Since we're all going to be living with the promo for Kamala Harris's new book for the next couple of weeks, it feels worthwhile to pass on this reaction from the Episcopal bishop of Los Angeles to her decision to forgo running for governor in California next year. I found it interesting.
What does Bishop John H. Taylor know about politics? Well, in a previous life, he was Richard Nixon's post-Presidency Chief of Staff and then director of the Nixon library.
Taylor's thoughts about Kamala's moves:
Kamala Harris is officially not the new Nixon. After he lost a squeaker to John F. Kennedy in 1960, party elders such as former President Eisenhower played on his sense of duty and persuaded him to run for governor of California in 1962 against a popular Democratic incumbent. The factors contributing to his loss included his palpable lack of desire and aptitude for the job.
No one really thought Harris wanted to be governor, either. For that reason alone, she was wise to step back.If Nixon had won, he would've been the frontrunner for the GOP nomination to run against Lyndon Johnson in 1964. That's assuming that in this particular “what if?”, President Kennedy still would've been assassinated. Running against Johnson, Nixon would've been buried forever in a landslide.
If Kennedy had survived, and Nixon had been tempted to run against him in 1964, Californians would've been understandably grumpy about him angling for a grudge match after just half a term in Sacramento.
Running for president as governor would've entailed similar complications for Harris. By standing down, she becomes the leading contender in 2028. Just read her statement. She wants to help her party find "new methods and fresh thinking” without abandoning core values.
That actually shouldn't be hard, if one assumes a core value, both democratic and Democratic, is not being sadistically cruel to immigrant workers, trans and non-binary people, the people of African descent Trump is attempting to erase from history, Haitians he accused of the blood libel of eating pets, and others he attacks for political advantage.
Imagine a middle way that honors the principles of political and economic liberalism while respecting the dignity of every human being. What a concept, huh? It's an opportunity Democrats have but Republicans won’t unless they're willing to abandon Trumpism — which, in or out of office, he won't permit them to do.
With Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in the mix, Harris would have to tack to the center. Trumpy critics who claim she [Harris] has changed her view on one issue or another will have to explain their unstinting support for the formerly pro-choice, pro–gun control Manhattan libertine.
Democrats will only be able to use #butTrump as a defense against hypocrisy, towering misconduct and dishonesty, and outright criminality for the next century or two.
Harris also says she'll be "helping elect Democrats across the nation," which means collecting favors for the next three years, as Nixon did after his unsuccessful gubernatorial run in 1962 as he prepared to run for president in 1968.
Harris’s is the ideal situation for a popular candidate with high name recognition who doesn't need political office to pay the rent. Republicans would've preferred her in Sacramento, arguing with mayors and trying to balance the budget and hold Trump at bay. Instead, she can do what she wants, when she wants, where she wants, and with whom she wants.
Running for president next time will be almost as fun as the job itself and twice as good as being veep.
I am not nearly so happy or sanguine about Ms. Harris angling for another run in 2028. I loyally did everything in my power to try to elect her in 2024. If she were the Democratic nominee in 2028, I'd have to do it again. Sure, what Taylor suggests is plausible but ...
Because Harris has repeatedly achieved high office, people miss that she has NEVER demonstrated that she is any good at politicianing. The blocking and tackling of campaigning weren't part of her instincts or acquired expertise. Before last fall, the only truly competitive race she had ever run was against Steve Cooley to become California's Attorney General. In that one, she barely squeaked through in a state that simply doesn't elect Republicans not named Arnold to statewide office. For US Senate and Vice President, the runway was clear from the get-go and she didn't have to make the way. That weakness, along with so many other factors, contributed to her squeaker loss last fall.
My bet is she'll figure this out between now and 2028. She's a smart person. And I think one who actually wants to serve her country. I suspect it is time for an even younger generation to take center stage.
No comments:
Post a Comment