SerpApi.Org
There’s an idea taking hold on the left that former Vice President Kamala Harris is a viable choice for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2028. She isn’t. And even if she somehow won it, she'd be a certain loser in the general election.
A recent New York magazine piece by David Freedlander was headlined “Like It or Not, Kamala Harris Is the Front-runner.” Her advisers now treat it as an article of faith that the compressed campaign cost her the chance to define herself in 2024.
If anything, it did her a favor. The 107 days between President Joe Biden’s exit and Election Day, the same "107 Days" she titled her memoir after, meant no real primary and less time having to defend an unpopular administration. She got to run as a blank slate instead of a scrutinized nominee. The thing her team calls a handicap was actually her cover.
Start the day smarter. Get all the news you need in your inbox each morning.
She’s leading early primary polls by a wide margin. One recent survey had her at 36%, more than triple her nearest rival. But that’s mainly about name recognition.
Prediction markets, where people put real money on the outcome instead of just answering a pollster’s phone call, have her far lower.
Kamala Harris' problem, in one sentence
In Freedlander’s conversations with Democratic insiders, the stale metaphors arrive early, which is never a good sign. “You don't have to be a rocket scientist to understand that right now we need leaders that can take us in a different direction,” says Minyon Moore, a Democratic operative.
Then this, from an unnamed supporter convinced that Harris is running: “She is looking for where the wave is going and is determined to ride it.”
That’s Harris' whole problem in one sentence. Donald Trump didn’t ride any waves. Neither did Barack Obama. They were the waves. Voters can tell the difference between someone who generates energy and someone searching for a current to ride.
The same supporter: “Her mindset is that I should have won, and I am going to do it my way. … It was all these consultants … it was their fault.”
What was “her way,” exactly? Nobody says. But it’s clear that the border, the economy and taxpayer-funded gender surgery for inmates hurt Democrats badly – and Harris doubling down on all of it, even as the race slipped away, hurt her specifically. Her former staffers blame the money and the ground game instead. Of course they do.
“People are looking forward,” says Laura Telerski, a New Hampshire state rep who’s met Harris but hasn’t endorsed her. “I don’t think she’s bogged down in yesterday.”
“Look how quickly voters forgot about Trump’s first term,” adds an unnamed Democratic official.
In other words, they’re betting Americans forget how the Biden-Harris years actually went.
But voters didn’t return to Trump because they forgot who he was. They went back because they remembered the economy was better and the border was under control. Harris’ “fascist dictatorship” routine didn’t square with people’s memories of a Trump term that had, in fact, been just fine.
One anonymous former aide bragged that Harris "comes in with 99% name ID, and everyone else is going to have to raise money and buy it.”
True, but total name recognition just means there’s no room left to grow, and the former president's favorability has sat underwater since the day she left office.
What Democratic voters actually want in 2028
If Trump's rise taught Democrats anything, it's that voters will forgive plenty of rough edges for the real thing, which is why candidates like Rep. Jasmine Crockett of Texas, Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York have drawn the party's energy in recent years.
It's why Democrats are gravitating toward candidates who come across as raw and unfiltered rather than manufactured and stage-managed.
The problem with Harris isn't that she’s too moderate or too far left. She can lurch left as easily as she's lurched everywhere else. Her problem is that she isn't anything in particular: not authentic, not much of a populist, certainly not working-class and not even a committed democratic socialist. She’ll be whomever the base needs, and the quotes above prove it.
Losing nominees rarely get a second act. Harris might be the exception for a simple reason: She’s still technically first in line in the Democratic Party until she says otherwise. As a Black Asian woman, she’s even more protected. Democrats handed her the nomination in 2024 rather than be seen passing over the first minority woman vice president for another White man. The same thinking that made her impossible to skip in 2024 makes her nearly impossible to skip past now, unless she rules herself out first.
In the magazine story, Freedlander admits a contest against Harris “could get messy,” because women and voters of color anchor the Democratic coalition, and being seen defending those groups matters to the party’s identity as much as winning does.
When he asked Democratic donors and operatives what they make of a “Kamala 2.0,” a couple were candid. “I hope she runs, because then she will lose and we will never have to hear from her again,” says Democratic strategist Alex Hoffman. “She will never win an election at a national scale. Never.”
But most gave Freedlander a particularly damning response: a heavy sigh, followed by a long pause. Everyone knows exactly what that pause means, but nobody can say it out loud.
Daniel Allott, USA TODAY’s conservative opinion editor, is author of the book “On the Road in Trump’s America: A Journey Into the Heart of a Divided Nation.”
This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Actually, no. Kamala Harris doesn't have a shot in 2028. | Opinion
