The notion that Kamala Harris is a weak candidate

[Sir Mohamed]

Seems like a major faction of this forum thinks Kamala Harris would be a weak candidate should she the nominee after Biden retires. I dunno where that's coming from. Do people just think that because they dislike her or because HRC lost?

It's possible I'm not 100% neutral on the question either because I always liked her, but I don't think she'll be a particularly weak candidate for the GE. For sure she's not perfect, though she has already established a reputation as reliable and loyal VP to a popular POTUS. If she runs in 2024 and 2028, I'm certain it will inspire many women, and black women in particular, that one of them is finally elected to the most powerful job in the world. And I find it questionable there are a ton of voters who vote for Biden and her as VP but turn to DeSantis, Pence or Pompeo if Biden isn't on the ballot himself.

Yes, her 2020 campaign wasn't great, but Biden himself didn't do well either. Like Reagan, he needed 3 attempts to finally get elected. Let's also not pretend circumstances can't change and Harris is unable to learn from that experience. Also worth noting is that Harris has far less baggage than HRC ever did and I think she's more likeable than the former.

So I'm not saying she'll definitely win in her own right once Biden retires. However, I don't share the notion that she's a weak candidate either.

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

Harris was literally responsible for turning what was supposed to be a landslide for her party into a close race last year, by turbocharging racist voter turnout. She is clearly weak.

[Not Me, Us]

Agreed. Harris has always been a mainstream center-left Democrat, I don't see why she would perform significantly worse than any other Democrat. Plus, I think she's a strong candidate for the suburbs and the sunbelt, which will be especially important for Dems going forward. As long as she chooses a decent running mate, I think she has a good chance of winning the general.

[Not Me, Us]

Harris was literally responsible for turning what was supposed to be a landslide for her party into a close race last year, by turbocharging racist voter turnout. She is clearly weak.

That's ridiculous. It was a close race because polling was off and Trump has a unique appeal to low-turnout voters, Harris had nothing to do with it. Nobody voted for Trump because of Harris.

[MT Treasurer]

A forum composed of 95% white male posters believes 95% of white males are extremely "strong candidates" (see: Mark Kelly, Joe Biden, Ron DeSantis, John Fetterman, etc.) and that a non-white female is significantly less "electable" or that her campaign can be reduced to mere "identity politics." Color me surprised.

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

Harris was literally responsible for turning what was supposed to be a landslide for her party into a close race last year, by turbocharging racist voter turnout. She is clearly weak.

That's ridiculous. It was a close race because polling was off and Trump has a unique appeal to low-turnout voters, Harris had nothing to do with it. Nobody voted for Trump because of Harris.

"Trump has a unique appeal to low-turnout voters"

Romney votes, 2012 - 61 million.
Trump votes 2016 - 63 million.
Trump votes 2020 - 74 million.

Nope

[wbrocks67]

Pretty much agreed with all the OP said. Kamala isn't perfect - nobody is - but she's not weak, either.

Her 2020 primary campaign is pretty irrelevant at this point, and her favorables have been impressive so far as VP.

[Not Me, Us]

Harris was literally responsible for turning what was supposed to be a landslide for her party into a close race last year, by turbocharging racist voter turnout. She is clearly weak.

That's ridiculous. It was a close race because polling was off and Trump has a unique appeal to low-turnout voters, Harris had nothing to do with it. Nobody voted for Trump because of Harris.

"Trump has a unique appeal to low-turnout voters"

Romney votes, 2012 - 61 million.
Trump votes 2016 - 63 million.
Trump votes 2020 - 74 million.

Nope

I don't see how this disproves my point. Trump got a lot more votes than he did in 2016, yet performed worse percentage wise. Ergo, Trump turned out many people who didn't vote in 2012 or 2016, also known as voters with low turnout. Kamala Harris being the VP nominee didn't cause those people to turn out, Trump did.

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

Harris was literally responsible for turning what was supposed to be a landslide for her party into a close race last year, by turbocharging racist voter turnout. She is clearly weak.

That's ridiculous. It was a close race because polling was off and Trump has a unique appeal to low-turnout voters, Harris had nothing to do with it. Nobody voted for Trump because of Harris.

"Trump has a unique appeal to low-turnout voters"

Romney votes, 2012 - 61 million.
Trump votes 2016 - 63 million.
Trump votes 2020 - 74 million.

Nope

I don't see how this disproves my point. Trump got a lot more votes than he did in 2016, yet performed worse percentage wise. Ergo, Trump turned out many people who didn't vote in 2012 or 2016, also known as voters with low turnout. Kamala Harris being the VP nominee didn't cause those people to turn out, Trump did.

If it was a Trump effect, then he would have received way more votes in 2016 than he actually did.

[Sir Mohamed]

Harris was literally responsible for turning what was supposed to be a landslide for her party into a close race last year, by turbocharging racist voter turnout. She is clearly weak.

Whaaat? There's no evidence Harris hurt Biden's electoral chances. The day she was announced as VP, but Biden broke records in small donations from all over the country. She also did well at the VP debate and helped to turn out black voters in GA.

[Xing]

It's certainly suspicious that people feel so strongly about someone who's basically a generic Democrat. She'd need to learn from her mistakes from 2019 if she were to run for president in 2024, but I don't buy that she'd be DOA against DeSantis.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

It's certainly suspicious that people feel so strongly about someone who's basically a generic Democrat. She'd need to learn from her mistakes from 2019 if she were to run for president in 2024, but I don't buy that she'd be DOA against DeSantis.

Saying she'd be DOA vs DeSantis both underestimates her and overestimates him.

[wbrocks67]

Harris was literally responsible for turning what was supposed to be a landslide for her party into a close race last year, by turbocharging racist voter turnout. She is clearly weak.

Whaaat? There's no evidence Harris hurt Biden's electoral chances. The day she was announced as VP, but Biden broke records in small donations from all over the country. She also did well at the VP debate and helped to turn out black voters in GA.

Yeah, people tend to forget that the VP debate was highly watched (~57 million) and all surveys suggested she won it too.

[vitoNova]

America is an extremely sexist country, unfortunately. 

[Bomster]

If anything I’d say Harris helped clinch Biden’s 2020 victory. She successfully accomplished two things: 1. She satisfied large swathes of the Democratic Party who wanted to see a woman or POC be the party’s nominee, and 2. She didn’t rock the boat. Just like Biden himself, she was the safest choice, and it worked, she didn’t create any scandals for the nominee unlike Ferraro or Palin.

[Del Tachi]

Harris' relative unpopularity is suggested in the national polling we have to date, she was -8 favorability in the most recent Economist/YouGov poll conducted May 1-4

Trump was -11, for comparison, with a similar number of respondents not having an opinion (8% vs 10%)

So no, believing Harris to be weak isn't some fiction invented by media or the GQP

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

The Election is over if an INCUMBENT reaches 50% he is Reelected and Biden and Harris leads DeSantis by double digits and they only have to replicate 278 win PA, WI and MI easy to do

[tosk]

Harris is for sure weaker than Biden and has shown an inability to run a strong campaign. Her 2020 campaign was shockingly bad. That doesn't mean she has no shot (a la Trump 2016) but I'd far prefer running against her than Biden.

[brucejoel99]

It's certainly suspicious that people feel so strongly about someone who's basically a generic Democrat. She'd need to learn from her mistakes from 2019 if she were to run for president in 2024, but I don't buy that she'd be DOA against DeSantis.

Saying she'd be DOA vs DeSantis both underestimates her and overestimates him.

Speaking of people underestimating her, a lot of it sounds exactly the same as when people underestimated Biden for no sensical reason. Remember: Biden crashing-&-burning hard in 1988 & 2008 were supposed to be proof that he obviously wouldn't be able to win the nomination in 2020, let alone the general. If being VP turned Biden from somebody who failed to win 1% in the only primary contest in which he ever competed in up until that point - Iowa 2008 - into a President who defeated his incumbent predecessor to win, then there's no reason that Kamala wouldn't be able to similarly benefit.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

It's certainly suspicious that people feel so strongly about someone who's basically a generic Democrat. She'd need to learn from her mistakes from 2019 if she were to run for president in 2024, but I don't buy that she'd be DOA against DeSantis.

Saying she'd be DOA vs DeSantis both underestimates her and overestimates him.

Speaking of people underestimating her, a lot of it sounds exactly the same as when people underestimated Biden for no sensical reason. Remember: Biden crashing-&-burning hard in 1988 & 2008 were supposed to be proof that he obviously wouldn't be able to win the nomination in 2020, let alone the general. If being VP turned Biden from somebody who failed to win 1% in the only primary contest in which he ever competed in up until that point - Iowa 2008 - into a President who defeated his incumbent predecessor to win, then there's no reason that Kamala wouldn't be able to similarly benefit.

Harris would likely have done much better if Biden hadn't ran - that much needs to be said.
Even leaving that aside, the 2020 clown car primary is even worse of an argument for Harris supposedly being a disaster of a candidate than 1988 and 2008 were for Biden being one.
By-and-large I fully agree with your post here.

[President Johnson]

Joe Biden obviously is the strongest Democrat for 2024, but I agree that Harris seems a bit underrated. I think could do pretty well in the suburbs of Georgia and Arizona to hold these states. The Rust Belt would obviously depend on her opponent. What I don't buy is that DeSantis would automatically have an advantage here just because he tries to imitate Trump.

As for her likability, it's tough to answer. I like her. Seems like she's a joyful person and well articulated. Definitely more authentic than Hillary. She doesn't have Obama level charisma though.

[💥💥 brandon bro (he/him/his)]

She's a middling politician who circumstance led to fall upward relative to the caliber of other federal politicians. This doesn't mean she's weak, or rather any weaker than a replacement level D politician.

Her 2020 campaign was a disaster but I'm willing to attribute that much more to poor staffing than any intrinsic qualities. We've seen enough successful runs from her to say she's not an awful campaigner.

The real illustrative moment was the VP debate where she held her own against Pence but aside from the dogwhistle (foghorn) of telling Pence that she was speaking was pretty unremarkable. She did what was needed and held her own but came nowhere close to the evisceration of Trump that her campaign promised us in summer of 2019. But the flip side is we saw nothing as eye-rollingly ridiculous as the rest of her 2019 campaign led us to expect. She was neither great nor awful but sufficiently good.

She certainly isn't weak enough to be immediately uncompetitive in 2024/2028. The problem is that rabid GOP base + extreme EC disadvantage + continuation of geographic packing into urban cores means that an average D candidate probably does worse than an average R one. You need to be better than average to push you over the finish line (do we really think that Hickenlooper would have beaten Trump in 2020?). Is she that much better than average? I suspect she isn't but it's not out of the question.

[Literally Just a Contrarian]

She’s a fairly weak candidate. I think that she is actually overestimated in this forum.

She has a lack of appeal to the electorate and has zero charisma. And no, it has nothing to do with her race or gender. There are minority women out there who have actual charisma and can inspire turnout. Harris doesn’t have any of those qualities, she’s no Barack Obama.

[Literally Just a Contrarian]

Agreed. Harris has always been a mainstream center-left Democrat, I don't see why she would perform significantly worse than any other Democrat. Plus, I think she's a strong candidate for the suburbs and the sunbelt, which will be especially important for Dems going forward. As long as she chooses a decent running mate, I think she has a good chance of winning the general.

How is she strong in the sunbelt? I can maybe get Georgia, but she’s a horrendously bad fit for Nevada, Texas, Arizona, and particularly Florida.

[Literally Just a Contrarian]

Harris was literally responsible for turning what was supposed to be a landslide for her party into a close race last year, by turbocharging racist voter turnout. She is clearly weak.

Whaaat? There's no evidence Harris hurt Biden's electoral chances. The day she was announced as VP, but Biden broke records in small donations from all over the country. She also did well at the VP debate and helped to turn out black voters in GA.

LMAO no.

She came across as extremely whiny, similar to an annoying middle school English Teacher I’m sure we all had, and performed horribly, what are you talking about? There’s a reason the Biden campaign barely used her in the actual campaign itself.