that still identifies you with the shade of your skin, i.e. black. That is America.
The most disturbing take on this article and its comments is the New York Times Picks. Most should just state their ignorance with regard to race right off the bat. And their misogyny. So are the journalists feeding into the mythos that a woman cannot beat Trump - especially a “black” woman? Think about it.
20
@Anonymous Not sure where you think the Asian comes from, unless you’re including South Asian ie Indian in the mix. Her mother’s family are high-caste Brahmins (in the literal meaning, not the Boston variety). There is no East Asian in her heritage.
Her hypocrite message was reinforced in last debate how she will fight the rich and powerful
Did she come up with that as she sat in her Brentwood CA $4.5 million home that is in a trust
https://www.forbes.com/sites/kamranrosen/2019/06/25/where-the-top-democratic-primary-candidates-call-home/#af7b24324a3a
24
NYT forgets to mention her claim to fame really was President Obama saying she was the best looking attorney general In America . Not the best just good looking. Put that in a white politicians mouth and wow the NyT would be all over it. And if they both were republicans they would have disparaged Kaamal as a nothing but looks. Oh and dont mention the fact that her mentor has all but said she slept her way to the top...but that’s ok.
23
Quick question: Were you ever planning to mention that Ms. Mehlenbacher quit the campaign to work for Mike Bloomberg, or were you just hoping to plop this hit piece and run for the hills?
35
I watched her rise up from San Francisco DA to the AG of CA to Senator. She has always been in such a hurry. Spend a little more than a single term in your role and learn to temper your tantrums a bit. The angry black woman thing is a big turnoff, especially when you're not black, nor white, nor any one thing. You just come across as bitter and no one wants a bitter person in charge of anything... Go back home to CA, spend a few terms in the senate and do something other than climb the ladder and make the talk show rounds. Prove to us you're a leader instead of telling us... It is the only path.
39
Exactly as I have always perceived Harris: as a climber with no principled core.
3
Thank God!!!
12
Let me get this straight... A Kamala aide got hired by the Bloomberg campaign and their internal resignation letter gets “leaked” to the media. The NY Times doesn’t just report these facts but does a full-on obituary hit piece?
Nah. Kamala has more support than you think.
See y’all in Iowa and South Carolina.
21
Maybe it was the absurdity of pretending to be "black". Look at the picture. Claiming racial privilege that she doesn't even fit.
18
Sorry to see that she has not gained traction with our ignorant, uneducated idiotic electorate. She's clearly the smatest person in the room, but that's lost on our reality TV moronic population. Oh well, I'll vote for Morris the Cat if it means getting the lying grifter our of office!
19
Who in their right mind enters the squirrel cage of running for US President?
8
Nice NYTimes. How about a follow up about her emails?
16
It may be tacky to comment on a piece I refuse to read, but this is an awful lot like the NYT HRC reboot. The race is in flux and Harris is a moderate that may still get the attention she deserves and she clearly has the rhetorical style that can beat the criminal in the WH with all the respect he has earned. But with friends like NYT, the US needs no enemies.
25
Whatever happened to Hillary's Arkansas "twang" ??? Non-existent. Kamala busts out the Ebonics but she doesn't really speak like that behind closed doors. She may have been born in Oakland, but she was raised in Montreal.
19
Sometimes it's instructional to watch these candidates when they appear on late night TV. I watched Ms. Harris do a late night interview, and she came off as vacuous and silly. So I put her in my "does-not-appear presidential column." Mayor Pete, Elizabeth Warren, Joe Biden and Bernie all seemed to have a better command of that format. I know this is a pretty shaky way to evaluate candidates, but a lot of people do get their news only from talk shows.
15
The July debate was the moment that sunk her. Even otherwise, she would have been in decline. Sanders, Warren, Gabbard, etc are very clear in expressing what they stand for. What does Harris stand for? Can she express her true self instead of saying and doing pre-programmed things her advisors tell her to?
18
“You can’t run the country if you can’t run your campaign,”
That's a problem with someone who made there name in a deep blue state that is sort of an anomaly with the rest of the country. She is out of her element and comfortable in a safe zone for Democrats.
Not only that but a Senator typically does not have to make tough operational decisions such as those faced by a governor or mayor: making sure things work and this campaign sadly doesn't.
9
I had the same reaction to her deriding Biden on the debate stage regarding busing as many of these commenters did . I didn’t like it . It seemed very opportunistic , mean spirited and just stupid. I liked her before that . I was surprised as well that many in the media thought that was a plus for her. That just goes to show you how out of touch some of the TV pundits are . They don’t seem to speak for the majority of Democrats.
34
Me too. it was a viral moment planned in advance against a friend who had supported her. I said at the time that the jump in her poll numbers would not last because at our core we don't like nasty attacks against our own and over time this would come back on her. I had been hoping for a Biden- Harris ticket. After that not so much.
2
Ms. Harris is my vote for AG, not president, but Ms. Mehlenbacher lost me at “To Whom It May Concern” and “It is with a heavy heart...” Doesn’t indicate a lot of experience or rhetorical skill. Sounds like someone bummed and just ready to complain.
9
Over 1,000 comments. It seems almost all of them negative. The heading is negative. The press first ignored her and now is attacking her. She'll need a lot of stamina to survive this.
18
@MT W If you can’t stand the heat, don’t go into the kitchen.
15
It's really a shame that Harris and Booker, two brilliant and younger candidates are eclipsed by three old candidates. Buttigieg may be fourth--but let's get real, he wouldn't win even if nominated because as a country we are not there yet.
13
The ratings of Harris have never justified the rave publicity she received.The media has thus exaggerated her chances of winning because she is a woman, a Californian,and a far leftist.
17
I think Senator Harris should continue to fight for the nomination. These campaign politics seem like a relatively minor setback. I don’t think it’s a liability that her beliefs are somewhat malleable either, as she shapes her message. If you’re not an absolutist on something you shouldn’t pretend to be. At the end of the day, the American people want evidence of good judgment and sincerity, not iron clad commitments on fine policy points that may prove largely academic once the circumstances in which the actual negotiating for the policy materialize.What I am sure Senator Harris that has yet to be demonstrated by the other candidates is the skill, conviction, and personality to deliver punch after punch to trump’s ego in a debate. Consider how the moment in the 2016 debate when trump weirdly kept looming behind HRC on the debate stage would have played out with Kamala — she wouldn’t have let that stand and likely would have tried to flip it to her advantage by calling out the weirdness of trump’s tactics rather than ignoring it and hoping it would go away as HRC appeared to do. For all their talents, I don’t know that bernie, warren or biden has that signature kamala combo of tactics or the guts to do the same.
7
This article makes me sad. This seems to be a case of trusting everyone but yourself. Or running because you can, but not knowing why.
I was intrigued with Senator Harris until the attack on Vice President Biden at the first debate. It seemed to me to be a stunt (t-shirts ready right after the debate!) and I just have no patience for that right now. We have bigger fish to fry (including saving the Republic). She needs to fire all of her consultants and dig deep and figure out why she is running.
27
She never deserved to be at the top. It was just hype. I don't like her totally unenergetic way of speaking. She has no charisma or charm or authenticity. She seems a creature of politics. No thanks.
24
And as quoted in the article if you can’t manage your campaign how can you be expected to manage the country. She’s as deep as a 1” ruler, no there, there.
1
Funny how everything that could be said as a problem with Harris's candidacy - too young, too soon, too ambitious - could have, and should have been said about Barack Obama. He had the same rise from relative obscurity through state office and the Senate.
In the final analysis, what's wrong here is the same thing that is wrong with the Democrats: too little, too late, bad organization, no planning, little or no real vision beyond Grand Plans intended to draw attention without much detail.
As with Hillary, as with Dukakis, the Democratic ineptitude in the face of a well funded and well organized GOP will cost them the Presidency, and possibly much more.
14
I was briefly intrigued by Harris until I learned she did not bother to go to the "right schools", downplays her Indian heritage, and theatrically plays up her identity as a black American. She never says that she's Indian American, especially in high profile media spots, as far as I can tell. Imagine if Obama ran and decided to only identify as his white half, almost never identifying as being black or talking about it, and did not attend a single top 5 school. Howard and UC Hastings Law are perfectly fine places for normal citizens, even senators, but they aren't exactly where any American generation grooms its future presidents. <1% of Howard's students are Asian, <2% are white. How is that overwhelmingly black undergraduate experience supposed to prepare anyone to lead a racially diverse, multicultural country? She was prepared and groomed to lead *black* America. If black America wants to constantly argue for racial diversity at the top high schools and colleges, they should set and example by evening out the racial disparity at HBCU's like Howard.
8
I thought her attack on Biden in the first debate (where she just interjected the busing issue out of thin air as a straw man and finished with the packaged "I was that girl") was incredibly unfair and could not believe how the analysts gushed over it. That turned out to be it and I think she got her just desserts.
36
She's a terrible public speaker - can't enunciate, and her speech always has a sneering quality. Effective as a Senator, maybe, but not presidential.
21
I believe this can be coached out of her and is just a very bad habit. Kamala is smart, articulate and sharp as a tack in Senate questioning. Let’s chalk that drawl up to insecurity and/or inept campaign advice.
2
Sorry but who moves from DC to Baltimore - 50 miles - in the very early stage of a Presidential campaign?
3
Biting. Bitter. Unlikeable. Unaccomplished. She’s the Caribb-Indian Hillary. Without the charm (if that’s possible). It’s what happens when a California female wannabe politician uses an older male establishment to set her on her way in return for her favors. If she could have made it on her own, she would have. An empty pantsuit.
23
What ever made Kamala Harris think she could become president of the United States of America? Ratings are low, her money is scarce, and she should bow out immediately. And that goes for the rest of the candidates who don’t have a prayer of getting the nomination. The leadership of the DNC has once again failed in every aspect of this current presidential campaign.... Too many candidates, too many debates, too many progressive issues, no cohesiveness and no platform. It looks like it will be Trump 2020.
937
@Pvbeachbum While I agree with the too many candidates and debates comment, I understand why the DNC is gun shy on limiting who can run. They were excoriated in ‘16 for appearing to push Sanders out so Hillary had a clear field. I do wish those with 1 percent polling would see the handwriting on the wall and yield to the top tier. Too many have already dropped out to the refrain of “I didn’t know he was running.”
153
@Pvbeachbum
Whether it is four or fourteen Dem candidates competing for the nomination doesn’t change the fact that the trump presidency has been a chaotic nightmare. That trump considers himself above the law. That trump is as divisive a president as we have seen in anyone’s memory. That the trump era will be remembered in a very similar vein as the McCarthy era: a blight on US history. That trump is an ignoramus and life-long cheater.
With the possible exception of the new-age flake Williamson, any of the Dem candidates would be a stratospheric improvement over trump.
190
@Pvbeachbum Here I disagree with you. I believe 2020 will be all about Trump (assuming he is the president).
Therefore I believe any Democrat can beat him or no Democrat can beat him.
Do not forget that his victory was a statistical anomaly.
74
Expectations about Harris declined after the first debate...I think that she doesn't work with the right focus to defeat Donald Trump.
6
She plays to the gallery and waits to hear what people think. She has a mind like a focus group. And there's nothing liberal about her.
20
Senator Harris has never come across as authentic.
25
Can someone explain to me why it’s “Senator” Sanders but “Ms.” Warren and “Ms.” Harris? Aren’t they all senators?
43
New York Times style sheet. They need to change it. And fast.
19
@Alexa
Doesn't everyone refer to Sanders as Bernie, not even Mr or senator?
It is “Senator” the first time in the body of the article and “Mr.” or “Ms.” thereafter. Always. Not a gender issue.
5
People thought she was going to be the female Obama. She like Obama came from a multi racial background and neither had the legacy of bondage in America in their lineage.People thought it was possible for lightening to strike twice. Obama caught that perfect storm wind once and now it is gone. I personally believe if she had not had attack Biden with the sucker punch during the first debate she won't be in the basement.The Biden sucker punch and her ever changing policies have caused people not to trust her. People think her policies and speech changes depending on her audience.Voters admire loyalty and honesty and she hasn't demonstrated she had either. People I know are very protective of Biden because they thought he had Obama's back and her sucker punch didn't go over well with them.
17
Yup. I am one of those Democrat voters whom could have supported Harris, but after her sucker punch to Biden, I was done with her. That was very bad and short sighted strategy on her part and now she is paying the price.
15
Excellent point re the ‘sucker punch’. The media was so gaga about it that there was little room for constructive analysis of the unfounded attack. For me, that was the point, along w/her waffling on Medicare for all, she was never going to be take seriously
2
"She scored the campaign’s biggest debate moment in her confrontation with Mr. Biden over his record on school busing"
That moment was the death of her campaign. It was so scripted and reality-TV inauthentic.
Plus, no one wants a return of federally mandated school busing. Everyone hated it decades ago when it was buried.
That debate moment was when I decided against her.
48
I agree totally. Terrible performance. She said the audience wasn’t there for a food fight and then proceeded to provide... a food fight. Idiotic. She’s smarter than that. I hope she’s learning.
16
Sometimes political candidates are just a flash in the pan, to quote an old expression. Kamala Harris appears to be just that, no substance, no stamina, and no purpose.
14
The irony is that she has all those qualities and did not show them in her campaign. I chalk it up to rookie mistakes and incompetent campaign management.
I'm so disappointed!
Ms Harris was my early choice, I even donated to her campaign, hoping she would be able to move forward.
Same with Mr Booker, and now I'm questioning whether we as a nation are beyond civil discourse, hope, and being blind to color of skin.
But I must admit, if Ms Harris cannot manage her own campaign, how could I possibly hope she will manage a nation?
Very disappointed.
5
you have to be a uniter, like Barack Obama, not a divider
a lot of the current crop of Democrats think they can play 'Us vs. them' , because they are so infuriated by the Trump exception to that rule. Even that exception will not last..
14
Personally, I got tired early on of hearing her say, "I am the person to prosecute the case against Donald Trump." Okay, fine. Then what? And what she never seemed to grasp is that the "then what" is what voters were most interested in hearing about!
15
No greater example of Harris' tone-deafness was the belief that her campaign slogan "Kamala Harris for the People" would go over happily with people of color. The only demographic that slogan appeals to is affluent whites.
As a lawyer, I find it difficult to chastise Harris for doing her job in a system that is by nature adversarial. It was not her job to do the "right thing" but to represent the State in the expectation that in the clash of court, the right thing would end up getting produced...somehow despite all odds. (That is the curious Anglo-American belief.)
The difficulty with this classic view of the system is that in the past 50 years the law itself has become an engine of racial discrimination, not only in how it functions but in the kind of laws that are enacted and their intended impact on minority and poor communities. The classic example is the draconian penalty imposed on crack cocaine versus the slap on the wrist for ordinary cocaine. But there are hundreds of other laws and technicalities that inflict carnage on the life expectations of poor people and minorities while giving breaks and passes to affluent whites.
In such a system there was no way Harris could discharge her adversarial role in a way that was not extraordinarily harsh on non-affluent, non-whites. Putting aside the pass she gave Steve Mnuchin for his role in the mortgage crisis, the fact that Harris was tone deaf to the reverberating clang of her slogan shows with whom cast her lot
6
If we are going to cede leadership of these systems to people who are not at all invested in reforming them but rather are deeply committed maintaining them as they are, how do we expect them to change? I am asking in good faith. I see this critique a lot but I haven’t yet heard the alternative theory of change. It seems to me that pushing from the outside while having people who are (even partial) allies on the inside is likely to be more successful than being positioned exclusively on the outside. Isn’t that the theory behind current efforts to elect progressive prosecutors across the country? Don’t you need people who are actually willing to reduce/redistribute budgets, institute alternatives to incarceration etc to advance the goal of decarceration or abolition?
3
Kamala Harris is no Obama. Nor is Corey Booker. Their identity politics have exposed their core weakness: No message, no belief in American values, no commitment to democracy in an ever-changing world. This may be a harsh assessment, but it is "truth."
16
Is being a Senator, Mayor, or Governor a part time job? Who is minding the store while all these presidential candidates are out on the road?
19
Politicians and their egos. She won't admit to herself that she's not going to be the democratic nominee. She should do the job she was elected to.
14
I insist on taking some credit for her unraveling campaign. My "Kamala is a cop" reddit memes were very popular. You're welcome, world.
7
Interesting that the leaked resignation letter (effective 11/30) is from someone already working on the Bloomberg campaign. Getting someone like Harris out of the way would be helpful to Bloomberg. Just sayin’ ...
12
Harris is smart and talented. With newcomers to the race and the inability to raise funds to get her further, staff losses are to be expected as well and potential political sabotage. Her law enforcement background is new for a woman running for President. She is strong and appears to be resolute in her thinking. I don't like her cackling laughter when speaking-- as presently-- there is little to be humored about concerning the state of the nation. Needless to say, a Black/Jamaican/Indian woman is not going to be the nominee to go up against Trump. Her race may have something to do with the lack of her campaign to attract funds. Iowa is presently swayed by too many candidates for her to be anywhere near the top. She may not make it to South Carolina; may not get past New Hampshire if she can survive Iowa.
I doubt the democratic nominee will be a woman, period. I do think the VP nominee will be a woman. Harris is as good as any other woman campaigning for POTUS presently. She is a hard working Senator who can return to her term without feeling beaten ideologically. Just not her time....
6
POLLING. When a campaign starts talking about messaging and makes changes based on polling, What does that say about the candidate? NOT genuine. Ambition without core values. Acute Hillaritis. We've been there, done that, don't want the T-shirt. Time to triangulate on out of race.
16
How many times did she backtrack on an answer she gave by claiming she didn't hear it afterwards? I count at least four. That ruined her for me completely.
19
Aside from the staffing problems and poor HR handling, Harris was just never likable to me. Frankly speaking, there's a smart-assyness about her that goes beyond snarky. Kind of an arrogance and a flippant attitude. She did not come across as a "Presidential" type. She relied heavily on the 30 second sound byte, and seemed incapable of having a meaningful "conversation" with the American people. She also has a very unpleasant nasal quality to her voice, and she needs to do something about that if she plans a 2nd run.
16
I really wanted her to do well. Obviously, she’s better than the Mad King. But she is not ready to be President.
7
Harris was my favorite female candidate from the getgo but she seems to have devolved into a confused one. That said, I was shocked by the harsh and judgemental tone of this article. Stick to the facts, guys.
17
Senator Harris should continue her position in the US Senate. You are not ready and you do not have the temperament to be an executive. Start doing your job as a US Senator for California.
8
Kamala Harris's campaign imploded the debate night when Tulsi Gabbard called her out for her hypocrisy and atrocious record as a prosecutor and the inexplicable harsh treatment of black and brown people, the constituents she so pandered to up to that point. Boy, did the love vanish quickly. She has been a flip flopping, rudderless politician throughout her campaign and people are just fed up with dishonesty and being played. We just can't take another panderer.
20
We need a serious democratic candidate. Looks like Joe is the guy.
8
I've only lived here since 1994, so my experience of following how Americans elects their POTUSes is definitely limited, but this experience has permitted me one simle conclusion:
the one who gets to be POTUS is usually the complete opposite of the prior POTUS. Almost as if the American electorate becomes bored with one political direction and flips to the opposite, just for the heck of it, because they can, because they have the luxury of choice.
1. Clinton was the complete opposite of Bush 1.
2. Bush 2 was the complete opposite of Clinton.
3. Obama was the complete opposite of Bush 2.
4. Trump was the most complete opposite of Obama.
And currently Pete seems to be the most complete opposite of Trump. And I have never even heard him speak. But I cannot imagine that anyone else would shock the viewers of Faux News more than a man moving into the WH with his husband.
Such is the polarization of American politics. It is extremes only for the last several decades.
7
No one else had the courage and the honesty to expose Harris as the self serving fraud that she is.
California may be gullible but the rest of the country is smart. Tulsi 2024!
10
As a former Californian, I have voted for Kamala Harris in every election she's been in so far, and I do think she's a very good candidate. Yet her campaign has been frustrating, even at a personal level.
Having been on her email list since well before the campaign began, I now find myself receiving about half a dozen emails a day from her campaign, all "signed" by different campaign staffers and sometimes with somewhat conflicting tones.
It is clear there are factions within the campaign, and times when one hand doesn't know what the other is doing.
Oh, and every single email ends with a plea for donations.
If a campaign is going to send that many emails (and it shouldn't), the majority of those emails should be on-point updates about campaign and policy issues, augmented by the occasional ask for donations. The constant begging makes her campaign sound like it's operating from a position of weakness, when it should be projecting strength.
7
@Jeff, It’s annoying, I agree. But I hate to tell you, ALL candidates’ emails, no matter who they are, beg for donations. All the time. Successful campaigns are all about money. They can’t stop asking for money.
3
Despite her current situation and the predicament her campaign finds itself in, I still believe that Kamala Harris is still the most viable Democratic candidate for the presidency, and the one best suited to face Donald Trump in the 2020 election. Sharing a ticket with Pete Buttigieg as her VP running mate would I think be the most dinamic and interesting combination.
I think Ms. Harris has an compelling background a viable personal story and all the qualities, experience and skills to go all the way.
What the Harris campaign is clearly lacking is a cohesive and solid strategy and the advisors with the know-how to craft a way forward out of this morass.
I sincerely hope that she can find her strong voice and unique narrative and push forward.
9
@loco73
She found her 'strong voice' by channeling 'that little girl' during the first debate. It's been downhill ever since, and unsurprisingly so. A completely scripted moment.
19
In Iowa you always have to give the voters a chance to meet you.
That’s the whole point of a small state going first.
I know of no one here who has met her.
12
It seems to me that she was never ready to run for president and it was only the kismet of Joe Biden inevitably making a stupid remark while on stage next to her affording her an opportunity to reply that buoyed the campaign up at all.
She is a competent Senator. She should be happy with that and humble about learning her shortcomings i this effort. I say go back to doing her Senate work until she learns enough to better prepare in future. Maybe she can turn her talent for reason toward getting republicans in the Senate to accept reality in public?
10
@magicisnotreal
People with actual "talent for reason" have principles they can expound on.
Harris has nothing coherent to say. It's clear that she's great in the court room where the opposite side and the judge dictate the parameters of her attacks.
Her problem is that the real world is not a court room. No one is going to prompt you, and you don't have an opposing side to define you.
9
It is difficult to trust a presidential candidate who brags about her drug habits in high school and laughs about it in a media interview.
What a contrast to our current President who has championed the fight against drugs and opioid crisis.
Ordinary Americans -- those who wish to see their children grow up in a drug free world -- understand that contrast.
That is the difference between one candidates's sinking candidacy and another's imminent reelection in a landslide.
18
I don’t mind a candidate who fesses up to smoking weed. I do mind when that candidate is a prosecutor who has put countless people behind bars for the same offense.
19
@ Bhaskar: You have a strange definition of constitutes an "ordinary" American. Many of us are realists and understand that America will never be "drug free." Prohibition did not work in the 1920s, and it will not work now or at any other time in the future in a free society. The best we can do is to legalize drugs, regulate and tax their sales, and learn how to successfully treat the small percentage of people who are prone to addiction. Otherwise, most Americans understand the concept of live and let live.
10
@Bhaskar: Aha! Now we have heard from one of the very few Americans who doesn't think that Trump has done illegal drugs. (Not to mention that he may still be doing them, as several people have alleged seeing him crush and snort Adderall in recent years.) I knew you were out there somewhere!
10
The problem with Kamala Harris is that she stands for nothing. She equivocates on every issue. Her record as a prosecutor is horrendous and she is in the back pockets of the donor class.
Sad to say, she is exactly the sort of candidate we do not need
39
Maybe the voters can perceive an unqualified lightweight when they see her?
29
She should be recalled for betraying California voters who thought they'd be getting an actual Senator but ended up with someone tilting at the windmills of higher office. She should have just quietly warmed her gifted seat like Boxer did for decades. No substance, all pandering.
32
She will be a great Attorney General!
4
Kamala Harris is simply not ready to be president. Period.
9
Her first debate was pretty good when she went after, but she couldn’t recover after she got kneecapped by Gabbard. Who rightfully challenged Harris’ record as attorney general of being too willing to throw people into jail.
Then Harris had that stupid policy of trying to get the president banned from Twitter. Harris exemplifies the losing strategy of cancel culture. If she is the nominee we will definitely get 4 more years of Trump. She is like Clinton part 2.
17
As an African American man who has lived in NYC for 40 years, I know a phony when I see one. Senator Harris like Mayor Pete, Senator Cory Booker, former Vice-President Joe Biden, former Mayor of New York Michael Bloomberg, Senator Amy Klobochar, Senator Elizabeth Warren, Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard, Andrew Yang, and Senator Bernie Sanders – all - have no chance of being president. Senator Harris has always been a superficially attractive candidate. Yet, the more people hear her the more they dislike her. Harris wanted to gain the black communities support early, but many in the African American community do not see her as a black woman, those who do, disapprove of her white husband, and both factions feel her prosecutorial record was racist against African Americans. Thus, Harris seems to many as a shameless opportunist.
13
@Jonathan
BTW, if I as a white guy disapproved of a white candidate because of her/his African American spouse, I would be a racists. But that's just my opinion.
15
@Jonathan
Jonathan, do you therefore conclude that Trump is the only one who is not a "phony" by your standards.
I'm just curious.
9
Reading this article should make it clear to any honest person why Harris would make a very poor president.
9
The impression I had from listening to her busing experience was that she came from a humble African-American background and that she was bussed from a low income neighborhood and that busing to school was the deciding factor in her overcoming an underprivileged upbringing. That impression was unrelated to the actual circumstances of her life. This is like Trump promoting himself as a self made billionaire, it just isn’t true. I think the only reason she’s a Democrat is that California is largely Democratic and that’s where her opportunities for power exist. It seems that she’s really only interested in self promotion and that’s just not good enough for Democrats.
29
@Tim Phillips
Right you are. You really have to do your homework with Camala's claims about her past... as well as Elizabeth Warren's.
8
Her advisors thought the attack on Biden over busing was a high point? Nope, that was went the arrow turned down for her. Bad enough she was attacking over something that long ago, but when she later answered than she would not support that sort of involuntary busing to correct the even greater levels of segregation in today's schools, she showed herself to be an unprincipled hypocrite. Of course she couldn't support it today. It never worked, in fact it made the situation worse as parents fled mixed-race cities for their surrounding suburbs, which were separate school districts. The city schools became more segregated.
She never adequately explained why she opposed releasing victims of proswecutorial abuse. Not being a Californian, I don't have a clear view of her performance as a prosecutor, apart from what she said at the debates. She sounded more like she tried to play the law-and-order and anti-drug cards to further her political career. She certainly didn't sound like a progressive-minded prosecutor.
The author is correct that across debates, Harris has been fuzzy and unfocused on policy.
She is not going to be our presidential candidate. She has an outside chance to be Bernie's V.P. candidate, if he wins the nomination.
10
The real story is media erasure of her campaign. Take for example, how over the last three weeks, Kamala Harris has received major endorsements from the United Farm Workers, 100 Iowa teachers, and Latinx lawmakers. She gave a well received speech at the Iowa Democratic Party Liberty & Justice event that was followed up by a stand out debate performance. Yet, in that time the NYTimes ran the following articles “What Happened To Kamala Harris”, “What Does Oakland Think About Kamala Harris”, “Black Voters to Black Candidates: Representation Is Not Enough”, and now this article. Perception becomes reality, the polls reflect voters responding to a constant barrage of bad press. As for what she stands for, it’s a pragmatic agenda of benefiting the working & middle classes with the LIFT Act, Teacher Pay Gap, 6 months family leave, renter tax credit, executive action on assault weapons, Medicare for All that has a reasonable implementation timeline, ending cash bail, increasing public defender pay, etc. Policies that are implementable unlike a wealth tax that will be found to be unconstitutional. Unfortunately, when it comes to media narrative, the fix is in.
18
They do the same thing to Bernie Sanders and he’s consistently first or second in the polls in spite of it. Because people actually want him to be President.
17
Isn’t this the purpose of campaigns, of primaries . . . to see who can run an organization and who can’t? Granted, it’s only a campaign, but if the person we “want” can’t even run their own little show, why would we hand them the keys to the White House?
13
To me, Harris always seems to be going for the “quick win” in the debates—clearly valuing style over substance. Pandering will only get you so far, you need to be steadfast in your beliefs to remain competitive in a race this long and grueling.
17
This was sad. She tried to be what she thought would win and she was wrong. She did that as AG in California and she won. She couldn't be herself.
8
"I'm a prosecutor" is hardly an inspiring message to people without health care or who work two jobs and can barely afford their rent.
23
Kamala Harris wants to be President, that much is clear. She has yet to explain why any of us would want her to be President.
34
I sensed from the beginning her indecisiveness , and her rush to climb the political ladder.
15
I wanted to like her and even donated money early on, but she lost me a few debates ago when she publicly dismissed in a post-debate interview Tulsi, someone for whom I have little respect. It still matters how you treat people. It matters how women treat other women. It matters if one appears as arrogant as our present POTUS. We don’t want a push-over, but tone is key. She’s smart. She’s capable. Surrounded by good people, she can soar. So many who entered the White House weren't ready. She lacks the privilege other candidates have the minute they’ve show up. But she should know that and stop going on and on about the obvious. Be firm, inclusive and have a consistently urgent message, but also a open heart. There are many who would listen if she did. What’s happening is criminal, but we’re not in a courtroom. If only we were that lucky.
6
Harris ran before she was ready. She’ll be back.
7
Unmentioned anywhere but undoubtedly affecting the perception of her candidacy: Harris has run as one of two black candidates, and played up the racial angle in the first debate, complete with preprinted tee shirts, as if she were something other than the child of privilege that she was. The resurrection of bussing created a momentary bump by Democrats who live on racial politics, but turned everyone else off who wanted to leave the divisive issue in the past. Harris's chosen identity is black, but those who know that she is biracial must be rankled by her utter denial of her Asian heritage. Her squishy personal identity bleeds off into the others areas of her candidacy -- her policy positions -- and leaves voters wondering just who she is and what she stands for.
22
They can blame whoever they want, but she's just sort of unlikable. You know when you meet someone for the first time and you just kinda go a New Zealander "yeah, nah"... that's Kamala.
Don't get me wrong, I voted for her as my US Senator and will do into the foreseeable future, but as my POTUS? Yeah, nah.
10
All this said and we have T was he ever scrutinized. ?
7
Just another opportunist.
11
Regardless of talent, your sister should not be your campaign manager.
16
This article is that last, little nudge she needs. Out by Christmas.
8
There are universal candidates and there are sectarian candidates. In countries where sectarianism is rife, the only candidate that raises to the top are sectarian candidates like Harris that have support of her local group. It is good and well this country aren’t so fractured as to allow only sectarian candidates.
4
To say "her personal political convictions can be unclear" is a real understatement when it comes to Harris. She seems filled with a good deal more ambition than conviction. At this point, I doubt that I would even vote to return her to the Senate.
26
Thing is, Senator Harris seeks to be president,
not Attorney General, who does the prosecuting in the federal government.
When she is sworn in as president, she will play no role in prosecuting Trump, as that should be done by a freshly scrubbed independent DoJ with an AG of highest integrity and respect for rule of law
Sen. Harris must tell voters what the post-Trump era will look like, rather than wallow in his prosecution at the moment, if she is to win nomination.
4
ice cubes in the August sunshine
6
In the end the devolvement of the Harris candidacy is a good thing. While serving as California Attorney General she turned away from principles of equal protection under the law and instead sought to pander to law enforcement unions and advocates (probably because they promised her money). Hers was a harsh tenure on ordinary people. I would sure hate to see her in the White House but darn it all she’s still our Senator!
6
“You can’t run the country if you can’t run your campaign,” pretty much sums it up. It's a microcosm, a test of management skills. But as we've often seen, some pols are fine at speeches and soaring prose but can't make the trains run on time, which is a key part of the presidency. Think about Obama's campaigns, which ran like a Swiss watch with no drama. Inspiring rhetoric is fine, but show me you can run something before you get to run everything.
8
I will not vote for anyone, whose policies seem to change depending upon the political whims of the day, who conveniently disavows positions they fervently held in the past, and as a result, who is intellectually dishonest. Yes, that eliminates a majority - a supermajority- of candidates from my list.
I would have far more respect for a candidate who defended past actions without apologizing, probably insincerely, under current political pressure.
In the past, I have refrained from voting at all because no candidate was intellectually honest. And I’ll do it again.
5
Since when dos the buck stop with the campaign manager and not the candidate? Harris sounds a bit like Trump in refusing to accept responsibility for her own decisions.
Other than skin color and gender, what's her pitch?
21
We felt she had potential but she is not reaching the audience that makes up the real voters. She lost us with her continual referring to her childhood and upbringing. Past is past and we need to know a candidate/President will bring us into our desired future.
6
I need to say first that I did not vote for either Clinton or Trump in 2016 finding both of them equally despicable. When Trump won, I vowed very publicly that I would vote for any Democratic nominee (other than Clinton) running against Trump in 2020. I even went so far as to change my state voter registration from Independent to Democrat to ensure I have a voice in the Democratic primaries. In this state you can only vote in the primaries of your party and there are no Independent primaries. Additionally, I voted for President Obama in both elections. All that being said, I will not vote for Senator Harris if she is nominated. After reading about her record and, especially, after hearing her in the debates, I find her as reprehensible as Trump and Clinton. If she should become the Democratic candidate, I'll be forced to vote Independent once again. I don't want Trump to win but I don't want a female Trump in the White House either. Senator Harris is unabashedly playing the black and female cards as her only consistent virtues and that is not enough. Although I currently support Senator Warren, I would gladly vote for Booker, Castro, Yang (or anyone other than the ex-New York mayor) but will never vote for Senator Harris. Race, gender, or sexual proclivities are not important to me. The qualities of the person are what I will vote for. Senator Harris does not measure up to my standards.
10
She's way too angry. Anger has its uses, including in political campaigns, but hers is layered with a kind of bitterness that does not appeal to centrists in America. The chip on her shoulder has been apparent not only in debates but also in many other settings, including congressional. I also agree with the article regarding some of the persistent problems with her messaging, but even without that, you have to have more than anger and be more than just an attack dog to be an attractive candidate.
13
@calleefornia - You find her too angry? I think she is less angry than Biden, Gabbard, and even my man Bernie who gets pretty riled up about the cost of insulin. I like the fact that she is not as vanilla/comatose as Mayor Pete and is more aggressive than Yang. Yang always whines he doesn't get enough time at the debates but Harris is always heard even when everyone else on stage is arguing among themselves. I wish she had some policies I could point to rather than touching stories but I don't find her to be too angry.
12
@tom harrison
Thank you for your interesting and respectful reply. You make some good points. Perhaps my own viewpoint is shaded by greater familiarity with her style in general, which includes a kind of naivete on her part about how the "California style" does not always play positively outside of the State. It seems that my perception of her resonates with a few "recommenders," as well, so maybe they are also from California! :-)
3
Did it ever occur to her or anyone else that she is simply not ready now or ever to be president of our country. Most of these candidates have very thin resumes, will someone tell them to go home and focus on retaining their respective seats and helping other Democrats defeat Republican challengers!
4
The nation is not ready and indeed smart enough not to want California's politics on a national level.
10
Say whatever you want about Kamala, ok. She definitely has a bat phone to the center of the universe, but I agree with another commenter here that she isn't ready yet. And, more importantly: watch your edits. I am FROM California, and I love it; but it is NOT the "largest state" as you put in print. I think you mean it's the largest because it has the most Electoral College votes. That's true. But clarify, please! (Texas is bigger and we all know it. So you look like you're printing bad facts.)
1
@SF Atty
So apparently you think Alaska is still a Territory ?
6
Please explain why you did not include the important detail that the staffer whose email you highlight now works for Bloomberg campaign. What is Bloomberg campaign’s motivation for approving this leak? That’s a critical detail missing from your story.
15
You could have just called this a self-fulfilling prophecy of the media that has all but ignored one of the most qualified and electable of the candidates and saved yourself a bunch of time.
6
I’m distressed by this news because I like Kamala so much and I think the American people would too. But the point that if she can’t run her own campaign then she can’t run the government is a valid one. One true thing we see is that presidents who mess up prior to election tend to mess up the same way in office. Bush bankrupted every business he ever ran, then he bankrupted the US.
1
@David Law: Same for Trump, for that matter. Why people didn't heed his history of bankrupt casinos, unpaid bills, and lawsuits is a mystery to me.
7
She is just another of the Democratic candidates without anything to say, just as Tulsi Gabbard pointed out. She always seemed to me to a petty candidate. Her comments on affirmative action that initially scored points against Biden until it became known they had the same position on the issue was really a poor showing. Then in her interview after Representative Gabbard pointed out her failings as a prosecutor she seemed irrational. A big nothing! Lets hope she looses her Senate seat soon.
10
This factoid says it all - an impending demise of Ms. Harris candidacy :
"...Extensive polling led her to believe that there was great value in the word “truth,” so she titled her 2019 memoir “The Truths We Hold”.."
And our POTUS - with zero polling had a winning message MAGA.
To me, that's symptomatic of many of these candidates - poll first and then come up with a message.
The problem with polling is, well, they are often wrong and that too, spectacularly.
POTUS winning against Hillary being a poster child of polls go e way wrong.
And many saw that Hillary was parroting what polling told her - not what she believes. In that regard, I admire Bernie and now Send. Warren.
I think - even as a Republican - I was not earlier enamored by Mr. Trump - but his staying on the message helped convince many of us - he is our man.
And of course, he has delivered.
To me, Ms. Harris has even less likeability factor than Hillary.
And if she is speaking truths that pollsters told her - most can see when it is not an authentic message.
It's like saying I love KFC because most of my potential voters love chicken.
It just don't cut it.
1
It's pretty hard to run a campaign when the fundamentals aren't there. She had great political and, early on, media backing, but she never had widespread popular support - or even the potential for widespread popular support, imo. The political and media powers thought that her genetics and prosecutorial skills would resonate in a country that, in their view, wants to skewer Trump for being a racist and sexist. Once again, they were very wrong; but I wouldn't blame Kamala here. Wasn't it obvious from her first presidential debate that there is no way her nonchalant and arrogant attitude would resonate in middle America. I believe common Americans recognize the inherent inconsistency of an aggressive criminal prosecutor combined with a laid-back, California "cool" attitude. Tulsi Gabbard also effectively exposed the hypocrisy between her current political views and her past actions.
5
Ms. Harris is a spoiled American woman who believes everything should be handed to her. Remember her reaction to having to fill out a form for health care? With a contemptuous "Tss" she mimicked tossing the imaginary form over her shoulder, and shrugged and said" why should I bother?" and then launched into a endorsement of government provided health care.
Well, Ms. Harris you must bother. Bother to define yourself, bother to articulate a body of ideals you represent, and bother to step forward and reach out to people.
7
Kamala Harris' campaign for president unraveled because she is a mealy-mouthed liar, who tried to to reshape her previous image as tough law and order anti-crime fighter when she was a prosecutor into a caring socialist. Like every one of the Democrat candidates for the presidency, she will do and say anything necessary to her audience of the day in a pandering effort to win their votes. Even Democrats can see through that empty rhetoric, as the are now doing with every one of the remaining candidates. Not a one of them has the remotest chance of beating Trump. Not a single one.
7
Kamala Harris needs to think long and hard about who she is so she can stop pandering to whichever way she thinks the wind is blowing. It’s too bad but now is not her time. She needs to step aside.
3
Her run for president is a vanity project....and not much else.
7
All you had to do was say Tulsi Gabbard, who was mentioned with word 2916 out of 3233, give or take a few.
3
Joe Biden “ carried water” for President Obama for eight years and Harris practically called him a racist at one of the debates. After that attack I lost respect for Senator Harris.
19
Her campaign died, along with Julian Castro's, when she attacked Biden.
18
She lost me in the second debate when she basically bashed President Obama's legacy in an attempt to take down Joe Biden. As a Democrat I will not tolerate political cannibalism. Ever.
22
Sorry to see her go, but it looks like she made a poor choice in hiring Ms. Mehlenbacher Really - a letter to "whom it may concern" venting your anger and campaign dirty laundry. Seems very unprofessional and childish
8
@Neighbor2: Isn't the unprofessional and childish person the one who provided Ms. Mehlenbacher's letter to the Times? Of course, that may have been Ms. Mehlenbacher herself.
That would make sense, given that one of the Times's competitors published this yesterday: "Bloomberg hired Kelly Mehlenbacher, who had worked in operations for California Sen. Kamala Harris’ 2020 presidential campaign. She will be joining Team Bloomberg as its deputy chief operating officer, a Bloomberg spokesperson confirmed Thursday."
6
Bloomberg should watch out.
4
For someone with 'abundant political skills', she's remarkably tone-deaf; and she's never mastered the art of actually doing the jobs she manages to get, she's too eager to move on to the next one. How many votes has she missed so far this year? It was 16 by mid-April, compared to ONE missed by Warren.
If her Presidential campaign tanks, maybe she can focus on doing her job for a while.
819
@SB
Until Tom Steyer wins her Senate seat!
24
@SB I'm from NJ and view Sen.Booker in the same light.
31
I saw Sen. Harris speak at an event hosted by Sen. Sherrod Brown. I was impressed by her story, but if anything, I thought she would have made a great running mate for Sen. Brown. I still think that would be a great ticket, but we need him as our Senator!
6
Sen. Harris does not seem to have any consistent policy goals. After watching all the debates, I came away with the feeling that she definitely wants to be president but hasn't a clue about what she would do if she won the election.
18
Senator Harris is not my choice for the Democratic presidential candidate. But I think that the best political reporting focuses on the platforms and community connections behind candidates, and does not treat the races as sporting events.
19
Interesting story, but I think we often overestimate the impact of political operatives. You can't "sell" a candidate who lacks the qualities voters want. First time I saw Harris I thought, "hmmm, possible Attorney General" and nothing I've seen since has changed that. I wish her well and will vote for her if she is the Dem nominee but she seems unfocused, inconsistent and uncomfortable in her skin. Not a great triad for a chief executive. When your heart's not in it, it shows.
6
@Jody McPhillips Having read her book, The Truths We Hold, that was my thought too, Jody. A possibly good Attorney General, but not President.
4
As one who has voted for her throughout her political career (sometimes reluctantly), I was alarmed when she announced that she was running for President. This showed more egotism than common-sense. Do the current job first, baby, then think about what you can offer the country later. (The same could be said about some of these other candidates.)
Obama was one in a million.
20
I’m sure she stands for the National Anthem but not sure of what else she stands for.
So many of these candidates —Booker, Beto, Gillibrand, etc.—-were able to get national publicity but really didn’t have much more than the ability to be talked up as potential presidential candidates.
A one liner here and there doesn’t qualify one to be President, as we see and continue to see as more drop out.
The sooner Cory, Kamala, Tulsi, Andrew, Tom and the two newcomers, Mike and Deval get off the stage we can have a manageable look at some real potential candidates.
17
Amy Klobuchar.
Harris does not seem committed to run to the Democratic nomination. Sometimes I question her seriousness in her endeavor. Her forcefulness is spotty.
3
No core principles or policies based on those principles, no core strategy for getting to where you can convert principles and policies to law.
6
Doesn't seem as though Senator Harris has taken charge of her own campaign. She should have been in attendance at the meeting of senior aides, she should not have permitted a "war" to happen between the campaign and the consultants, and she should have fired Rodriguez or reset his priorities instead of allowing him to become the focus of frustration in her campaign.
She was dead set on getting the nomination by using black voters as her base, thinking their support would be automatic. She didn't have a Plan B when she realized black voters did not support her. Deval Patrick, take note.
12
"In Baltimore, though, the consensus is that the fault lies with Mr. Rodriguez..."
...conveniently ignores that the candidate gives the impression that her primary motive is ambition that is unhampered by the understanding of, and interest in, policy. Her Senate performances, debates or speeches do not exactly give us the impression of a candidate with a sharp mind and the attack on Biden was as unwarranted as it was opportunistic and cruel.
Harris is the embodiment of Peter's Principle ("every employee to rise in the hierarchy through promotion until they reach a level of respective incompetence")
8
@Lucy Cooke: "Ambition wrapped in ethnic allure." That's a spot on characterization of the junior Senator. I recall an early interview on NPR with her where she let us all know that she "fully intended to win" the nomination and presidency. Such hubris! However, no billionaires in the Senate, either, please. Rather, I would like to see Adam Schiff run for Senate in 2022. Harris has been missing in action from doing the job that we taxpayers in California are paying her to do. All her finger pointing, pre-printed t-shirts, and vaunted "prosecutorial style" got her nowhere. As others comment, it's time to fold up the tent and get back to D.C. (Not that the Senate even does much, that I can tell, but still ...)
8
Many of us in California know that Ms Harris has political and debating talent but she doesn’t really lead. Rather she is the type of politician who holds her finger in the air to determine the prevailing wind and only then does she “take” a position and that position is often defined by is it good for Kamala or does it look good.
18
Madam Senator, thank you for showing courage and standing up among the few. Please wrap up your campaign and endorse vice President Biden. We will need you at the DOJ to start the clean up from day one when when Biden cruises to victory.
3
Difficult to ask voters to believe in you when you don't even have strong personal values or convictions/beliefs, but instead follow the scent of a "vote" like a dog searching for food.
9
I'd back Harris over Biden any day. But I'd back anyone over Biden.
Tom Perez is doing a terrible job as head of the DNC. There are far too many candidates, all with a wildly different platforms. Most American voters don't have the interest or attention span to listen to all of their scattered messages.
Alternativley, it takes no effort to pay attention to one loudmouth president and party, who are speaking with ONE voice, constantly bombarding Americans their juggernaut messaging machine.
This campaign season is disastrous for Democrats unless someone in leadership can start tightening up this race now, reducing the field by at least half. We've got several good candidates but only one can win. The Dem party must start presenting clearer, more cohesive messaging and the sooner, the better.
14
Good cross-examiner in congressional hearings. Not as good a campaigner. Maybe next time.
1
I'm always amazed when campaign managers are blamed for a candidate's failure. Harris is a weak candidate with a poor record as Atty General of CA. She curiously attacked Biden on the ancient busing issue and then needled Warren about calling for Trump to be removed from Twitter. Say what? She doesn't deserve any elected office, IMHO.
9
The fact that the cynical, amoral, triangulating exercise in fake progressivism and identity politics that has been the Kamala Harris campaign is now in its death throes is a sign that grassroots Democrats aren't so easily fooled anymore.
The fact that the punditocracy and major media outlets were shilling for her campaign for so long despite there being no there there is a sign of either their sheer vapidness or of their being less interested in the interests of Americans than in the interests of the multinational corporations and post-national oligarchs who have the power. In other words, either they were fooled themselves, or they've been in on it.
10
A big turn off for me is when I learned she who owes her career to sleeping around.
11
Pandering to racial and identity politics is not enough even with the activist democratic party base and in the more recent words of her former mentor Willie Brown, "Kamala Harris can't hit major league pitching". I believe that she should view this as a learning experience and develop more consistent policy positions rather than try and be all things to all people or to paraphrase the lyrics of a Bob Dylan song 'It shouldn't take a weather vane to tell which way the political winds blow'.
5
Kamala Harris is a light weight who initially grabbed the spotlight by going after Joe Biden on busing 45 America almost 50 yaers ago, even though her policy seems to be the same as his, whch was leave it to the states. Tulsi Gabbard hammered Harris at the second debate and its been downhill ever since. I think her campaign is managed by her little sister, who was a top advisor to Hillary's campaign, which should be disqualifying right out omg the gate. Harris had a very spotty record as District Attorney in San Francisco. As attorney General of California she managed a legend staff but aside form a favorable settlement on the mortgage fraud issue, her tome ion office was unremarkable. She slept her way to the top when as young lawyer she dated and received political appointments from Willie Brown. She clearly lacks the national experience required to be president. Unfortunately, Democrats are still looking for a candidate who can win. Harris does not meet the criteria for s serious candidate, but she made a made name for herself and maybe after a couple go terms in the Senate, she will have the gravitas she currently lacks.
6
People now see what a phony she is. Changing positions sometimes in the same day. Tulsi Gabbard knocked her out when she put Harris on the spot with her prosecutor record for everyone to see in the second debate. The crowd went crazy. But her problems started way before with the contrived School Busing attack on Biden. And right there she blew it big time because if Biden was the nominee he may well have picked her for VP..... It is many things from her putting on a thick 'Black' accent when she thinks it's appropriate to her lack of any vision. Personally she makes me cringe whenever I hear her speak.
17
Some people want to do something and some people want to be somebody.
7
'a senator from the country's largest state'? Missed it by two states!
2
-The former DA from San Francisco betting it all on Iowa? Desperation defined.
-Believing all of the media stories about yourself as the “Dream Candidate” without having an identifiable policy platform or ability to communicate publicly what you believe in? General Wesley Clark 2.0.
-Two years in the Senate and you think you’re ready to run the world’s most dysfunctional, unresponsive, unreformable and unrepresentative political system among all global democracies? Where hubris meets delusion.
-Tolerating a campaign manager who’s already managed you to the cliff’s edge? Poor judgement and weak leadership.
-Letting your sister steer your campaign as über-adviser who passively intimidates others into silence on matters meriting criticism? Maya, you’re no Bobby Kennedy. But your sister — despite her recidivist poor judgement in trusting the wrong people, including you — might make a good Attorney General, where she’d more likely understand what she’s doing and why she’s doing it.
3
Funny that in an article analyzing why Harris's campaign failed to lift off, the name "Willie Brown" never appears.
10
Kamala Harris comes off as all ambition at any cost-she has a sincerity problem...
5
Is it to late for Cuomo to throw his hat in the ring? What about Chelsea Clinton?
2
Jimmy Carter could technically run for a second term.
4
Kamala appeared to click all the "right" boxes. SHE also thought that she clicked all the "right" boxes needed to be president. But what she seemed to lack was the passion, hard work and the courage of her convictions (if any). That said, if I were ever convicted of any offense, she would be the kind of attorney that I would want representing me. Because it seems that she so easily morphs into whatever mode necessary to win her case.
Honestly, she's a very sharp lady, but its pretty clear that she's not ready for this. While she's talking, you can almost see her thinking to herself "am i saying the right thing?" , its seems like she's being over-managed. Either her "handlers" are pulling her in different directions, she's overwhelmed and unsure of herself, she really doesn't know what she believes, or is unwilling to share anything at this point. Or all of the above. Either way, it adds up to a candidate that is not remotely ready to run for president, and especially not ready to be president.. I have to be honest, i am not impressed with this field at all.
32
@S. Snow
And to be honest, I am not exactly impressed with the person already in the White House.
Looks like we're even.
8
Senator Harris would do well to focus on AOC's
Green New Deal and aligning herself with the Parkland kids. Debt and college tuition is also a big issue with first time voters. Even if she's not the candidate, these are the issues that her party needs to assure a big turnout by new voters.
Bread and butter issues: We have a strong economy because of steps taken by Barack Obama, in spite of the Republicans. The economy first started to improve with implementation of the ACA--new jobs in healthcare plus the assurance of access to healthcare. This has stalled, or gone backwards, under the Republicans--still a lot of people who need health insurance.
Healthcare is a basic human right; Strong steps needed now to be taken to combat climate change, or Social Justice is also Environmental Justice. By beating up immigrants, Trump and the Republicans, have taken the focus off other issues. Pointing out Trump's criminality may not be helpful as an issue, as he does that every day by himself, and one suspects to distract from his traitorous dealings with the Russians.
Jobs in the Midwest: Make business savings from the tax cuts mandatory for investment in new jobs, especially in renewable infrastructure, or cancel the tax cuts. Also bring back progressive taxation, including raising FICA maximums.
Calling for prosecuting the political crooks at the top has been a major accomplishment as a Senator. Her Justice proposals for the poor are more important in the campaign.
7
Reading between the lines, it would seem as if the main problem with the Kamala Harris campaign is that there was no reason for it, other than that she wants to be President. You don't get a sense that she's in any way occupied with rights that need to be wronged, people who need to be helped, etc., etc. People see through that rather quickly. And this, by the way, is the main strength of the Sanders campaign. He's got an agenda of issues and needs and injustices that he wants to correct, and that motivates people to help him.
31
As someone of mixed race, I was embarrassed to see how often Ms. Harris used (or milked) that identity. Being mixed raced can allow you to view the world with a different perspective, but it depends on whether, as your grow and face challenges, you stay on the outside looking in. If you do, you can remain somewhat neutral, standing for your values yet not feeling obligated to any one group that you would otherwise owe your success to.
Ms. Harris put me off with 20 mins of reading her autobiography. In this America of blended backgrounds, we need in the White House someone who sees value in each of our unique gifts. We are not simply a product of our family backgrounds or our communities... following Mr. Trump down that road will only lead to this country’s downfall.
19
I watched her take that cheap shot at Biden and said, "that's it, she's through" -- only to tune into the pundits the next day and find they had the opposite opinion. I thought I must be projecting my own distaste. But here in the comments were many others, particularly fellow Californians, who also had a bad taste.
Many of us had misgivings about her handling of the bad banks and mortgage pirates -- particularly her sweet treatment of a guy named Steve Mnuchin.
An activist I know had a meeting with her early on in her tenure as California AG, and came away angry and disillusioned. He later consulted for Sanders. He's a Bernie supporter but what he said to me (and this counts double for Nevada), was, "you want to win California you need the unions." Then he said, "You know who gets that? Joe Biden gets that".
20
@Duncan
Maddow was among the first to swoon over. Harris’ attack on Biden, calling her “the new front runner” almost before the debate was over. Not quite, Rachel.
10
It always seemed like she was always trying to play it safe early on by not really taking a firm stance on anything. Her canned response to any tough policy question was always ‘we can have that conversation.’ Um, no. I want to know what you think about issues, not what you think the politically safe answer is.
14
@Nathan
Yep, as evidenced by her promise to eliminate private insurance, clearly without having thought much about it. She seemed almost surprised to learn 250 million people had it, then switched her plan.
Very weak, ill prepared. Another person who felt it was “my turn”?
5
I share the disappointment of many commenting, I thought she had potential to effective candidate. uniting the wings of the Democratic Party, an aggressive campaigner, and someone who might galvanize women and minorities. And though I'm a "progressive" I see no problem with a storing prosecutorial record, the country generally believes in "law and order" and she would have been well postitioned to avoid the trap on that issue that befell Mike Dukakis
8
@Barry Schiller Woefully I’ll prepared. It became clear she hadn’t really thought about issues. That shows laziness or a sense of entitlement. Maybe both.
2
Harris seems like somebody who would aim for US Attorney General rather than US President. She was a little known recently elected senator from California. Going from that to a top tier presidential candidate would be quite a challenge. The three top candidates, Biden, Warren, and Sanders, have been familiar faces on the national scene for a long time. Amy Klobuchar has a similar problem as Harris having been a senator who was unknown nationally until she became a candidate. Kirsten Gillibrand is another female senator who was probably better known nationally than either Harris or Klobuchar but didn't even do as well as either of them. Except for Warren, who has been a progressive favorite for a number of years, it has been tough going for female senators.
9
If Ms Harris had been a heavily financially-backed man, we could second guess her choice of sister for her campaign. If she had a ton of money to spend on ads and strategy, we could criticize her flagging campaign organization. It’s disappointing to the people she hired who probably would ironically call themselves “party hacks” that they moved and then got laid off. One of her former key employees was announced today to have landed with Bloomberg ( who is himself a late bloomer in every respect.)
It strikes me that the current Presidential sweepstakes winner continues to employ family and was always criticized for poor campaign management skills. He accessed vast resources (both openly and through dark channels). He won anyway. So is it her fault, really? Or is it easier to blame her than to recognize the role of publicity and dark money?
3
@Laura Weinberg Yes, it's her fault. Really.
4
@Laura Weinberg Kamala had a ton of money at the beginning. She built a huge campaign staff full of (sorry) expensive Clinton consultants. Ironically, it's one of those expensive Clinton staffers that wrote that unpleasant letter before jumping ship to Bloomberg. I do agree that having your sister or other family member involved is not ipso facto a reason for a campaign faltering. Even though a tiny campaign, Tulsi Gabbard's sister is managing her campaign with Tulsi,who is hands on. Maybe that's what went terribly wrong with Kamala. She should have stuck with a small, lean campaign...
5
Insights into how to effectively form a working organization of people are I should think something of a requirement for a national leader.
4
It's hard to take Harris seriously when she was portrayed so aptly by Maya Rudolph on Saturday Night Live. I know that's not where one is supposed to handicap Presidential candidates; nonetheless, it left an indelible mark on me.
Who knows where she alienated others?
9
I identify as a very liberal Democrat, but it is tiresome to have politicians driven entirely by ego. Perhaps Ms Harris should pay some dues and establish nationwide credibility by serving her voters for a few terms in the Senate and enacting meaningful legislation before a presidential campaign.
18
@Darold Petty Though that doesn't seem to be working out too well for Amy Klobuchar. Maybe that playbook only works for white men?
1
She turned out to be an empty suit. Didn't really stand for anything except where polling opinion was at a particular moment.
20
Harris is charismatic and intelligent. However, being an AG from the 'country's largest law and order agency' does not qualify you to be president. Kamala ran way too soon – hoping to repeat Obama's path to the presidency – which was largely turbo charged by the press. I don't think it's a mistake that an African American man won the presidency before any woman of any color or qualification. That's the kind of misogyny Kamala was up against– and so are all the other women running. However I also believe that Kamala allowed her ego to interfere with a more pragmatic and longer term approach to running for the presidency. Kamala was a rookie/junior senator from California with only two years under her belt in the Senate – and zero foreign policy experience. I was never convinced she was ready or able to be an effective president because she lacked the executive, legislative, and foreign policy experience I think is critical to the presidency. And I think her campaign's breakdown is emblematic of that inexperience and clarity of focus. Kamala ought to return to the senate where she can do some real good, gain more experience, and help win that body back from McConnell's death grip and the Trump loyalists.
13
Good piece. It's hard to imagine her in the Cabinet.
6
The writing was on the wall here. In my experience, Kamala ran the DA's office well, but her campaign organization was not tight. Even simple things like responding to contributions and managing contributor information was abysmal. Perhaps she should have brought higher-horsepower management staff onboard earlier and tightened things up. Still- her appeal, judgment, and breath of experience would make her an VP. Harris would fill a number of voids in a Biden presidency.
-Michael
She doesn't look serious enough. She appears more to be in the race for personal promotion. She does not speak expressively and leaves you wondering what she really thinks. She is often smirking and her personal affect of swaying her hair back and forth makes her appear to be using feminine charm, more than a pensive thinker. I would be reluctant to vote for her.
9
You don't run your first campaign to win, you run to put your name out there and gain experience. She has many races to win ahead.
1
She was my pick until her cynical and contrived ambush of Joe Biden in the first debate on the issue of reviving forced Federal student busing, a position she has since walked back. She was even ready with the pre-made T-shirts for sale the next morning. It was all so blatantly phony and insincere.
Harris is young and has plenty of time to make another run at being President, but she's clearly not ready now.
20
Good story, though a bit too kind to Harris. If Hollywood were to cast an unprincipled politician with a nasty streak it couldn't do better than Harris -- though probably would refrain from putting a black woman in the role. Her main problem wasn't strategy or staff turmoil. It's that she has no core. She'll change positions on health core or criminal justice in record time. She grandstands in the debates and at the Kavanaugh hearings. Harris is more an identity concept than a candidate. Maybe the public saw a fraud.
18
Ms. Harris is responsible for her drop in the polls. Her debate performnces and flip-flopping on issues were to blame, not her campaign strategists.
9
Ms. Harris was our state attorney general here in California and the fact she supported targeting men of colour for prosecution always bothered me, in light of the fact that once she attained higher office as a Senator and ran as a Presidential candidate she changed her mind. Sort of like holding your finger to the wind to see how voters felt.
As a woman I never have and never will vote for someone based on gender, race, state they are from. Personally I want someone who will want to be President of ALL citizens. Be they from big cities, farmland, rust belt, suburbia.
10
To me, playing a race card and a victim card in the first debate, in your face, is not a smart move for her and for any candidate. She cemented her image, thus being portrayed often in SNL sketch. The likable factor shouldn't be ignored.
13
I've never liked her. I didn't like her record as SF DA or CA AG. I seen her primary motivation as an ambitious quest for power, instead of the desire to be a public servant. I had a chance encounter with her when she was DA. Before she became CA AG, she was meeting with DNC big wigs about a Presidential run down the road ( CA AG was a very well planned put stepping stone). I was not impressed with her. I was at a nice restaurant frequented by a lot of SF City officials. All of us sitting where she walked by were professional people, well dressed, etc... She walked in with her entourage ( which included NO other women, and NO other people of color) and was whisked off to a private room. She didn't greet anyone or make eye contact with anyone, which I thought was rude and when I learned from a waiter that this was a big important meeting for her Senate run, I also thought it was stupid to blow off an opportunity to connect with voters and potential donors. Just say hello, make eye contact. It was just a gut feeling, but she rubbed me the wrong way, and it made me start closely scrutinizing her work, which I found unimpressive. I did vote for her for Senate, I voted a straight Democratic ticket, but she is extremely lucky that Barbara Boxer basically handed the seat to her. IMO, Harris' career exemplifies much that is odious about politics. Her campaign platform is NOTHING like anything she did in lower office, but that has not surprised me.
14
Her exchange with Joe Biden about mandatory bussing helped to sink her. She inaccurately portrayed herself as participating in a mandatory bussing program as a schoolgirl in the early 1970s; then, after denouncing Biden for not supporting bussing at the time (African Americans only did in the single digits), she announced that she did not currently support bussing. Way too clever by half.
14
Identity politics is the cancer that keeps the GOP in power & what sank Harris's bid. She lost the second she went after Biden on the busing issue. The fact that that moment is considered a highlight proves how out of touch the political class in the media is.
Trumps win was a reaction to decades of overtly slandering whites, most of whom are just trying to live a good life as best as they see fit.
Here's what practitioners of identity politics don't understand: Good policy is good policy for EVERYONE. There is nothing to gain morally or politically by dividing us & pretending that there is a magical set of policies that can help only some groups in lieu of punishing others for the sins of dead humans who share the same complexion.
Identity Politics by any rational analysis is racism.
It lies to it's supporters, giving them hope that reparations etc has any chance of becoming law. It's impossible to administer since so many of us are mixed race.
It distorts the basic concepts of individuality to blame white descendants of people who weren't even here in the 1800's for the actions of other dead whites whom were equal opportunity sociopaths and that also took advantage of poor whites too.
IP also makes America itself appear to be exclusively racist when slavery, racism & various forms of a "caste system" have been practiced by every group of humans in history.
Let me know when China, India or a Middle Eastern country allows a white or black person to become president.
14
@John Carlo
You cannot compare racially homogeneous countries to the mutiracial United States.
2
Massive amounts of ego and ambition, a dose of identity politics, straight neo-liberal “values”, and some elitism and rudeness thrown in? Senator Harris was never as serious a contender as the narrative would have us believe. Maybe in 4 or 8 more years, with some seasoning in the Senate, or long enough for memories to get blurry and nostalgic.
6
This article seems to ignore a major blow to her campaign which was when she was called out in the election about her prosecution of marijuana crimes....Rather than answer to the inquiry which had swirled around her for some time. She deflected, rejected and refused to answer. These are not qualities desired in a president....her slide in the polls picked up steam. But it's frankly justified.
7
Another one weeded out. If you can't run a campaign you can't run the country.
5
This kind of headline sickens me. The election is a year away. In most countries papers would not even be talking about front-runners yet, and here is the Times, undermining a serious candidate's chances.
Papers, journalists, anchors: your voices have enormous impact on the scales of political viability. If your goal is not to herd voters away from or towards certain candidates, act accordingly.
7
If we don't support women of color, we won't elect women of color. If we want to end income inequality, we shouldn't elect billionaires and millionaires.
Next November, you will have a choice between one old, White billionaire and one old, White millionaire or billionaire.
2024 can't come soon enough.
5
This is the result of her obsession with Identity politics. Black Identity. I guess not too many people know that her mother is Indian. But then again how many citizens w/ lineage from India will vote in 2020. Not too many. So her strategy was based in large part to garner the Black vote. Next she is very unsure of where she stands on so many issues - To me she is more centrist/right on many issues, even though she can't come out and speak to that. The liberal agenda of the Dem. Party would be unforgiving if she expressed her true opinions. So instead she comes across as a confused, often acrimonious and thin skinned candidate who keeps coming back to playing the only thing she thinks that will help her get nominated - The Race card. Too bad, because I think she is a smart woman.
4
The Kelly Mehlenbacher resignation letter tells all you want to know about Kamala Harris. A political opportunist who is a poor leader, decision maker and manager. The letter is exactly what you got as the S.F. DA, the California Attorney General and what her campaign organization discovered. She is incompetent.
9
I wouldn’t expect the corporate media to acknowledge that Tulsi Gabbard’s accurate criticism of Harris was a major factor in her unraveling, but it definitely was.
23
The Russians sure love Tulsi Gabbard.
1
Very good article actually. Really tells of who Kamala Harris is as to why she shouldn't be president. I'm very happy that you acknowledge that Tulsi Gabbard took her down even though she was on her way. What Tulsi Gabbard said was so correct and beautifully orated that one could not expect a response with any weight from Harris.
This was the only point that I felt you failed to expound upon. You made it sound as if Harris could somehow come back from a blow by Tulsi Gabbard. She could not, she did not.
11
I am delighted to see the failure of Kamala Harris's campaign. I had a banner made addressing an invasion of my house by members of the San Francisco District Attorney's office when she was district attorney. The banner asked her to return the game machine she stole from my younger son when she finished playing with it. I planned to put it across the second story of my house if Harris supporters visited my next door neighbor during her campaign. Chelsea Clinton, along with Hillary Clinton supporters, spent a day there during Hillary's 2016 campaign. (I voted for Hillary.)
The case involved a dispute between my older son and tenants in a building he owned in San Francisco. One tenant, apparently under the influence of methamphetamine which he made in his apartment, attacked his wife with a hammer. He kept a large bin of pornography and did not bother pick up used condoms on the floor. A second tenant had never worked and lived off lawsuits against his landlord, a life style made possible by San Francisco's corrupt legal system. Details like these were ignored by Harris because they did not fit her political narrative of a powerful rich landlord against poor helpless tenants. In reality my son was a hapless landlord who had received poor legal advice, and who could ill afford the expenses of the building.
2
Good that several women of color have been giving her advice. Men of color or women not of color would surely be less wise
3
Comparing Harris to Obama ends at both being half black. She is not genuine at all. Never had a clear message of what she stands for. She seems to need a weatherman to k ow which way the wind blows, and if she doesn’t hear the weather report she doesn’t know what to do. I’ve never seen her as a “rising star” as described here, but rather just an ambitious woman who p,as the race card whenever it’s convenient. Its good that we have one less choice now.
4
Kelly Mehlenbacher's resignation letter is addressed "To Whom it may Concern". How bizarre.
6
Sort of a gossip piece. A voter switching to another candidate absent some scientific evidence of a trend should not be considered news. The reader responses are worse yet. How about an article simply describing what would go into a credible campaign story? Then you can see how many times you strayed from that mark.
6
And she lost me by co-sponsoring a wildnerness bill in CA. Bad enough to have Feinstein being owned by the Sierra Club.
1
This is the exact kind of reporting I can’t stand. If she was in the top tier you would be saying her campaigning was brilliant, even if they did the exact same things. It is never a straight line between activities and outcomes. The other candidates, current events, all stuff out of her control. It is not possible that they are doing a great job and she is not in the top tier because people simply like other candidates at this time? And is it possible that voters really like her all the same? I really can’t stand political reporting.
13
@A how does a campaign do a great job and it's not reflected in the polls? What standard are you judging them by if not the polling? It goes without saying if she was leading in the polls, there would be no need for this article because the "results" speak for themselves.
9
As a black woman, I gave Senator Harris full attention for awhile because I really wanted to know what she represented, and what she could offer. My conclusion is that it's simply too early for her to be ready for the Presidency. She needs more time, and much more introspection, to form and defend the core principles and beliefs that should be the scaffolding of a convincing campaign. I suggest she continue in the Senate, and work to understand why she is there.
1139
@F Bragg
Kamala's performance in this presidential campaign has been sufficiently poor that she will likely be facing questions about whether she is really the best candidate that California can put up for one of its 2 very precious Senate seats... my guess is, there will be some serious Democratic challengers to Kamala in the '022 race.
100
@F Bragg I agree with that sentiment for most of the candidates running. There are and were a few who seem pretty promising that are moving too soon and too fast.
25
@F Bragg Couldn't agree more. Ms. Harris does not know who she is. Being a mixed race ambitious politician only takes you so far. However, her core principles and beliefs have already been formed. She doesn't need more time for that. We form out beliefs as children and young adults. Her core beliefs are either not electable (being "a prosecutor" is not a belief) or else she is unwilling to reveal her true beliefs. She is obviously very intelligent, which is great. But I have two friends from Oakland CA, a white liberal Jewish artist woman and a black liberal male teacher, and both distrust her.
If you don't know yourself and reveal yourself, it's hard to connect to others. Or perhaps she HAS revealed herself and her identity, and voters just don't like it.
65
Trump has shown us that relying on relatives plus having a chaotic management approach is a recipe for disaster. I liked Ms. Harris early on but this does not bode well for winning the nomination or the presidency. I’m looking elsewhere.
6
Rule number one: Don’t make your sister your campaign chairwoman.
958
@Rod
Or as my father once said: Never write an insurance policy for a friend or a relative.
28
@Rod, Its worse than that. Campaigns must have one person clearly in charge. Years ago when I was unvolved as a volunteer in running more local campaigns virtually fulltime when someone involved was questioning what they were tasked to do, "This is a campaign, not a democracy." In other words once a strategic or tactical decision is made you either get behind it or get out of the way. But this falls apart when the decision making process doesn't produce definitive results.
My other adage was that during a campaign candidates need to allow themselves to be managed and not be the manager. Anyone who cannot delegate in that way probably should not be running for an executive office beyond village mayor.
19
@Rod
Exactly!
And don't make you daughter and son in law top West Wing policy advisors.
Enough of this.
43
Wait a minute. She’s been a senator for three years and is running for president, but she hasn’t gotten around to the details in health care (only the biggest domestic issue of the past decade) or the identity of her party. Beyond her control?
19
Regarding the attack on Biden re:busing. Many people don’t know, or remember that even Hubert Humphrey (certainly a liberal Democrat) thought the money could be more optimally spent for educating our children than through busing.
Cheap shots worked for Trump, but they likely won’t work for Harris or Castro (remember him?).
9
Harris' campaign comes off as prosecutorial, not presidential. I hope she becomes one of the Senate's top members where she plays a much more crucial role. She's also young enough to perhaps run for president in 2028. Perhaps by then, she'll have much better chops.
5
Simple. Harris has shown herself to be a dishonest fraud.
Candidates may have very enticing policies with tremendous popular appeal, but if they don't demonstrate that they have excellent character then their commitment to carrying out their proposals becomes suspect. Harris has not shown that she would follow through on her proposals.
8
Any candidate with this level of disorganization and staff rancor has no business running. Truly. If you can’t run an organized, inspiring campaign, how can you run an entire country?
10
"Extensive polling led her to believe that there was great value in the word 'truth,' so she titled her 2019 memoir 'The Truths We Hold' and made a similar phrase the centerpiece of her early stump speech: 'Let’s speak truth.' But she dropped the saying out of a belief that voters wanted something less gauzy." This anecdote is a perfect microcosm of Harris's clueless cynicism. Voters don't value "the word 'truth'"; rather, they're craving the genuine article. But Harris's reaction was perfectly in character, mistaking cynical rhetorical positioning with principled leadership and authenticity. This made is very easy for Tulsi Gabbard, the most courageously truthful politician currently on the American scene, to destroy Harris's candidacy.
12
Ego. Ego. Ego. Ambition.
After what we’ve been through, I’m looking for a Public Servant.
9
As someone in Iowa who’s seen a lot of candidates over the years, I’d say a candidate’s campaign says a lot about what kind of president they would. Alas, Harris’ performance here has been a textbook case in electoral malfeasance.
4
Thought experiment: Hillary Clinton won the primary in 2007 and had two terms as POTUS. Obama smartly stood aside in 2016 along with the rest of the Dem "A-Team", deferring to an obvious GOP "turn" of the cycle, but Obama is running now. Could he be nominated?
1
I was put off by her "gotcha" moment with Biden. I think Biden is more than a little flawed by it was a set up. Her campaign already had t-shirts printed with what she said to him "I was that little girl". If she took issue with what he said she should have articulated it clearly rather than use it to raise her profile and smear him.
16
The reality that she is an empty suit candidate is finally dawning on Senator Harris.
When your only message is "Trump is bad", you are vulnerable to the facts on the street before the American people, that President Trump is actually pretty good at his job (putting style aside), and the results he has achieved so far benefit African Americans and people of color to a great extent.
5
Ms. Harris's performance is no surprise to those of us who live in California and have been exposed to her as a district attorney, attorney general,and now senator, She confuses being telegenic and sporadically articulate with substance. It has always been this way with her. She lacks a core and I would venture to say that she will never acquire one. She is a politician in the worst sense of the word.
16
Kamala Harris would be an awesome Attorney General. But I don't think she is ready to be President yet.
Reading this article, there's almost NO mention of Harris's positions on issues -- as is so often the case in articles about these "rock star candidates" inflated by the media.
Nor any real strong rationale for why we should elect them! What does Harris stand for? No idea. And a glaring lack of info in this article.
Perhaps, that's at the core of Harris's problem as a presidential candidate? (And many others too). NO compelling views on answers, nor even a coherent sense of policy or plans?
It's all "vote for ME!" Why? Because I'm ambitious!
What ever hardened to the quaint of of having accomplishments qualifying a candidate for higher office and a plan to offer to voters? It's not all about media-granted stardom, often devoid of substance.
"a politician with star power who was compared to President Obama even before Californians elected her to the Senate in 2016 ... Health care policy and the identity of the Democratic Party became much-debated issues this year, but she had never given the details of either matter extensive thought as she rose from local prosecutor to California attorney general to the Senate"
4
@NYer I don’t even know what her positions are, and I’ve watched all the debates.
4
Another ambitious, less than genuine politician who does not understand why most voters don't think she is ready for prime time! Learn from Obama, your own campaign mistakes and develop a reason why you are running that does not scream - because I'm a woman of color!
4
Saying "we need to have a conversation about that" signals that you're not ready to be a presidential candidate.
7
"Extensive polling led her to believe that there was great value in the word “truth,” so she titled her 2019 memoir “The Truths We Hold” and made a similar phrase the centerpiece of her early stump speech: “Let’s speak truth.” But she dropped the saying out of a belief that voters wanted something less gauzy."
This just about sums up the problem with a lot of political candidates these days. She did polling to establish the value of truth...
3
I guess it's official, if The Times copy desk (if such a thing exists anymore) says so: the meaning of unravel has been reversed.
Mysteries and confusing messes can be unraveled and rendered comprehensible. Plans, schemes, organizations and even the cuff of a sweater sleeve can ravel into a confounding tangle.
1
@fred I think it was pretty well on the way to unraveling before this article.
3
i liked the NYT article about Sen. Harris where they talked about her wearing white Converse All Stars. I have considered Sen. Harris to be bright but one who’s political hot points change whenever she conceives of the next bright and shiny idea.
Trendy sneakers over substance, and a holier than thou attitude.
5
I felt Gabbard really damaged Harris’ credibility by pointing out her past record of locking up minorities/the poor (and laughing about it). Harris did not have an adequate response, it showed, and she has never recovered. Her attack on Gabbard the last debate was petty. Instead of using the moment to really step up, she resorted to getting “revenge” by criticizing Tulsi for speaking on Fox news? How can Kamala expect to lead when she tunes out those who don’t agree with her?
10
@Sara I think you give Gabbard too much credit. And she’s another one who will never be president.
4
@Vivien Hessel *** but she should be
1
It’s really a shame because she would shredded Trump into little pieces at the debates.
Kamala Harris burst onto the national scene with her no-nonsense interrogation of Brett Kavanaugh. For a while I looked forward to her as the vice presidential candidate. Now, I wish she'd drop out. Her interrogation skills are excellent but her debate performances are canned. She is a one-trick pony.
5
Article says--- "whether the senator should embrace or downplay her record as a prosecutor, which some on the left have criticized." On the 'left'?
See NYT op ed, Jan. 17, 2019 --- "Kamala Harris Was Not a ‘Progressive Prosecutor. The senator was often on the wrong side of history ....as attorney general. By Lara Bazelon law professor and the former director of the Loyola Law School Project for the Innocent."
Quote: "She also defended Johnny Baca’s conviction for murder even though judges found a prosecutor presented false testimony at the trial. She relented only after a video of the oral argument received national attention and embarrassed her office.
And Kevin Cooper, the death row inmate whose trial was infected by racism and corruption. He sought advanced DNA testing to prove his innocence, but Ms. Harris opposed it. (After The NY Times' exposé of the case went viral, she reversed her position.)"
As other recent lamentable events show-- the US does need a "Law School Project for the Innocent" to correct gross injustices inflicted on innocent, imprisoned citizens by some prosecutors.
Harris did not do all possible to reverse convictions of wrongfully imprisoned people.
Is decent justice a 'left wing' idea in America? Is that how the Times labels it in the Land of the Constitution and Bill of Rights?
Yet we need Projects for the Innocent to defend basic rights?
3
Harris’ campaign is muddled. Blame the bicoastal decision scrum, her flip flopping opportunism, America’s waspy terminal
bout of racist sexism or sexist racism: the smart articulate
Californian is flailing. To whom does the torch for our “better angels”pass? Two billionaires, a mega millionaire, two previous candidates with left over war chests prevail. Pete’s authenticity sells well in white rural Peoria, Iowa. Pete’s debating skills mask
his very thin political resume. The path is clearing—
Vlad and the Donald couldn’t be more relieved.
3
@Dama I agree, but what political or governing experience did trump have.
1
I love Kamala Harris. We really need her in the Senate. Her future is bright.
3
We know the establishment is scared when you can’t even find a NYTimes article detail the substance of what Tulsi Gabbard said that cut Kamala down;
She laughed about prosecuting people for marijuana possession while laughing about her own marijuana consumption.
Kamala could have apologized as Tulsi offered. But instead Kamala doubled down on her “top tier” ness and shooed Tulsi away like a servant beneath her.
Bad move.
Kamala could have apologized and mentioned her Senate version of the MORE Act. Instead she didn’t question her own hubris on marijuana policy. Then her staged attack on Tulsi during the next debate? If Kamala thinks that worked she’s in for another burn during the next debates. Tulsi is already jumping through the fiery hoops the DNC keeps creating for debate qualifications. And Tulsi didn’t even bring up how Kamala laughed about jailing single mothers who can’t afford to get their kids to school much less pay for truency. Good luck with that Kamala! Guess it’s always easier to ask for forgiveness than permission but Kamala so arrogant she can’t do either one!
10
She is just like Hillary. Calculating and no roots or passion. Her premeditated attack on Biden confirmed that.
12
It’s appropriate for Democrats to weed out weak candidates. That said, Harris is still a million times more fit to be President than Trump. Just for jollies, what does Biden stand for?
5
Sanity among run amok progressivism.
5
Senator Kamala Harris is clearly unfit to be candidate for Democrats’ nominee for President. Her insincerity & lack of personal conviction on any Issue shows through in her constant use of calculated clever lines. Her choice of putting down Vice President Biden in the July debate by raising his views of 40 years ago, rather than show her better strengths vis-a-vis present Biden positions, was a most obnoxious low blow against a fellow Democrat & one of the pillars of the Democratic Party.
7
It sounds like The Russians destroyed her campaign with a little assist from their asset Tulsi G.
4
Ms. Harris also can't get ahead because of her campaign personality. Whenever she's being interviewed her tone of voice is like she's our favorite auntie who's very disappointed in us for something. Or she's bemused because we said something stupid.
6
You dance around the elephant in the room: Harris stands for nothing but naked ambition, as proven by her execrable record as a prosecutor.
14
Tracy Flick.
2
Her biggest problem was hiring her sister, second, she is an unqualified (willie brown got her her first political job) panderer (who was an aggressive prosecutor now she is a friend to criminals) she memorizes one catchy quote fir debates, and the SNL parody of her as the fun aunt aka funt is a perfect parody of her.
She thought her 1/2 blackness would project her into a VP slot at worst, but she can’t compete with those offering free stuff (Bernie & Warren) for the uneducated young voters - somehow Biden says Obama enough to corner the black vote and she is right about where she deserves to be 2% and sinking
2
Her campaign ended the day she sat down with Al Sharpton for a televised coffee break in Harlem to kiss his ring and say that broke millennials need to pay reparations. As if these poor kids arent broke enough with crushing student loan debt. So she loses not only all of those kids votes, but also those kids parents votes as well. Terrible judgement on Kamala's part. Making kids pay more is just pure evil if you ask me.
3
She lost me when she endorsed reparations for slavery.
8
I found very troubling about Ms Harris.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/17/opinion/kamala-harris-criminal-justice.html
2
Her feigned “racism” attack on Biden in the first debate told me enough about her.
9
Don't appoint a family member to run your campaign.
Have a clear message.
Get the chip off your shoulder.
Stay in the Senate.
6
This far-left woke warrior has NOTHING to offer America except a Venezuelan vision for Americans. It’s bad enough that she was a career climber as Willy Brown’s pincushion, but now even her own parents are embarrassed by her radical Leftist Socialist policies.
Let’s hear it for the Woke Warrior!
5
She's a natural Attorney General, not President.
1
Attorney General of Venezuela maybe.
1
I love how liberals must always find someone or something to blame. Don't you understand that the people of this country are smart enough to figure out who they want to elect and who they don't. It's not about Russians and campaign chairs and poor messaging. In this day and age we all have all the information we need at our finger tips and when we look at people like Hillary and Ms Harris and Joe Biden we see the swamp in full force. To the point where we trust a narcissistic, megalomaniac with gold plated toilets to better represent the interests of we the people. The media has been drinking their own Kool Aid for so they will never get it.
7
@David
Yes. Very well stated! Many liberals believe their own propaganda. (It hurts me to see, as a liberal.) They think the photos they select of Trump supporters at rallies are actually representative. They think Trump supporters are foolish enough to believe tabloid and clearly foreign internet ads that attack Hillary (as if they read the National Enquirer for real news). Sometimes I think our mainstream press has, to some extent, knowingly ramped all this up as a defense (very successful so far) against losing market share to internet news sources now available. Cable news is going the way of buggy whips and this is their desperate last gasp, liberated from all their journalistic standards.
1
giving a pass to Munuchin when she was CA AG and dealing with the foreclosure crisis should have been a tip off that she hadnt formed a core set of principals yet
2
Anyone who still preaches slave reparations will not be taken seriously.
5
I liked the possibility of Harris until it became clear that she is racist: when she said that she identifies "black."
She's not capable of bringing people together, as Barack Obama was. Obama isn't racist.
4
Let's see as much ink poured into how Biden has run a worse campaign but remains elevated in the polls due to his status as a well-liked, well-connected, and established white person. He has been worse on almost every policy issue, yet remains in the lead. My feeling, as an outsider (Canadian), is that she needed to be absolutely perfect to overcome the fact that she is a black female in a country that elected a racist buffoon. The so called enlightened democrats are likely going to nominate Biden, who can barely spit out a proper sentence, and appears to be going a little senile. This article misses the forest for the trees.
1
The important lesson here: Consistency is key to becoming a president.
Don't believe me - look at Trump's or Obama's campaign.
- Trump ran his campaign centered on immigration, trade and the economy - and never once switched his position on any of those issues, (until he won).
- Obama ran his campaign on healthcare and revamping the US economy and won the election in a land slide.
Still unsure what's Kamala's campaign message on any single issue.
14
@T
And sandwiched in between Trump's campaign centered on immigration, was a healthy dose of white nationalism.
Think not?
How else did he earn that endorsement from the Klan?
1
When Senator Harris first started campaigning, I was very impressed and felt strongly that here is a female candidate I could support. I thought, if not POTUS, then a solid choice for VEEP. But, after seeing her debate performances, something changed in both her message and, frankly, the way she delivered it. Ego is the bane and the blessing of all politicians. In my opinion, President Obama was the gold standard for “ego” that inspired both confidence and leadership and humanity and accessibility. While Senator Harris certainly had the first two in spades, I felt let down in the last two in spite of observing her “mixing with the crowd” a few times as well as during one on one interviews.
4
Unlike Booker (with whom she shares low poll numbers & race), Harris seemed to always be on the attack of her peers. It wasn’t a good look, we have Trump to do that.
14
Senator Harris ran the most impressive campaign for statewide office in 2010 that I have ever witnessed. She was far behind in her race for attorney general and ended up with a stunning victory over a well know Los Angeles district attorney.
Her Senate race, however, was handed to her without much fight. Senator Boxer essentially anointed her and cleared the field. This didn't help her create the necessary campaign infrastructure she needed for a successful national bid.
Additionally, her flip flopping on healthcare did her great harm.
11
I agree with all of the criticisms of Kamala Harris' campaign. I went from thinking of her as a promising breath of fresh air with valid viewpoints to seeing her as a flirty, flighty, ditzhead - not doing her job well as a US Senator or as a person with years of California political experience.
If a candidate cannot even run a successful campaign orgnization, she certainly cannot run an organization as complex and politically charged as the United States of America. By being too anxious to proceed beyong the Senate (which after all must be pretty boring and frustrating - but was totally foreseeable!), Kamela lunged ahead to try to duplicate Barack Obama's track record.
Unfortunately, she lacked Obama's gravitas and good education at Columbia, Harvard, etc. Her life story, written about her campaign, was all about her mother, an Indian immigrant who never held political office.
I have been very disappointed in Kamala Harris since her successful Senate campaign. She should retire from seeking the spotlight, get off the campaign bus, and go back to her day job in the Senate. She's doing nothing there and will not be re-elected if she doesn't clean up her act.
Your long time home town and scene of your DA years had better hopes for you, Kamala. Since you married your entertainment attorney from LA, you have lost the values that made you a leader in Northern California.
14
Instead of getting people to believe she would fight for them, she got them to believe she fights for herself.
Stay in the Senate Kamala,
5
When you name your sister your top campaign person, in a Trumpian time of nepotism and cronyism, it signals Kamala Harris was fundamentally unprepared for her position.
13
I gave Harris a shot. Her questions on the Judiciary Committee are unfailingly on point, and I thought she could beat Trump. Then she trimmed her position on health insurance, and went after Joe Biden with her fake , "It hurt me." And as my opinion of her changed so did my ability to watch her on TV without looking for her fakery. She's got a great and easy laugh (which I like in a candidate) but now I'm wondering if even that is real.
7
Her campaign has been so unimpressive, she has probably taken herself out of the running for VP.
15
She pretty much sealed her fate among white boomers when she grabbed her brownie points for attacking Biden on busing. Any boomer remembers bussing. And most of us were not in favor of it back in the day. Black folks have never warmed up to her for reasons relating to real politics. She isn't perceived as someone who can get white votes. Especially not white boomer votes. And in that they are on the money. If Blacks turned out for her en masse but everyone else stayed home what do you win? You win nothing. You have to start over from the beginning. Harris went for the low hanging fruit regardless of whether some of that fruit might sicken and kill her campaign.
7
@C. Schwinbarger
The only thing "black" about Kamala Harris is her Jamaican biological father. She was raised by her Indian mother and spent much of her formative years in Canada. The rest in Berkely and Palo Alto ... hardly hotbeds of racism.
What does she know of the typical African-American experience?
She's a fake ... and everybody has come to see it.
And to suggest white boomers would not vote for an African-American or a woman is just plain wrong. It's the person ... not their gender or race.
8
SHE was always on the attack or angry! No simpatico! Needs grooming and more experience in life!
7
Too bad borrowing page from Trump playbook she impressed coming out talking major issue like health care and being a female/minority I thought it was hers to lose is she played it right but at the end telling people she listened to rappers who hadn't released anything to listen to or tweeting she was going to forgive Pell Grants(keyword grants) .........just another politician looking for votes
3
Ms. Harris has a chip on her shoulder the size of Vermont. She is not presidential material at this time.
14
Since when has that stopped someone from getting elected?
2
@David H
And Trump doesn't? Sorry, but if you're going to talk about one having a chip on one's shoulder -- you might want to take a closer look at the current resident in the White House.
3
She started off in politics by having a relationship with a married man 30 years her senior (Willie Brown). She has zero substance of her own, she's used to her California connections. Good riddance.
27
The angry black women victim message that Kamela has used so often no longer sells. Trump and many others like Kaine and Candace Owen have chipped away at the traditional black democrat support and have shown blacks that it is much better to strive to be self sufficient victors instead of victims always looking to others to provide hand outs. Blacks have had decades of white Democrats telling them what to do and how to vote to no avail. It is no surprise that Kamela is floundering. Watch for her to drop out after Iowa.
16
Mark my words, when Kamala drops out she will blame it on racism and sexism.
30
@Russian Bot
And let's face it, there's probably something to that.
1
I find it strange and calculated that she makes a big deal of being 'black' whilst never mentioning her Indian ancestry.
42
Now is a good time for Obama to step in for Kamala.
1
I enthusiastically supported both Harris and Warren early in their campaigns. I am now wholly behind Warren and have been for many months. When Harris attacked Biden’s character in that first debate, I knew at that very moment her campaign was over. Strangely, to me at least, her polling and fundraising numbers skyrocketed in the days that followed. But what I saw was a plotted and cynical gotcha moment that made her look petty, disingenuous and over rehearsed. She would be an excellent VP or AG pick in a Warren administration.
8
"Ms. Harris is now attempting a pivot, taking a less scripted approach to campaigning."
Yes, less scripted is advisable when you can't afford script writers.
Anyway, a mismanaged campaign is certainly a plausible explanation for Harris' campaign implosion. I have a simpler explanation though: Voters don't like prosecutors. I gave Harris a fair shake on her policy positions. However, I set her odds of securing the nomination as long and her odds of securing the presidency as basically non-existent. This was months ago.
The basis for the prediction was profession and profession alone. There's only been two prosecutors elected President in US history. Taft and Jackson. Both only served in the role as young professionals. Taft was technically only an assistant prosecutor. Jackson served briefly in a territory. Neither were career prosecutors.
Every other prosecutor who has ever run for President either failed to win the nomination or failed to win the general election. There's something about prosecutors that doesn't work in national politics. Harris is now another statistic in a very long trend.
8
When she announced her running, I was so excited. Finally, someone strong, intelligent and pragmatic that will make Donald Trump so uncomfortable that he will not know what hit him. However, along the trail, I was disappointed. I noticed her lack of firmness on issues that have been on the headlines for many years and finally have realized she is not ready. She is a great California senator, but not on the national level. She needs to educate herself more and take a clear position, even if leaving the door open for tweaking and evolution. I think she needs to wait for a next time and continue her work as senator.
4
Not Surprised!
Almost from the beginning she seemed to see this campaign of hers as all about her. I wanted to like her, especially given her Senate performance questioning Mr. Barr for U.S. Attorney General. But she never had any substantive plans for what she would do as president. And almost every interview I saw her laughing at the most inappropriate times. And NO it is not because she is a women that I feel this way. Warren and Klobuchar are excellent in their presentations, no matter the venue nor the questioner.
3
I'm still not sure just what the "message" of Senator Harris's campaign is, as it seems to be constantly changing.
That said, with her background as a D.A. and state Attorney General there's no reason to think if elected, she'd walk all over the U.S. Constitution like this president has.
However most likely, that alone won't earn her the nomination.
3
From my perspective, her best talent is berating people that come up for nomination. Even if I was to agree with some of her positions I would not vote for her. Actually, at the moment that’s pretty much my sentiment for every democratic candidates with the exception of Bloomberg; but he has time still to turn me off by promising a grand solution for every grievance voiced by every group under the Democratic Party umbrella....
7
"She has proved to be an uneven campaigner who changes her message..." That'll happen when your only core principle is "I want to be President." I'll never forget the very first debate, when she haltingly raised her hand in support of healthcare for undocumented immigrants, only to announce the very next day that she'd misunderstood the question. Possessed of the thinnest of resumes (well, OK, there was Beto), her crowning, no, singular achievement was election from the bluest-of-blue California. And now she's been exposed as having a reach that exceeds her grasp. She can now return home to accept her political future: routinely mentioned as a Vice Presidential candidate, but like her Senate compatriot Diane Feinstein, no real force in national politics. In other words, in the cruelest of ironies, another Joe Biden.
10
Kamala Harris has a fatal political flaw. Many people just do not find her likable. Once people have decided that it's pretty hard to change.
Based on her polling numbers and the feedback on this thread the die has been cast.
6
Ms. Harris lost me because of her disingenuous takedown of Joe Biden in the first debate. She intentionally misconstrued the issue--locally mandated busing versus federally mandated--and at the end of the whole kerfluffle it turns out that currently both she and Mr. Biden are opposed to federal busing.
10
Dear Kamala, You need to get your campaign excited. Complaining that some people are not ready for a woman of color to be president may be true but it is not going to excite your campaign or expand your base.
The number one issue people care about is defeating Trump. I think this not only means beating him in the election but also undoing his threats to our democracy. I think the next president should establish two commissions. The first would be to determined what laws have been broken in his name and to prosecute the guilty. Most of your democratic opponents are wishy-washy on this subject. You are a former prosecutor, play to your strengths. The second commission would be to determine what laws and/or constitutional changes are needed to make sure a Trump never happens again.
Taking a strong stand on the above would excite people and differentiate you from your opponents. Alternatively, you can continue to play it safe in the campaign. Then your only real assignment will be to write your withdrawal speech.
1
If so goes a chaotic campaign, so it could well go if this candidate came to occupy a chaotic White House. There has never been a more critical time to elect a president with organizational skills.
2
The DNC is an established political entity that has a process and a structure. In order to win the nomination the candidate must pass a series reviews.
Senator Barack Obama was vetted, tested and supported since his 2004 appearance at the DNC. Barack Obama was a well groomed and polished candidate who was able to garner the nomination through his impressive personal skills and pedigree, the role of history, fierce behind the scenes strategic planning and significant organization.
Neither Cory Booker or Kamala Harris have the cocktail elements to win the nomination.
2
Everyone polling from Harris and below needs to take 10 steps back from the punch bowl.
The party is over and Pelosi and Schiff failed to reshuffle the game board. Censuring is not going to work either.
3
The problems with her campaign come from the fact that she is and always has been a completely empty suit, with great ambition but no core principles.
Worshiping the rich and powerful and always looking toward the next office worked in the past, so why not now? Unfortunately her complete lack of any core values makes it hard to run a Presidential campaign against those who actually have some.
Just what the Dems. do not need : Another limousine liberal.
11
@sam g
I never understood the pejorative use of "limousine liberal". Must have been coined by a republican who just could not comprehend a person being personally wealthy while advocating for those who are not.
4
@caljn To me its about folks who spout their support for the disadvantaged but in their own lives associate and identify with the rich (and powerful, which today are the same) . Harris, like the Clintons , always aspired to be wealthy --she is one of the Senate's wealthiest...She hung out exclusively with wealthy people during her ascent to power.
1
@sam g
Well you've confirmed my supposition. Why exactly can't someone aspire to be wealthy, attain wealth but still advocate for the "disadvantaged"?
Her fortunes turned on the attack on Joe Biden over bussing. Why on earth pick such a controversial and long-ago topic to go on the attack with? It made her appear both reaching and tone-deaf. There is so much more important fodder for today's campaigns! However, this piece may have gone a bit far in the harshness of its critique. I'm certain there is infighting in virtually all political campaigns. Perhaps she is simply not ready for prime time. Ms. Harris is at her best using her prosecutorial skills during confirmation hearings. All that said, I'd vote for her in a heartbeat over Trump.
5
Harris has been one of the best at interrogating republicans at hearings, and hopefully she will be encouraged to continue her superb work.
1
@Joe Smith
She is a grandstander. What she does is show how "tough" she is with nothing but shrill and bombast. I don't see "interrogating" in that. It's all for the camera.
7
Female candidates are held to impossibly strict standards. Black female candidates carry the added burden of not being white and the highly offensive stereotype of the angry black woman. Any of the current Democratic candidates would make far better and certainly more honorable and respectful Presidents than Donald Trump. Ms. Harris is very smart and passionate but like many of the lower polling candidates, her political stand on the issues has never really been distilled enough as either a moderate or progressive candidate. Fair or not, other than her extreme dislike of Trump, her political message is otherwise muddled. As the first candidate in the debates to attack Biden for a decades old vote of school busing, that appeared to quickly backfire on her campaign and she has never recovered. For some voters, she may have fueled some latent fear that she is indeed an angry black woman.
4
This is good news, because if Harris's campaign collapses, it protects the nation against her becoming president. The problem appears to be that she is too selfish. She has an honest desire to want to help the country, but she focuses on herself heroically winning; she lacks the reflex to always see herself as facilitating what is good for others. When she attacked Biden regarding his position on forced bussing from decades ago, which was typical of its time, and correct in respecting how people hated having little children bussed for hours each day, she separated herself from the larger goal of advancing the Democrats toward the White House, regardless of which candidate won. She also extracted herself from the pool of suitable vice presidential candidates. She retains the prosecutor's killer instinct, a trait unsuitable for a thoughtful, reflective, inclusive leader. Lacking the ability to place others and the big picture first, we can be sad that someone so talented is kicking herself out of the race, even while we are glad to see her lose.
4
As Joe Rogan said, Tulsi Gabbard sank her battleship. A well-deserved fate for Kamala Harris. Let it stand as a lesson to everyone who takes the morally compromised, careerist path of least resistance. Eventually someone will hold you to account.
14
Harris isn't likeable. She has the qualifications but no personal charm or attraction in her personality.
She knows she is a pretty woman and she's very smart but what she is missing is warmth. Can't buy that.
US Attorney General...yes.
4
Harris's problem was always Harris herself.
Harris kept recalibrating her positions. One day she'd say she was 100% behind a policy, and a few days later say she misheard the question and was against it. Her well-planned attacks, while lauded by the media, reinforced her inauthenticity.
Harris attack on someone a large number of Democrats identified with as a racist because he opposed busing when 94 percent of blacks opposed it not only came off as a low-blow, it was patently false.
Harris, the daughter of highly educated upper middle-class immigrant parents living in California, was not bused because of anything the federal government did or failed to do, but because white, black, and brown communities in her area of California implemented it locally.
Harris spent months planning that attack on Biden; memes, tee shirts, and a publicity campaign ready. She used a rhetorical trick, saying she didn't think Biden was a racist, so she could argue he was one.
Even those supporting candidates other than Biden understood Biden was stung because he deeply cared about the accusation. They also understood Harris's trick would fail miserably against a thoroughly indecent Trump, who along with over 60 million Americans who will vote for him no matter what, would laugh at the accusation.
Democrats could already hear Trump attacking Harris for going after "poor, sleepy Joe Biden" as a racist. Trump would say it meant Harris thought every white man is racist, and it would work.
5
It was her bad faith, disingenuous surprise attack on Biden in the first debate that did it. Got her a little bit of a bump until people realized what a cheap shot it was. After that it just cemented her image as a craven opportunist who will do or say anything. Hopefully she really learns something from it and comes back a better person and candidate in 2024.
2
@Tim I hope she never comes back as candidate for President.
5
She has never had any significant opposition in California. When you think it’s a big moment to confront a major opponent in a debate over whether Trump’s twitter account should be removed, you are in way over your head.
7
Too much reliance on hopes based on "the Obama model," whatever that means in the current Universe. That she had not thought about the tension within the Dem Party is a factor that was "beyond her control..." Huh? Notice to everyone in this game! It's 2020! We need to unseat the madman. The way to do it requires being in the here and now. We're not going back! The silver lining of these past four years is that REAL change can happen now!
Senator Harris’s campaign never took off for two main reasons. First, she is a prosecutor who actually put criminals in jail. That is anathema to the police-hating, über-woke progressive wing of the Democratic Party. Second, she refused to embrace the socialist-internationalist platform of the Bernie Sanders/AOC faction, who view the federal government solely in terms of the handouts it offers, and who believe that an illegal alien from Guatemala has more intrinsic value than an unemployed Ohio steelworker. All in all, it’s a foolish and depressing recipe for a 2020 Trump victory.
1
Perhaps Kamala should have run for Governor of CA first. Gavin Newson should have run for the Senate and been a primary contender this time around. He probably would have clinched it.
2
There was no mention in the article of her support for reparations, which is a losing proposition. If she is as smart as supporters say she is, why can't she figure out how to organize a campaign? This woman is as phony as can be.
6
Senator Harris does not have the experience to be President, neither does Buttigieg and a lot of the Democratic field. Go away, get some real life experience with a large bureaucracy, accomplish something with national import, then come see me in 4 to 8 years. Right now this looks like an ego trip for most of the field.
6
This reader predicted in the NYT comment section at the very start of her campaign that Harris would fail. The prediction was based on the fact that Harris has no idea who she is or what she stands for. Watching her was like watching Hillary, a candidate driven by polls, mouthing positions she clearly didn't believe in but hoped would convince voters she did.
Even the latest decision, "to be less scripted." is in reality, just another scripted move.
6
It is all much more simple than all this in-depth analysis. Kamala Harris was an empty shell. Even in a country debased by 100 years of cereal ads, Harris was too lacking in nutrient content.
Now I realize that editors and moderators on toney and mature news outlets want something more considered, ponderous and analytical than comparing Harris to a box of cheap cereal. But to all those who would insist on "analysis fit to print" I have two words: Erich Fromm.
Mr. Fromm was certainly a considered and serious sociologist and it was he who pointed out c. 1950 that modern man's sentience had been reduced to that of "a well-fed, well-entertained" creature "attracted by the latest model in thought, art and style, under the illusion that the thoughts and feelings he has acquired by listening to the media of mass communication are his own." In other words, modern man is Homo Cornflaccus, a creature whose free will is exercised by the choice of a hundred different, colorful brands of cornflakes.
And Kamala Harris was just such a box. When the UK Guardian first reported on her candidacy last year, it was all: "She's Indian! She's Black! She's She!" But not a point about policy. This paper was no bolder. That she had no content other than wanting to sell herself "as a colorful candidate" was made painfully obvious by her double-talking and back-pedaling on Medicare.
Some brands of cereal are too lacking in content even for a public acculturated to accept them.
5
Not surprised!
Almost from the beginning she seemed to see her campaign as all about her and nothing about her vision for the country.
I wanted to like her, especially given her Senate performance questioning Mr. Barr for U.S. Attorney General, virtually my only context for her back then. But she never had any substantive plans for what she would do as president. She spoke in generalities or said things like, "Well, we have to talk about that, now don't we." But, she never talked about whatever "that" was.
You can't go up against Trump and win solely on "smart comebacks."
5
She’s done for now in my opinion. She’s wicked smart, has a good heart and she’s young. She can try again.
I think the major flaw in Harris’s campaign is that she is not consistently focusing on the big issues the way Warren and Sanders are.
We do want to support teachers. We do want to close the income gap among black and Latina women.
But she needs to focus on healthcare and the broader economy.
She just missed the boat. Still love her and hope she learns.
12
I think it is pretty clear now, that if a candidate cannot tell the electorate why they are running for President, what their convictions and goals are and how they will attempt to go about getting there, they have no business running and if one takes notice, ALL of the corporate/establishment candidates fall into that category and that includes Harris and Biden and now Buttigieg(when he started collecting money from lobbyists). Bloomberg is just another billionaire who wants to buy an election.
These "status quo" candidates spend their time attacking those with the policies, convictions and commitment to do it and who are they attacking? Of course, Sanders, Warren, Gabbard and Yang(the outsiders)essentially no one else and the establishment, who wishes to maintain the "status quo", fully supports it.
13
Early on it baffled me to no end the positive support Harris received from the media and others. She never had a coherent message -- any message really -- and her big moment during the debates resulted from attacking Biden for having a current position on busing that she herself holds. When she took responding hits on stage, even small ones, she became flustered, looked angry, and responded with nothing of substance. No leadership. Reading up on her earlier roles, I didn't see accomplishment without associated controversy. I just shook my head and wondered what anyone ever saw in her. I can only conclude that: 1) her appearances on C-Span, when she tore into Republicans during various hearings, resonated with those on the Left who wanted to punish those on the Right, and saw her as their avenging angel. And 2) she checked several identity boxes. How many people would vote based on those things? Not enough.
34
@Holmes Agree completely. NYT, WaPo, MSNBC--all of them initially--and for way too long--touted her far beyond any substance, policies, or accomplishments she could claim.
It was almost as if she was a sort of CGI media mirage: good-looking, female, youngish, black (but not too black), and a great smile--voila!
It's a relief to see that lack of substance (along with highly questionable actions as California DA & AG) actually have come home to roost.
1
Very sad development but instructive. Senator Harris would be my choice for the Attorney General of the United States in a Democratic administration. There will be many criminals from the current administration to prosecute and I think her leadership at Justice would be outstanding. She'd really be in her element.
15
I noticed Ms. Harris was off her game from the start. Telling me she was getting missed messaging from her team. If you've heard her speak in small meet and greets, and Q&As, you know she has the right skills. But clearly on the larger stage she's shifting gears but the wrong ones...and grinding them at the same time.
Her biggest mistake was trying to drift towards Sanders and Warren. That was never her lane. Prosecutors don't do socialism, etc
6
If there's anything good about the grotesquely long primary campaign, it's that those candidates who can't manage their own campaigns are exposed as bad executives. If you can't manage a campaign, what would you do in the world's most difficult job?
17
Trump’s campaign was a joke and he won
5
@AR: And look at the mess his administration is -- same as the campaign. High turnover, "acting" heads of departments, nepotism, profiteering, divisiveness, and a total failure to reach out to anyone but his loyal followers.
4
That is a new thought to judge a candidate by their campaign organization. It does reflect their character and skills. Thanks for the tip.
I was a huge Harris fan as she began her campaign but unfortunately she ended up being not convincing. Except for some topics she's basically not been enrolled in her own message and therefore she's not enrolling others. Too bad!
I hope we see her again.
3
Kamala Harris had a LOT going for her -- 20,000 people showed up for her kickoff rally. She even had that "likability" quality, that unfortunately women candidates are judged by. But you can't run a campaign based on polling, buzzwords like "truth", and "big moments". Plus she went after Biden, accusing him wrongly of racial bias, which ticked a lot of people off.
Now I am beginning to question just what she represents, what her core values are, and what she's doing in the Senate. Don't count out a primary challenge.
12
If she withdraws her candidacy I'll contribute toward an engraved Lucite block of appreciation for promoting discussion of important issues during this campaign.
3
No former prosecutor could ever win the Democratic nomination in the "cancel culture" that now prevails among online liberals. Period.
I'm sure Harris made some mistakes, but what really ended her campaign was the way the other Democratic candidates jumped all over her in the second debate. She had made a splash in the first debate, confronting Joe Biden, and in the second round, she was attacked unmercifully for her record as a prosecutor.
If you've spent any time in law enforcement, you know that EVERY prosecutor has had convictions that were later overturned. You know that if you're AG of a city the size of San Francisco or a state like California, you're unfortunately had to deal with situations where police are accused of mishandling evidence and other problems. In Harris's case, those inevitable incidents gave her opponents the opportunity to accuse her of "sending an innocent man to death row" and to smear her as another Hermann Goring.
Which is a shame. Because to some of us, a progressive woman of color with a background in law enforcement made for a compelling combination. But the circular firing squad that is the Democratic Party these days functions to make sure that anyone with a law enforcement background is going to be eliminated from contention in short order.
4
Kamala Harris comes off as aggressive and opportunistic...tirelessly playing the ‘race and gender’ card, ad nauseam. And when she boasted about her ‘top tier’ status awhile ago, I suspected that would be the beginning of the end for her campaign.
25
Ms. Harris,
Please go silently into the good night after paying your campaign creditors. You have had your 15 minutes & did not capture or captivate the public imagination with your narrative. Your prosecutor spiel didn't transfer as well as you or your early supporters may have expected.
Please go out with some dignity and do not assign the blame about your moribund candidacy.
As of now, the race appears to be between Biden, Sanders, Warren and Buttigieg. Unfortunately, Biden will continue to self-destruct not because he isn't a nice guy but because that is where evolution has taken him. He has become a wind-up who has had his inner coil wound down due to chronic gaffs and the inappropriate use of language. Too much is at stake to continue to listen to his failing psychobabble.
As for the others, it will be decades before the electorate will seriously consider the march of failed big government that Sanders & Warren propose. Mayor Pete's stark inexperience makes him not electable just yet. He must move beyond espousing platitudes by doing and that takes time.
My crystal ball sees Bloomberg getting the Democratic nod. Many people don't like him but most rationalists & realists will come to terms w/ the gestalt that will make Bloomberg prevail.
The long road to Election Day 2020 will be like no other as will the Day itself. Will be very stimulating but, I will keep it a secret as I know who will win. I can not say because I do not wish to loose my time travel privileges.
6
@Spacetime
Sorry. Your crystal ball is cracked if you think Bloomberg will get the nod.
Why?
Because he's effectively lost the Black and Latino vote due to his racist "stop & frisk" policing policy -- and his recent apology won't cut it.
Not only that, most folks who remember his reign here as Mayor, and the unprecedented third term he gifted himself after giving the City Council a raise won't vote for him.
Time to get a new ball.
4
@N. Smith
Thank you for reading my comment and more importantly taking the time to respond. I sincerely appreciate your thoughts. I do not have as much of an autonomic negative reaction against Bloomberg as you. My own disappointment is that he did not run for the Presidency in previous years. Perhaps, we will meet again w/in these columns during the coming months whereupon our forecasts/opinions may shift. In the meantime N.Smith of my favorite city on the planet, may I be so bold as to ask you who would you like to see win the 2020 contest and why? Thank you again.
1
@Spacetime
Thank you for your reply. As to your question about my reaction to Bloomberg, let me first of all assure you that I am not alone in my reasoning -- as most New Yorkers took offense to his "stop & frisk" policy and his unprecedented third term, which we saw as a blatant power grab.
Sorry. That's not Democracy and we already have a president who looks like he'll never leave the White House, even if he's voted out.
As for who I'd like to see the 2020 contest, I'm still in observation mode.
But whoever it is, I hope they represent this country better than Donald Trump has.
1
Ms. Harris hasn't displayed star quality in my opinion. Her unpleasant, even nasty comment to Joe Biden in the first debate gave us good insight into her character. The presidential election is not about race, and she doesn't seem to "get" that. Her arrogance comes through very clearly, and we've already had three years of egocentricity.
20
@Elizabeth Bennett
Actually I beg to differ with that.
After three years of this egocentric and racist president, this election is very much about "race".
And only those in denial fail to see it.
2
@N. Smith It seems to me that the majority of Americans find this president repellent precisely because of his racism, among other things.
2
I had great hopes for her but her attack on Biden in June ended any early "political infatuation" I had for her. It was such a deflating moment when she went after him. Instead of showing passion, vision, empathy ...she appeared petty, nasty and ultimately unsure of herself.
27
Don’t tell us what to think with your headlines. It really disgusts me the way voters are manipulated by the press— both right and left. Just give us the facts and find a more balanced headline.
8
Kamala, come home - California loves you still.
4
@Ed Andrews
Yes. And please stay!
2
Harris has time. She's young. She just needs a little seasoning. Maybe a Governorship would round out her resume.
3
If you ask me, the entire Democratic Party has unraveled. America is not a socialist country. Most voters would take Trump over a socialist and that's why the Democrats are a disaster right now.
10
@Mark: How about some solid evidence to back up your assertion? Anecdotally, most people I know would vote for a democratic socialist ham sandwich over Trump, but that's just anecdotal evidence, and I'm fully aware that many people I do not know hold views such as your own. Try getting out of the right-wing bubble and meeting some other Texans who don't think exactly as you do, and perhaps we'll stand a chance of learning how to work together.
6
@Mark
On the contrary. The Democratic Party, with its diverse field of candidates shows us the Democracy is still very much alive in America.
If anything has "unraveled", it's the G.O.P. by giving up its identity and vision to only one nominee who rules with fear and an iron fist.
Another thing.
Maybe most voters in West Texas would likely vote for Trump over a socialist -- but most informed voters know that there's more to "socialism" than those who fling the word about in fear is about.
6
Really well done article! It is actually quite interesting seeing the insides of a struggling presidential campaign. I'm curious of the ongoings of a "rising" campaign such as Buttigieg.
3
Kamala could have had this nomination easier than anyone else if she was articulate on policy, less focused on identity politics, and frankly less arrogant.
I think in Kamala’s mind she deserves to be president.
13
Too long on snark and identity. Short on gravitas and keeping it real. In that regard she went the way of fellow Senator Kirsten Hillibrand.
20
@Woke
It's rather telling that you take exception to "snark" when we have someone like Donald Trump in the White House, and that's ALL he's about.
First of all, I find the selection of comments the NYTimes has chosen to endorse here extremely disappointing (but they have managed to wreck any respect I had for them during the past 3-4 years)
Hit pieces like this are also part of the reason Kamala etc. had issues. Her campaign may have been flawed but if we compare that to the nightmare that is Donald Trump daily - one wonders why we are even getting articles like this from the nytimes when they should spend that valuable real estate elsewhere than tearing down a woman trying to bring honor to the USA.
4
@Josh Amos
It would seem that because the 2020 election will ultimately determine the future direction of America(if it has any), the voters are no longer interested in the "lesser of two evils".
1
@Deus , it's always that. And the lesser is better. It works the same in Canada, btw.
Senator Harris, you will never be pure enough for the Progressive Dems. Many are willing to lose in 2020 rather than betray the cause. I had looked forward to voting for you until the half-hearted attempt to join dump Obama care without an alternative. You should have never raised your hand. Whoever advised you to follow a script did you no service It appeared you were hesitant, searching for your next on point line. Good luck and maybe next time.
“How Kamala Harris’s Campaign Unraveled”
For some of us it never even raveled.
When this Jussie Smollett actor guy came out with his story, Harris immediately jumped on the Twitter stage (like many other Democratic presidential nominees) shouting his sweetness and integrity and strength and denouncing all those MAGA-hat wearing bigot racists throughout the land who attacked him that night and figuratively every day in our terrible country.
Ok. Fair enough. She, like I, was terribly upset with the news. We wanted to lash out and punish as swiftly and severely as possible his hateful attackers. We reacted normally in other words.
But when it turned out that Smollett made up the whole thing and that he wasn’t sweet strong or honest but an incredibly selfish dim sociopathic liar – Harris didn’t didn’t retract her words, admit being taken in by the his con, and, most importantly, she didn’t apologize for her sweeping bigoted and flat-out wrong condemnation of her fellow Americans who happen to wear MAGA hats.
In other words, when the truth came out she didn’t react normally.
Someone like this, I hope we all agree, should not be president.
12
Small time pol who was eaten by the national stage.
14
All that may very well be true, however there was her annoying snarky little laugh that accompanied everything she said that did it for me.
14
Harris has been my initial favorite. Among the congressional candidates that dominate the D field probably the one with the most executive experience. A middle road between hard liberal and the moderate/Obama-nostaligia wing that could unite the party. A mixed ethnic and judicial background that could combine many perspectives on complex social questions. Prosecutor skill vs Trump. etc
The indecisiveness, evasiveness, and policy-holding-patterns, however, invoke echos of the 2016 Hilary campaign which was plagued by much of the same. At some level of consciousness the similarities are probably what many voters also react to and don't want to go back to.
4
As a citizen of California, I think Senator Harris would be best served by doing two things. First, use her seat in the Senate to accomplish things for the citizens and residents of the Golden State. Second, use time that she will create by pulling out of this race to reflect on what she really believes and what she really wants to accomplish in public life. Her candidacy has felt opportunistic rather than principle-driven. When one understands one's beliefs, it is no longer necessary to try to straddle the moderate and liberal wings of the party,. (Watch Senator Warren to see a principle-driven candidacy in action.) Senator Harris is clearly a very bright and capable woman with much promise for the future. Eight and sixteen years from now, she will still be young enough to become president and serve two full terms.
11
Disagree. I agree, however, that she should STAY in California permanently. Her brand of unbridled socialism and racism needs to be contained. NOW.
8
I read Kamala Harris' book, The Truths We Hold, because I knew she was flirting to run for President, and I feel I understand what she wanted to convey as her image, as someone who cares, but I thought it was just more of a campaign platform. I came away from the book without any sense of her depth of character. In the debates, I feel like she's trying to impersonate Barack Obama, but it comes across as insincere and self-serving. I've watched all of the debates, but I still don't have any idea of what she stands for and how prepared she's going to be on Day One if she is elected.
8
One of the most powerful indicators on the chances of a presidential hopeful is to look at their campaign and its overall health. The pathway to victory is historically speaking always enabled by a savvy and nimble campaign operation that dares to disrupt and challenge norms. It’s pretty obvious Harris campaign is as unimpressive as her candidacy overall in this respect. Contrast that with the Buttigieg campaign that seems to be firing on all cylinders in the early voting states and beyond and are consequently drawing crowds and big donations as a result. Also compare it with how the Obama campaign worked 12 years ago, and it’s clear that she doesn’t have what it takes to mount a winning presidential bid. The writing is on the wall, and it’s just a matter of time until she joins the rest of the dropouts.
6
I have friends who supported her ardently at the start, most of them spurred by the idea of supporting a black woman candidate. So I looked at her more closely, and the more I looked, the less I understood what she wanted to represent, besides herself. Most of the friends who supported her at the beginning have turned to other candidates with stronger, clearer platforms and visions. She is an interesting person and would probably make a good VP, but politically, she does not have a clearly articulated vision for the country. We don't need more division - Trump is doing that very well all by himself - so her aggressive attacks on her fellow candidates are off-putting to voters seeking unity and clarity of purpose. Strength is not the same thing as aggression, and Harris (admittedly, along with many other Americans) doesn't seem to understand that.
17
@Allison I believe Harris would « Palinize » the ticket as VP candidate. Her record stinks and the GOP would make mincemeat out of her during the campaign.
I believe Harris has maxed out her political potential with her Senate seat. When that dawns on her, I expect her to become a media pundit and maybe even host her own show.
Ultimately, Kamala Harris seems to crave fame and fortune. Television is where she wants to be, not politics.
9
@Allison
I am always baffled when voters like your friends consider voting based on race or gender. To do do is the very definition of racism and sexism. I’m sure some people voted for and against both Trump and Clinton based on gender. It has nothing to do with one’s validity as a candidate. I mean, did they consider voting for Ben Carson because he is black? For Sarah Palin or Michele Bachman because they are female?
7
@Franco51: I find it baffling, too. Some white friends seem to suffer from an excess of guilt over their privilege, so they think that supporting a black candidate makes up for that, somehow. And maybe it does. I am unable to judge whether or not it is an effective tactic. Some black friends are just tired of seeing white people in every position of power, and feel that a black person would better understand their needs. As a woman, I can understand that sentiment. I am certainly sick of old white men who have never had to endure pregnancy trying to legislate my reproductive rights away. I am inclined to believe that many women will have a better understanding of that issue in particular, although I am continually disappointed in the women who persist in succumbing to religious arguments against abortion. I would prefer seeing Elizabeth Warren as president, rather than another white guy, because I think it is long past time to get a thoroughly different kind of perspective on leadership and what the presidency means, and Warren's experiences as a woman will help in bringing that much-needed difference to the table. But, if nothing else, let us hope that a debate like this - in which we acknowledge that not all women are the same, not all men are the same, not all black people are the same, and that not all white people are, either - will help voters realize that a person's physical appearance should not be the paramount reason to vote for him or her.
2
Harris talks about important issues but they are issues for parts of the party not the whole party. She should focus on the economy, not economic justice, not racial justice, not lgbt justice, not criminal justice. She needs not so much positions on issues but simply to speak about broad issues and project a vision and demonstrate she is a leader.
1
Also: There was a sudden drop in the poll numbers of both Harris and Castro after they attacked Biden for some long minutes in debate.
Whether this drop was in defense of Biden, or repugnance of the nastiness of personal attack, I guessed the latter. It seems that many Americans really don’t want Trump-style viciousness in our politics in this go-around.
11
Her forcing everyone in Medicare-for-All then changing her tune began her downward slide.
4
@Frank
Yep. She seemed not have, you know, actually given some thought to the actual issues. Appalling.
5
Harris is in over her head. The Peter Principle has exposed her. She can’t even appeal to black voters, nor would she strengthen anyone’s ticket as VP nominee.
13
@Fred White Interesting that many Black women here in Harlem, in part because of her military background, like Tulsi Gabbard over Kamala. The assumption of Kamala's campaign that she "owned" the Black vote was I believe an unforced error. It's not enough to go to Sylvia's, it's what you order.
3
@Fred White Interesting that many Black women here in Harlem, in part because of her military background, like Tulsi Gabbard over Kamala. The assumption of Kamala's campaign that she "owned" the Black vote was I believe an unforced error. It's not enough to go to Sylvia's, it's what you order.
Only candidate? I guess the writer hasn't looked at the polls. Whether it be Harris, Delaney, Bennett, Booker, Klobuchar(and the list goes on) it is noteworthy that almost all of these are "flavor of the month" corporate/establishment candidates who offer little in the way of policy or exciting the voters, are the ones whose campaign has gone nowhere or downward and rather than reflecting on their own campaign failures and much like Hillary Clinton, start blaming others for their failures. Harris is no exception in that she is now using the excuse that she is a woman and of color.
When are they are going to start realizing that the "status quo" is no longer viable?
6
Senator Bernie Sanders and Ms. Elizabeth Warren and Ms. Harris? It will be a long time before a woman will win with a press that insists on unnecessarily elevating their male counterparts.
4
There is the old description – admittedly originated by men about men – of the boxer who could throw a good punch, but who could not take a good punch from his opponent.
Kamala Harris is such an intelligent, attractive presidential candidate that I and my wife donated substantial money to her campaign several months ago. She has self-destructed since then by seeming to focus on tearing down other candidates – chiefly Joe Biden – while appearing incapable of articulating and defending a cohesive position of specific steps she would take as president.
Platitudes and vague generalities just don’t work at this point.
10
Harris and Booker have both failed because they decided to inauthentically make their race, rather than policy, the central pitch of their campaign. They have both built senatorial careers on inauthenticity as well, seeking media sound bites rather than leading. Anyone who thought either could be Obama’s heir weren’t looking past the book cover.
19
@Matt as a NJ resident I think your comment is spot on
3
The problem Harris has is that she's not as progressive as the progressives, and not as "centrist" (aka, corporate-moderate) as the faux-centrists. Those are the real dueling factions at work in the Democratic Party.
Ergo, there's really no place for Harris to go, insufficient ideological real estate. Some Democrats want the Democratic Party to further water themselves down into near-oblivion (the "centrists" -- see also Bloomberg), while the progressives want to refocus the Democratic Party in rediscovering its New Deal/working class footing.
Caught between these poles, Harris could only kinda-sorta her way along, and came up short.
2
She's a very bright woman. I think she needs to figure out what her core beliefs are and articulate them clearly to the voters. She comes across as not having strong convictions and being genuine. She should be herself, whether she wins or not. A tall order for any politician.
4
@Jurij
If she still has to “figure out” what her core beliefs are, I am not interested
4
If Kamala Harris want to 'live to fight another day' when the time is right for her she ought to quit before her name is associated indelibly with 'incompetence' and 'lack of depth.' she has the potential but she was not ready to run such a major campaign. Which makes one wonder how in the world a shallow mouthpiece like Tulsi Gabbard stays in the race. Could Hillary Clinton be right that the Russians are fueling her campaign? We are now at the point where the success or failure of a campaign could be due to foreign money and propaganda. How do we make sure that if a campaign implodes or succeeds it is because of their own doing. And even if that is so, one must always wonder now if some dark foreign bots did not interfere. That is the unfortunate situation today.
3
"The fixation that some younger staffers have with liberals on Twitter distorted their view of what issues and moments truly mattered." How true! I'm so sick of "news" stories about what outrage du jour has enflamed the Twitterati. Tweeters constitute a very tiny part of the population; it's time candidates, their staffs and the media realized that.
4
You could see the problems she had from the cheap shot she fired at Mr. Biden over busing in the first Democratic debate. She got her quick 15 minutes of fame thereafter. The fame painted her as a formidable adversary capable of taking on Mr. Trump.
Enough said.
6
Senator Harris is the Democratic version of Trump - her proposal to bar trump from Twitter was the same as Mexico is going to pay for the wall.
6
@Paul Brickfield
Try as I might, I simply can't understand your analogy or how you came to the conclusion that Senator Harris is a Democratic version of Trump.
That said.
SOMEBODY should bar him from twitter.
She lost me after that awkward, amateurish cheap-shot against Biden in the first "debate". I knew then that she wasn't ready for prime time. I had been giving her a hard look prior.
10
I find it strange how she changes her dialect suddenly in debates. Instead of saying “going” she will say gon’.
Instead of saying “he needs to go”, when referring to Trump she says “dude gotta go”.
Things like that make me cringe pretty hard, I actually start to feel a knot in my stomach.
Outside of having no idea of how she feels about healthcare, she is one of the most cringe inducing candidates when trying to reach certain demographics like millennials and minority voters.
Her campaign was absolutely wrecked by Tulsi Gabbard. That is when Kampala unraveled.
19
So true! Obama could use “homey” dialect and quote Scripture and somehow make it sound natural, although both come from similar highly educated, sophisticated backgrounds. As the article points out, in smaller more intimate campaign settings she is more effective.
2
Nevee liked her once she announced. Found her to be fake which is a shame cause when I saw her grilling people in he Senate I thoughr she'd be a powerhouse The minute she became a candidate, she lost the sheen, in my eyes.
4
@Leo
I thought her actions in those hearings were terrible. Bullying, not letting witnesses finish even a phrase of their response before interrupting them...no thanks.
5
She messed up, right out of the gate. When she disrespected Joe Biden. Respect your elders. Please....
9
Kamala Harris impressed me from the start with her natural talents,,,charm, humor, warmth, and intelligence. Then, at the first debate, her gratuitous attack on Joe Biden, about a decision he made on busing twenty years ago, took me aback. Her subsequent behavior in debates, including her response to Tulsi Gabbard, have confirmed in my mind that she lacks something that we need in a President...call it moral maturity, deep integrity...I'm not sure how to define it but I sense it and I think others do too. She seems to want to win above all costs, where others who are obviously wanting to win, seem to have a higher purpose. We know clearly what Elizabeth Warren stands for and Bernie Sanders. The fact that Harris hasn't clearly defined what she stand for just shows that she doesn't stand for anything more specific than she wants to win.
I think it's time she bow out gracefully, if possible, and lend her support to someone more ready and worthy of the job.
19
Running a quality campaign is, of course, essential and this piece highlights the problem with Harris's. But the writers ignore something else that essential: The intangible "essense" of the candidate. How does he/she come across to voters in debates and on the stump? How does he/she come across to voters? Sound? Look?
Ms. Harris did not have enough experience to run, in my opinion, but in many ways she was a natural candidate - attractive, high-profile Californian, black and a woman. But when I heard her speak in the debates, I found something was missing - she didn't come across as "presidential," as a leader. She was missing gravitas; there was no "there" there.
If a candidate can't gain the trust of the voters as a leader, even a perfectly-run campaign won't win them the nomination.
Additionally, placing her sister in such a high-profile position tells me something important about her. She has something in common with Trump: Willingness to place a family member in a position with great influence. The last thing we need is more nepotism in the White House.
5
The Harris sisters in no way compare to Trump and his kids. The Harris sisters have been politically active for as long as Kamala has been active. In fact much longer. Plus, they have not been grifting like the Trumps. Nor seeking to self deal at every turn.
If you others draw such an absurd analogy...its clear the skill of discernment is lost to most Americans. Sad times indeed.
1
@Boregard Take a deep breath, Mr. Thought Police. I was simply making a point about nepotism.
I have followed Sen. Harris since she was in San Francisco politics decades ago. Throughout I have been one of her more critical, and occasionally ambivalent, supporters. She is extremely smart, and has tremendous potential. On a number of occasions she has truly stepped up and demonstrated a powerful voice & vision. At other times she really has made truly some serious mistakes. I love her ambition, I love her intensity and drive, but historically I have always been somewhat flummoxed by her evolution on issues and policies.
Politics can be so unforgiving. I think that is in large part because the politicians themselves are so beholden to so many interests outside of their constituency.
And politics can also overlook multitudes; Just look at this current administration. If the President is re-elected, perhaps Sen. Harris will be able to find her center & focus on a more compelling & convincing reason for running for President in 2024, provided we still have elections in 2024.
And perhaps she will have the clarity to create a campaign that works towards her strengths, and one that is a heck of a lot better organized and well run and respectful of its employees.
5
It's a shame, because Kamala Harris' Medicare For All approach of opening existing Medicare to ages 0-64 was the most logical, most doable, most possible to have a chance to pass through the legislative process to fruition.
In California, in 2017, we failed in running the Bernie-single-payer approach through our legislature. The concepts of universal coverage and cost slashing were widely supported. But supportive assemblypersons advised, if you want to practically get something like this through the legislature, modify existing health law, don't burn-it-all-down-rewrite. That'll never fly.
Bernie's S1129 HR1384 Sec900 actually call for retiring the 1965 Medicare law and completely replacing it. That's illogical. The infrastructure is established, proven, popular. Expand the use of it.
11
So Senator Harris either does not know or cannot articulate why she wants to be president. It is inconceivable to me, a Bay Area resident and voter, that Harris attempted instead to float on the identical aimless strategy that failed so miserably for Clinton in 2016. Senator Harris is too advanced in her political career to still not be ready for prime time. She needs to set her sights on retaining her senate seat, which may be an uphill battle, and if she can win it, serve there admirably, and leave the presidential politics to candidates who know who they are, and what they believe.
6
I think the biggest weakness of Harris’ campaign is her. I’ve followed her closely and all I get is that that she sincerely wants to be president. That sincerity never extends to why exactly. I think it’s because she doesn’t know why.
10
The problem with Kamala's candidacy is not organization, but the candidate herself. As the problem with mass incarceration becomes more apparent, anyone associated with that failed policy will be damaged goods unless they can articulate clearly how their belief and practices were justified or how they've evolved in their current worldview beyond just apologizing.
With that said, it is disappointing that a lot of the commentary is about her attack on Joe Biden. # 1 - either what she said was true or not. # 2 - is the belief that Trump would not go after Biden if he were the standard bearer?
Joe Biden is a grown man. If his candidacy can not stand up to the scrutiny of other candidates going against him, maybe it is time for him to retire from the race.
A primary is a battle of ideas and it is a competition among candidates.
4
@Cee , her attack on Biden was untrue in several respects, presenting a false image of herself as well. And yes, Trump will attack our candidates in all kinds of vile ways. That doesn't mean we should. What an odd idea. A primary is a chance for candidates to present their views so we can choose a nominee. Not a game of Rollerball. But even in terms of competition, Harris and Castro lost. Biden's the one still standing, without even punching back. Look at the polls and then decide who should retire.
4
If you’ve been following the Dem presidential race, you don’t even need to read this article.
Everything that could be said about Harris’s strengths and shortcomings has been said.
With the writing on the wall, Harris should drop out now, magnanimously promise to support the eventual nominee, and work on building a more cohesive political identity while setting aside ambition for a while.
There’s time for another run, another day, especially when the country currently has such unfathomable difficulty imagining a woman in the Oval Office.
11
@Publius - Well put. She might have some potential as a cabinet member for whoever runs and wins.
2
My experience with Kamala Harris is that she is a ruthless opportunist without an ounce of integrity. This fall from grace was inevitable as the campaign continued.
As others have alluded to in the comments, Harris seems to view each political role as merely a stepping stone onto a larger platform, showing little to no interest in helping her constituents. Indeed, Kim Kardashian has literally done more for prison reform than former Attorney General of California Kamala Harris, despite the fact that Harris literally wrote a book on that point in 2009 for a 2010 campaign for the AG role.
I am fine for Harris to remain the Television Senator from CA — although I won’t be surprised if she loses that seat and instead decides to be a full-time pundit. Regardless, most Americans have decided that Harris doesn’t have the basic tools or character to lead the country and don’t see her successfully running for national office again.
14
Too much, too soon. She's been a senator for how long ? She's inexperienced and it shows. I like Harris. She did a creditable job as SF's DA, and as Ca's AG. But does that translate into the resume of a presidential candidate ? I think that Harris was hoping to ride the wave of her color, and her gender, on the road to the WH. She's a battler, and I like that in a prosecutor. But she looked a little too combative during the Mueller hearings. Too eager for a brawl. And maybe that's a good thing because anyone who steps into the ring with Trump is going to in for one, whether they like it or not. Hopefully, she can sweep up the pieces and move on from this. Become a great senator for Ca, learn who she really is and what SHE stands for.
3
There was a lot of hype and hoopla around Kamala Harris when she announced she was running for president. But she has not been a good candidate.
She seems to be running more because she's expected to, not because she wants to. People have been tourtng her as a possible groundbreaking president for a decade.
She should drop out of the race and focus on making an impact in the Senate. She's young. She can always run again when she's developed a good reason she wants to be president.
4
A chameleon for sure. We do not need that kind of behavior to beat Trump in 2020.
8
In the marathon of American political life, Senator Harris made her move too early. She would have been perfect for 2024 or 2028. Her problem in the 2020 race is that she has not given herself the time she needs to think through all of the issues and to figure out where she stands on them.This has led to the indecisiveness that the authors note. And that indecisiveness has been her undoing. She made a huge move at mile six of the marathon by trying to decapitate Biden, not realizing that there were 20 miles to go. Now those she flashed by have caught and passed her.
5
When she decided to make a splash showing Biden as being inauthentic , I knew she was headed for trouble. She had little or nothing to offer other than a campaign shirt to draw money off. She is a light weight and the Presidency is way above her head. Most of her conversation is about her ability to prosecute Trump. America needs a President not Prosecutor.
She'd better protect her Senate seat which after this poor showing might be challenged.
6
I lived in CA when she won the Senate seat, and everyone I knew was praying she would not pursue the White House in 2020, as it was clear she was not yet ready to compete on that field.
As expected, if only by me, she threw some zingers out there in the debates that wowed, and followed up it with a lack of clarity on issues that really mattered. Ultimately, she comes off looking like the Queen of Sound Bites, ready for some talk radio appearances, but not more.
I hope to see a more seasoned candidate Kamala in the years ahead. This time around, every day she doesn't drop out is a waste of time for all of America.
3
Ms. Harris showed her true colors when she viciously attacked Mr. Biden in the first debate. She also showed no mercy when she was a prosecutor in handing out tough sentence for possession of pot.
The world needs more kindness, understanding, fairness, not more hatred and vengeance.
Gandhi said, "The weak can never forgive. Forgiveness is the attribute of the strong."
Ms. Harris lost me in the first debate.
8
After watching Senator Harris's performance in Committee hearings, none of her campaign problems are a surprise. She always appeared cynical, snarky, and someone with an attack agenda...Her debate performances did nothing to change that impression. I never got a sense of why she was running, what her vision or ideas were for America and why she believed she was qualified to be the leader of our country.
12
This is too bad. For me, Ms Harris has the intelligence, the debating ability, the 'look' (like it or not, the 'look' is important) and the connectivity to be a terrific candidate. She was my favorite, but the argument that if you can't run a campaign then you are not yet ready to run a country is a persuasive one.
I hope we will see her again in a presidential campaign, and if so we will also see what kind of a learner she is as she reemerges. Steps one, two and three: get a real campaign manager, have a strong simple structure devoid of relatives and know what your message is.
3
Anger and finger-pointing only take a person so far. Her clumsier moves appear to reflect a willingness to listen to very poor advice, perhaps in response to flattery and fawning. It's time for her to step out of the race.
3
Sen. Harris gave us a glimpse into her debate skills when she humiliated AG Bill Barr in a senate hearing. Despite Trump's willingness to inject lying and conspiracy theories into a debate with opponents, I felt Harris could effectively disrupt Trump's tactics. Would that get her the votes to beat Trump?
But we need more than debate skills against Trump. American voters are more conflicted, confused, unpredictable and maleable than we have seen in decades.
Thus, whoever the Democratic nominee will be, she/he will have to be compelling, as well as, likeable, if there is any chance to beat the Snake Oil Commander in Chief. Trump's fact-free success has, tragically, been a process of ignoring and debasing the truth, calling it "fake news", of using schoolyard name calling to characterize his opponents. He is tyrant toddler using his meltdowns to great advantage with his angry mobs.
Can Sen. Harris overcome the Trumpian tactics of lies upon more lies? It is highly unlikely Trump's voters would ever flip to vote for a female candidate, let a lone a black female candidate. And then, is such a needlessly crowded field of candidates, are there enough Democratic voters to carry her through the primaries into the convention? Is there enough money to support a long campaign?
For now, her campaign is drifting without a rudder. If that is how she would run her administration as POTUS, she should end the campaign and return to her senate duties.
2
The media should stop making excuses for Kamala Harris, blaming sister Maya, blaming Mr. Rodriquez, saying not aggressive enough, etc.: Harris is primarily accountable for her fall in the polls. One of her problems is being non-accountable, claiming the elephant in the room is fact that she's a black woman, for example. The DNC, the media, and moderators all rooted for her but the people would have none it. When Gabbard raised legitimate questions regarding her record as prosecutor, she turned her back on her, with a wave of the hand, imperiously suggesting to viewers that Gabbard was too low in polls to answer. Then in post debate interview with Cooper, she still failed to address her prosecutorial record, but assassinated Gabbard's character instead. When moderator Ashley Parks baited her to weigh in on Gabbard's response regarding what is rotten in Democratic Party, she launched an Ad Hominem attack, depicting Gabbard as unpatriotic Assad apologist, ignoring fact Maj. Gabbard is first female combat veteran to run for presidency. Gabbard's response resonated: " Harris continues to traffic in lies, smears, innuendo because she cannot challenge the substance of the argument." Harris showed herself to be glass-jawed, unable to take a punch, and her ferocity focused on character assassination to unfairly destroy credibility instead of reasonably addressing the allegations. She's nothing like the effortlessly cool, reasonable, civil, REAL Obama whom most of us still love.
12
@She
I agree on almost everything you wrote about Harris. But do not make Gabbard out to be this saint in combat fatigues! She's been sucking up to the opposition, Republicans, for years. Going on Fox News, a lot; years before this campaign. Now it's an accepted strategy if one goes on a moderate show like Chris Wallace's. But Gabbard wasn't going on the moderate Fox shows. And, isn't it also interesting that Gabbard has gotten more favorable mentions from Russian news outlets, like RT, than anyone else in the Democratic campaign's top 5. According to the Foreign Policy Research Institute analysis this past month she's racked up 46% favorable mentions as opposed to Biden at 3%, Sanders at 19%, Warren at 11%, and Harris at 12%. Very interesting in deed. And then there are those "talks" with dictators.
Not a huge fan of Kamala but I have to say this wide open primary has been healthy for the party — after the fiasco of Hillary’s ‘turn’ you can’t blame anyone for a little over correction this time. Particularly when Trump seems so oddly invulnerable to any logical lines of attack.
2
Prosecuting minorities for pot possession, and then bragging about smoking pot on a black radio station to prove her cool factor, certainly does not help. Nor does implying in the first debate that Joe Biden was a racist because he opposed a horrible forced busing proposal.
7
"She lost me today." Well, when one woman from Iowa says that,it proves it must be over.
4
@Ken calvey , is it your belief that everyone loves Harris? Or that she's popular with all? Your scorn for a woman from Iowa is odd, as well, coming from a guy from wherever. A lot of people agree with her, yes, they do.
2
Tulsi Gabbard is the opposite of Harris...the media attacks her constantly, but she has real values that she brings to the table. Ending the regime change wars is the core principle of her campaign, and that angers the media that has been cheerleading for wars (NYTimes as much as any). And it is true that Gabbard's pointed critique of Harris' prosecutorial experience was the tipping point. If you can't support the thing you claim is your strong point, how could you ever run against an animal like Trump? Harris is toast, and should head back to CA ASAP...
5
Her campaign seems reminiscent of Sen. Edward Kennedy's in 1979.
2
I have tried my hardest to be objective and positive about Ms. Harris. I have read, watched, etc. But she really comes off as mediocre in intelligence and sophistication, AT BEST. And for some reason she is extremely smug with a highly inflated sense of self-importance. A mindset of 'strong woman who runs for president' isn't enough. You have to have 100% substance through-and-through to get democratic voters behind you.
Imagine her first meeting with a world leader. She'd be pulverized in a second. And the US would be completely taken advantage of.
5
This article is more complicated than it needs to be. Simply, Harris’ support collapsed once her hypocrisy became evident. She is a child of privilege who had the audacity to lecture others in their privilege. She is a half-Indian half-Jamaican daughter of immigrants who attended high school in Montreal yet lectured other candidates on her supposed intimidate knowledge of the hardships of growing up black in America. And she was an aggressive prosecutor who relished in locking up black men for petty drug crimes who lectured her opponents on their tone-deafness to race. Her antagonistic views on race made her Obama’s opposite, not his successor.
7
California is not the country’s largest state. It’s the 3rd largest behind Alaska (1st largest) and Texas (2nd largest).
California is the most populous state but not the largest.
Yes, I realize that few of you particularly care. This “fact” The NY Times threw out just caught my eye.
Happy Holiday everyone.
6
Three Strikes! Need I say more!
Kamala Harris has never been a Reality TV Show host, so she can't be President. It's in the Constitution.
2
Here's one word that unraveled her campaign: BUSING.
That's one thing NO ONE wanted to talk about.
Plus, she's not really black, she's part Indian, part Jamaican. According to some African American scholars (both on the left and right), she doesn't 'qualify'.
3
She ruined California and people weren’t fooled
2
Senator Harris lost me early on. Her message and beliefs seemed to change with the prevailing political winds. I’ve had enough of that. I want a president who knows who he or she is and is as ready as humanly possible to assume that impossible, often thankless, and, these days, much less revered position.
20
Hard to say what happened. Her initial appearance was an attractive articulate woman of color who could go up against Trump. That has now manifested into a tired story always revolving around "when I was a prosecutor" theme. Too many of those self promotional sound bites to digest.
8
I was all in on Harris for a while. But her talking points were not stellar, and her campaign was so badly run, I questioned her ability. We went through that already with HRC. So easy her some time. Hopefully she will make a better run down the road. Or maybe end up our next AG.
6
Harris threatening jail over school attendance at those who most needed government support says all you need to know about her politics. And, the fact that she reminds me of Julia Louis-Dreyfus' character on Veep says everything you need to know about her campaign.
5
Harris looked good on paper at the start. I read her book and her personal history and her sense of social justice was inspiring to me. I liked her initially but then I started to see her debates. She seemed too quick with her sassy brand of snark that obviously would never play well outside of a devoted group of loyalists. Her too-casual attitude seems more appropriate for a campaign to be prom queen than president. Would she be a good VP choice? Maybe so!
9
The corporate media benefit by pushing this "ideological feud between liberals and moderates" narrative. It feeds the entertainment value that is so destructive to our culture, turning everything from education to climate change to democracy into entertaining sound-bytes.
I don't see much of that manufactured division directed toward Cons; even in the current state of the trump party, with many high-profile Cons fleeing the party, it's rarely framed as an "ideological feud." Maybe because it's not; or maybe because it doesn't work with Cons. They don't trust the corporate ("liberal") press. Maybe liberals need to start distrusting and dismissing the ratings-seeking press who profit off drama and our division, and who have an investment in the parasitic, 24/7 circus that currently occupies our White House.
3
Sad to see this. She was an early favorite of mine. Perhaps she can parlay her obvious skills towards the Attorney General position when one of her current competitors beats DJT next November…
6
I love the New York Times, I listen to The Daily every morning and appreciate the quality of your investigating. However, this is something I have noticed that I find problematic - a pattern of only men getting their titles. An example from this article: "especially those riveted by the ambitious policies of Ms. Warren and Senator Bernie Sanders, and before long Ms. Harris was downplaying what were her signature proposals." Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris are also US Senators and also deserve that title. It may seem small, but small linguistic patters and behaviors help perpetuate existing gender norms. All three of them were elected to their office, but you are implying through this use of language that only Bernie Sanders deserves that title because he is a male. Changing these patterns isn't hard and hurts nobody but can help subconsciously empower those reading your articles. PSA over just please keep that in mind for future reporting.
156
@Willis Homan I also caught THAT right away and it’s not the first and not just in these type of articles. Frank Bruni does it quite often using words like, “truculent, aggressive, loud, blustery,” about Elizabeth Warren. I’ve written to him about it, especially after his third column about Peter Buttigieg in which he never used those kind of words. 2019 and we’re still fighting for unbiased reporting from the press for women. Very disappointing when one considers that it is the New York Times that still is doing this.
21
Thank you, Willis Homan, for pointing this out, using a solid example. We women are so used to being treated as second-class that a lot of society's subtle sexism just escapes notice sometimes.
23
@Allison Hang on! Before the shoes start flying, let's please understand what's going on here is standard form. When first introduced, the human gets full title and first name; thereafter, just last name preceded by Ms. or whatever is the case.
So in the article, on her first appearance, Harris is "Senator Kamala Harris". Same for Warren. The paragraph in which those two are just "Ms. Warren" and "Ms. Harris" is the first in which Sanders is introduced.
I very much agree with the broader point, especially the way Warren is described these days ("shrill" is my favorite), but let's not confuse ourselves into believing the NYT here is sexist and evil.
35
Ms. Harris was never a good candidate for President, maybe even for the Senate. She doesn’t have national goals. She is ambitious, but for what? Without knowing the “what,” I think she’s ambitious for herself. She bends left and makes noise when she thinks she will get points. She comes from privilege and pretends she’s unprivileged. She is the most “Trumpian” of all the democratic contenders.
10
@Lawrence agree with you. She is a phony!
2
For me, it was the comments she made toward Tulsi Gabbard after the debate that Tulsi criticized her prosecutorial record. She showed America her arrogance with her comments that Tulsi was essentially a nobody with a 1% support vs. her 12% and who was she to criticize. That was a very revealing moment.
25
Senator Harris lost me during the first debate
when she went after Joe Biden...it was kind of shocking,
in your face and not effective. That's not a winning
campaign strategy.
21
I am a NH resident & when it was announced that she closed all her offices in NH to focus on Iowa, I completely lost any semblence of support for her.
NH has predicted the majority of presidential wins & we also have the leading # of opiate overdose deaths per capita & a major housing shortage in our cities & other large scale problems placing us on the lists that no state desires. For her to come here & share her commitment to our overwhelming, under- resourced opiate problem & then bail completely on our state, speaks volumes.
And all NH residents heard her misguided, flawed agenda loud & clear.
3
I like her. There's always 2024.
2
She is simply unqualified, and has demonstrated her lack of intellectual and management skills from the gig.
When was it, the second debate, when she put forth a major policy proposal (that some underling had obviously drafted) about which she knew none of either the details or ramifications... she said she's back to "us" on that! That's when I said, "no mas."
No one's fault but her own lack of ability: "Prosecutor does not equal Commander in Chief!
8
Maybe there’s some interesting dysfunction within her ranks. But the bottom-line is she really has nothing to offer.
At least Warren and Bernie put something on the table. Harris just whines about truth and justice.
12
All the Democrat candidates suffer from the same malady:
Inability to handle direct criticism from the media or other Democrats.
Gabbard in a few words knocked Harris off her game.
If the media would treat Democrats as they do Trump they’d be more adept at hitting back.
9
Kamala Harris has never said anything that made me inspire me to vote for her. It appears many others feel the same.
13
Optics backed with substance is everything and the blame lies with the candidate. You can't be everything to everybody and sometimes Harris comes off as trying to be too cute or clever by half. Like Jason Garrett who claps too much on the sidelines, Harris breaks into giggles too much in television appearances which can be annoying. She lost her mojo when her record as a prosecutor was questioned. Instead of owning it, Harris stammered around while trying to retrofit it for woke nation.
Harris can't seem shake the image that she still looks like she's running to be a prosecutor (a middle manager vibe) and not for the most powerful job in the world. Ditch the pedestrian pant suits for a more varied wardrobe that projects a comfortableness with power.
Time is running out to create a clear and cohesive message before she should heed the advice to bow out.
4
When Ms. Harris thought it was a great Idea to push that it she was an AKA, that doomed her campaign. Anyone Black, White, purple, who has had to work with or be supervised with these sisters of the Pink and Green know what I am talking about!
If you don’t here are some hints: Until she ran for president AKA website, stated that their membership was limited to black or defendant of slaves females. They were clear on their site if you were white, Asian or Native American do not apply! Then as soon as one gets a position of power they only hire their sister. They completely ignore qualifications.
2
Harris has a Harris problem. She wants to be President. The democratic debates have shown a clear divide between those who work hard to s
Kamala Harris is still my candidate for President. I am not convinced by this article at all.
4
Ms. Harris’s alarming inability to answer simple policy questions with specificity rather than “we need to have a conversation about that” indicates she had not bothered to form opinions on issues guaranteed to be raised. She attacked Mr. Biden for his decades-old position on the racially-charged busing issue, though it was a position she apparently still shares. Her campaign’s early focus was on South Carolina, “with its predominantly black Democratic electorate”. These facts suggest that because she had two 2020 Democratic boxes checked - woman, “of colour” - she believed she would get something of a free ride with people in those groups and wouldn’t need to get specific. But of course people are smarter than that, less easily fooled, and prefer not to be taken for granted. The campaign that made those assumptions is now where it deserves to be.
13
Senator Harris do the Democratic Party a solid—withdraw from the campaign focus on your role as a US Senator where you can do the most good.
Your talents are being wasted on your campaign. Use your prosecutorial skills where they will soon be a highly valued asset.
8
I couldn’t agree more as a CA citizen. She has an important role as our senator
I live in California, specifically in Northern California. I have watch Harris' career for decades and have always admired her. She. Gets. Things. Done.
But the comment last week about Mayor Pete not understanding what it feels like to be discriminated against as a gay man was the end for me.
That's not the sort of thing someone running for president should say and it speaks volumes about her temperament.
47
@George She didn't say that.
1
This article clearly highlights what many of us have been thinking all along. Harris’s candidacy has always been about Harris, herself. She does not know why she wants to be President. She just wants to be President. We have one of those in the White House already. We don't need another one. We need someone who has given a fair amount of thought to what needs to get done but won’t totally alienate people. It’s not nibbling around the edges. It’s called compromise. It’s called recognizing that many sides have well-reasoned positions, and that policy-making is complicated, and that the crawl comes before the walk. (Unless it’s climate change. Maybe that can’t wait.)
33
If you can’t run a campaign you can’t run the country! If you can’t take criticism of you or your family the oops that’s also trump.
1
These "abundant political skills" that are mentioned in the text and in the sub-heading are described in a manner that are not really skills. Instead, it is that she can give a nice speech and be warm to voters. Those are useful, of course, but they aren't really political skills in the sense of being a leader, defining a solid vision with appropriate strategy, demonstrating an ability to make things happen, etc. She doesn't actually seem to be a good politician.
20
This article shows that Harris is not, was not, ready to be President. Certainly not in this election. She may have a core but she has epically failed to show it. Even her Republican competitor, who clearly has no ideology, shows more commitment to his belief that it doesn’t matter than she shows to the idea that it does. That she’s come off as calculating and willing to shape-shift - the absolute antithesis of what we need now - is shown to have a foundation of truth. She’s a candidate with lots of talent, but without a core and this is not her time. I look forward to seeing where she lands after some much-needed reflection.
9
Under a progressive lens, California's Democratic Party looks very conservative - with big money helping to hide self-serving decisions under a public-serving veneer.
Before she decided to run for President, Harris appeared intent on prosecuting members of California's corrupt Public Utility Commission. She became AG after Jerry Brown and his father, Pat, tainted by connections to Big Oil, had unashamedly sought to replace California's carbon-free nuclear energy with natural gas. At the time she was a rebel, a crusader for justice. But when the support of Brown and successor Gavin Newsom was needed for her campaign, good intent collapsed under the strain of ambition, and charges were dropped.
Though Obama was able to overcome his associations with Big Coal by campaigning on a vigorous pro-climate agenda, so are all of Harris's rivals. For 2020, there are too many better choices.
6
I don’t see why her early supporters from California, now disaffected by Senator Harris’ politics and character, would want her back in the Senate. Where there may have been benefit from doubt, now there’s certainty.
14
Kamala has an odd manner when being asked about serious issues - as though she's chatting with someone at a party.
People don't care much whether a candidate is a minority or a woman - they want to hear specifically what you will do for the American people.
Everyone knows Biden's earlier years were in a different time and he should not have been attacked with what felt like her slapping him across the face in that debate.
Contrast all that with Elizabeth Warren. She believes every word she speaks and she knows exactly why she's running. And she's enjoying it all because she is so sincere and committed. Even if she loses, she'll win as a person.
44
We in California with a population of 40 million have 2 senators. Newly elected Senator Harris jumped right into the presidential race before her senate seat was even warm. What about us? I feel cheated and unrepresented. She should have spent at least a little time on the job she wanted us to elect her to before reaching higher. Like Obama and Clinton learn the levers of power, form the relationships. So far she's just an image.
86
@John Higbie
Obama ran as a first-term senator too.
3
If the Democratic party stands for anything, it stands for the rights of workers. The shabby treatment of campaign staff as outlined in Kelly Mehlenbacher's resignation letter, disqualifies Ms. Harris from serving as the party's leader.
20
In the beginning Kamala Harris seemed real, and always had a smile on her face when speaking. Now every time that I see her she seems more angry, not happy and somewhat rude. I think her campaign is over.
22
I believe this is what happens when you don't know why you're running for president but just want the job. The same goes for Biden and Buttigieg. Only Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders have a message that they've been fighting for before they ever ran for president.
23
Can't see how a prosecutor could bring people together. Until law enforcement realigns itself with the ideals of the nation and moves away from surveillance state mode, not going to vote for a super cop.
8
I was really excited for Harris. But... she disappointed me big time.
10
Early on Harris was my choice, but no longer. Ambition is necessary in a candidate for the Presidency, but not sufficient. Harris impresses as a candidate whose ambition alone is driving her candidacy and she is careening head long into a crash.
10
The irony is that Kamala is the only candidate out of this weak field who can win a general election.
4
She is unfocused, and the busing attack on Biden struck me as really poor judgment. As pointed out if she can't manage a campaign, why does she deserve the nomination. She has no chance at this point.
13
Thank heavens for that, a victory for America and for our bill of rights.
4
Her campaign unraveled because we did not want her style of justice to flourish in America.
6
When Harris turned on Joe Biden, she lost me. Democrats tearing each other apart for sound bites only helps Donald Trump.
26
Here common thread with all the MANY Other Candidates is that by running for President you get Free PR and no one gets criticized for for running , but she would be a good place to start...as she just got her New Job in the Senate KNOWING Full Well she was going to do this Charade fun run for President....thus doing all of this on the taxpayers payroll and deserves to lose her seat in the Senate!
12
No suprise.
When I watched Harris in some of the televised Senate hearings, I found her to be mean spirited and devisive.
She should drop out and return to do the work that Californian's elected her to do.
13
She is so not ready for prime time.
Hand her a scripted attack on Biden and the anti-Biden media loves it. Ask her a follow up question and she is lost.
Why does the Times refer to her lack of a health care policy as "beyond her control"? If she has never thought about the right health care solution, she is unfit to be a senator, much less president.
25
With Kamala out I will now switch my vote to Trump in 2020.
3
@CJT , wow. Well, it's a big country with all sorts of people, I guess.
1
@CJT In the immortal words of Marcia Brady, "Sure, Jan."
2
Two words: Tulsi Gabbard. The moment in one of the debates where Gabbard called out Harris’s hypocrisy concerning how she had locked up over 300 people on marijuana charges as CA’s Attorney General, yet laughed about smoking marijuana in college while on the campaign trail, sealed her fate. Her poll numbers have declined steadily since. No one outside of Trump supporters likes a hypocrite. It’s about the only thing Gabbard has contributed to the campaign process so far, as well.
26
Having your sister manage your campaign? Or not really be the manager but somebody involved making decisions? You lost me already. Would she also hire her sister if she should somehow win? We've had enough nepotism in this country. No more of that, please.
I just basically cannot tolerate her. I can't listen to her without immediately hearing 'fake'. And 'stop'. So I do, I tuned her out long time ago.
A country of so many millions and I am starting to get really nervous there isn't one that can take Trump down and stop this attack on our democracy. Truly frightening to me.
12
Unfortunate. Ms. Harris is the one who is saying most directly that we have a predator and a criminal in the White House. But there is no follow through.
4
Kamala will make a great attorney general.
6
@ASD32
Absolutely. Whoever wins should nominate her ASAP.
1
As a Bay Area native, Harris has been on my radar for over two decades. Anyone with knowledge of her career should not find this a surprise. Sen. Harris shares one fatal trait with the man she seeks to replace: An inability to admit error, even when mistakes are made by her staff, if not directly by herself.
I will not spell them out here. It's too easy to click this paper's search engine for Lara Bazelon's op-ed piece on Sen. Harris.
16
The lessons of Hillary’s loss in 2016 are plain as day. Let’s try Bernie this time.
5
@Corbin
Wake us when he joins the Democratic Party, instead of parasitically hanging off it.
“The weakness is at the top. And it’s clearly Juan. He needs to take responsibility —"
Isn't Kamala Harris at the top?
20
She looked so good until she opened her mouth and said nothing. She seemed out to lunch in interviews on cable, and her debate "performances" were cringe making waste.
Too bad. She should have been the real deal underneath the otherwise seemingly smart, attractive surface. But she's not.
13
Doesn't have Biden's gravitas. Doesn't have Warren's policy wonkiness. Doesn't have Buttigieg's enthusiasm and appeal. Doesn't have Sanders's ability to energize a base. Doesn't have Bloomberg's wealth. Doesn't have Booker's executive experience, and is no more black than Booker. Mediocre debate performances. Would probably be a competent AG, but the Dems will need every senator they can muster.
Please bow out, Ms Harris, and continue your work in the Senate.
12
Senator Kamala Harris suffers more than most female politicians from her gender. Her overall demeanor conjured a bored, intoxicated housewife. Her catty attacks on Joe Biden and Tulsi Gabbard did not help. Plus she identified most strongly as heiress to Hillary Clinton, solidifying this with her assertion of allegiance to institutional Democratic in another attack on third tier candidate Gabbard in the last debate. Not the stuff a nation turns its lonely eyes to.
14
Don't forget her stupid plan to give away $6K a year to every household with income <$100K, which would require taxing many of the beneficiaries over median income, thus robbing Paul to pay Paul! Absolute fiscal insanity.
Then add to that her awful personality, and personal baggage from her dating days with Willie.
She's running for VP, in case you hadn't figured that out. Patrick would be a far better "identity" VP candidate, and actually has policy chops.
Harris could be a credible Atty General, and use that for a springboard in later life, so she still has a path to the WH, but not in this cycle.
1
Look, let’s face it- she’s horrible, hard to get along with, it’s all identity politics and is the face of the future that has been previously rejected. A lousy executive, a hard nosed lawyer who seems to know better, aggressive, etc. and someone unlikable who will never become president. Except for the mayor, these candidates are the poorest excuse for presidential wannabes I’ve ever seen. They’re all wasting their time and money and they’re not going to beat Trump. If Trump wasn’t so successful in what he said he would do and has accomplished, I’d really consider Mayor Pete and the Dems should take my advice and coalesce around him and soon.
13
Kamala Harris has become a household name, which means that her campaign has been a success in many ways. This is not her moment to be president, but that moment may come around again. In the meantime, hopefully she will continue her political career with even more visibility and success in the years to come. She is in good company. Many of the current and former candidates for president in an almost absurdly crowded field are stellar people. She is one of many smart, ethical, and compassionate candidates who rose to the occasion to show us that Trump doesn't have to be our future. I like Kamala Harris. I also like Corey Booker and Eric Swalwell, and others as well. They did the right thing, and now they can move on in other directions to help keep America moving forward.
7
Early on, she presented herself as a real progressive. When she backed away from progressive positions like Medicare for All, she lost all trust on the left while completely failing to win over the center. She is left with no constituency or base.
11
Kamala Harris never really got her campaign off the ground. Her one brief moment of media attention was the senseless, poorly strategized Biden busing comment, followed by haphazard financial plan to raise teacher’s salaries. None of it gained national traction and subsequent research on her California record proved little to boost about, putting her on the defensive. In regard to restructuring a campaign strategy this late , remember it’s never too late to rid a campaign of misguided, divisive managers. Reagan did it when he fired John Sears right after the New Hampshire primary in 1980.
5
Finally, something that makes sense in 2020 politics. She always seemed to chat the sound bite without much cohesion in her policy statements....other than to say anything to get elected.
9