Can she overcome the hurdle?
Trust is a fragile thing—difficult to build and easy to lose. This challenge is particularly evident within the Biden White House and the Harris presidential campaign.
After a tumultuous July, Vice President Harris’ campaign faces a tight 93-day window to establish a national political operation. This trust deficit threatens to overshadow Harris’ initially strong performance, especially as her shifting policy positions come under scrutiny.
Last November, Harris praised President Biden as “absolutely authoritative in rooms around the globe and in the Oval Office.” By February, she described him as “bold and vibrant.” However, recent events have contradicted these portrayals. The public quickly saw through the rhetoric during a debate in Atlanta, which not only undermined Biden’s re-election prospects but also led to accusations of a cover-up involving those around him, including Harris.
In a surprising twist, after asserting that only divine intervention or a medical condition could cause him to withdraw from the race, Biden suddenly exited, making way for Harris. White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre insisted that Biden’s departure was unrelated to health issues, but his abrupt about-face in an 11-minute national address lacked an explanation for his reversal from his previous commitment to continue his campaign.
Vice President Harris was well-aware of these dynamics. Early in Biden’s term, he had promised her significant access and influence, similar to the privileges he enjoyed under Barack Obama. A Fox News Digital investigation revealed at least 80 public meetings between Biden and Harris, with the actual number potentially higher.
The upcoming November election will be influenced by more than just Biden’s exit. Harris faces her own set of challenges, particularly concerning the southern border. In March 2021, an Associated Press headline noted that Biden had tasked Harris with addressing border issues. Since then, migrant encounters have surged to record levels, and immigration concerns have outpaced the economy in voter priorities this spring.
Despite mainstream media’s attempts to downplay Harris’ role by critiquing the term “border czar” as a Republican label, her broader responsibility remains significant. The Biden-Harris campaign’s framing of the election as a “defense of democracy” also rings hollow, especially considering Harris’ nomination was a result of party insiders’ decisions rather than grassroots support, contrary to Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer’s claims.
Furthermore, Harris’ previous stances from her 2020 presidential campaign are resurfacing. She advocated for substantial climate change funding, a ban on fracking, co-sponsored the Green New Deal, and sought to end private health insurance—positions she is now distancing herself from. Before addressing these issues, Harris should focus on addressing Biden’s withdrawal with transparency and take responsibility for supporting a leader whom Special Counsel Robert Hur described as having “a poor memory.” Harris had previously criticized Hur’s remarks as “gratuitous, inaccurate, and inappropriate.”
