Kamala Harris has a long digital history – what we used to call a paper trail – that depicts her as an uber-liberal.
That’s hardly surprising, since for most of her career – from prosecutor to state attorney general to senator – she needed to appeal only to her left-wing base in royal blue California.
But as the Democratic nominee, Harris at some point will have to explain, or explain away, some of those past positions that will not play well in a tight national election, where a series of polls show her in statistical ties with Donald Trump in Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin – and up 6 points in Minnesota.
The Trump camp, where the former president called Harris a "bum," among other epithets, and boasted about mispronouncing her name, is surfacing some of her greatest liberal hits. But the mainstream press has what influential blogger Andrew Sullivan calls "amnesia," writing that while she might even win, "Harris is one of the weakest and wokest Democratic candidates there is. She cannot credibly appeal to the center after such extreme-left posturing."
So if and when the Harris Honeymoon wears off, that is the vice president’s challenge. She has to tell voters why she no longer holds these positions, if that’s the case. Maybe it’s because she "evolved." Maybe it’s because she was largely representing San Francisco at the time. Maybe her time as VP has changed her outlook. But she can’t simply let it slide.
Even the sympathetic press will get over its amnesia eventually.
Some examples: During the BLM riots in the summer of 2020, after George Floyd’s murder, Harris helped promote a bail fund to get the criminals out of jail.
She said in one interview: "They’re not going to let up and they should not. And we should not."
Harris said in another interview: "It is outdated, and it is actually wrong and backward to think that more police officers will create more safety."
And during her 2020 campaign she said: "Private prisons are making money off the incarceration and suffering of human beings. One of my first acts of business as president will be to begin phasing out detention centers and private prisons."
During the same campaign, Harris favored Medicare for All – a Bernie favorite –while acknowledging that would abolish private health insurance. Joe Biden refused to go that far left.
Harris also promised to ban fracking – but has backed off that through an aide’s comments.
When the media instantaneously switched their allegiance from Biden (of course he can serve another four years!) to Harris (she’s a young, fresh voice!), they quickly formed a defensive squad.
Several top news organizations tried to debunk the notion that she’d ever been named border czar. The most embarrassing case was Axios, which said that "the Trump campaign and Republicans have tagged Harris repeatedly with the ‘border czar’ title — which she never actually had."
Except that in 2021, Axios said: "Harris, appointed by Biden as border czar…"
It’s true that it was just journalistic shorthand, and that Harris was assigned to work on the root causes of illegal immigration, and did work diplomatically with Mexico and Guatemala. But why deny that she had that unofficial title?
Those who call the vice president a DEI pick justify it by saying Biden had essentially promised to pick a Black woman.
One guest on FOX Business went far lower by comparing Harris to the Hawk-Tuah girl. (It involves a sexual act. Google it if you need to.)
Trump, meanwhile, has accused Harris of engineering a "coup." (Nobody ran against her.) He also said Jews should have their heads examined if they vote for the Democrats (Kamala, of course, is married to a Jewish guy).
The former president may have lowered expectations by calling Harris "dumb as a rock," given the almost flawless execution of her first week.
I get the impression that Trump is still trying to figure out how to run against the 59-year-old Harris. (The Washington Post has a nice TikTok on how Donna Brazile and other allies spent weeks planning a Kamala candidacy in case Biden bowed out.)
Now contrast that with the media’s treatment of JD Vance, where no older remark is deemed too small to be resurrected.
The Harris team is trying to paint both Trump and Vance as weird, with a statement referring to his "weird and extreme views." The Trump camp is trying to depict Harris as weird. The whole thing is, uh, very strange.
Vance’s biggest controversy is his 2021 Fox interview saying that a "childless cat lady," naming Harris among others, doesn’t have a "direct stake" in society and are miserable in their own lives. He has broadened that to include childless media people.
The remarks got him into a spat with Jennifer Aniston, which is not exactly where you want to be – and brought him a scolding by the Wall Street Journal editorial page.
At first, the Ohio senator told Megyn Kelly he was being sarcastic and loves cats.
On Sunday, Fox host Trey Gowdy, a former GOP congressman, told Vance that George Washington and James Madison were among those who had no biological children.
"If you look at what the left has done," said Vance. "They have radically taken this out of context and, in fact, aggressively lied about what I’ve said. What I do think is true, Trey, and this goes to the heart of what I was talking about three years ago in those comments, but it’s going to be something I continue to talk about, is that the left has increasingly become explicitly anti-child and anti-family.
"They’ve encouraged young families not to have children at all because of concerns over climate change. They’ve suggested that people who do have children are somehow being selfish when I think being a parent is actually the most selfless thing that you can do, and again, really does transform your perspective.
"So this is not a criticism. It was never a criticism, Trey, of everybody without children."
Harris, by the way, has been deeply involved in raising her husband Doug Emhoff’s children — so says a statement from Doug’s ex-wife.
This is, without question, the most bizarre campaign in American history – and could well turn on perceptions of weirdness. But it sure seems like there’s a double standard, given the media consensus that Trump is a danger to democracy.
Footnote: With Trump backing off a debate or debates with Harris for now –claiming he’s still not sure who the nominee will be – it’s important to remember one thing.
Trump negotiated those terms with Joe Biden, accepting Biden’s terms. Now he has every right to renegotiate with Harris because she abruptly became the new nominee. Fox News has pitched a debate in September after Trump rejected ABC as biased. I don’t know if any debates will happen, but the former president has every right to work out a new deal.
By the way, it was Biden who insisted on an early debate with Trump so he could shake up the campaign. It was the beginning of the end. Knowing what we know now, how could his team have sent him out there?
That’s hardly surprising, since for most of her career – from prosecutor to state attorney general to senator – she needed to appeal only to her left-wing base in royal blue California.
But as the Democratic nominee, Harris at some point will have to explain, or explain away, some of those past positions that will not play well in a tight national election, where a series of polls show her in statistical ties with Donald Trump in Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin – and up 6 points in Minnesota.
The Trump camp, where the former president called Harris a "bum," among other epithets, and boasted about mispronouncing her name, is surfacing some of her greatest liberal hits. But the mainstream press has what influential blogger Andrew Sullivan calls "amnesia," writing that while she might even win, "Harris is one of the weakest and wokest Democratic candidates there is. She cannot credibly appeal to the center after such extreme-left posturing."
So if and when the Harris Honeymoon wears off, that is the vice president’s challenge. She has to tell voters why she no longer holds these positions, if that’s the case. Maybe it’s because she "evolved." Maybe it’s because she was largely representing San Francisco at the time. Maybe her time as VP has changed her outlook. But she can’t simply let it slide.
Even the sympathetic press will get over its amnesia eventually.
Some examples: During the BLM riots in the summer of 2020, after George Floyd’s murder, Harris helped promote a bail fund to get the criminals out of jail.
She said in one interview: "They’re not going to let up and they should not. And we should not."
Harris said in another interview: "It is outdated, and it is actually wrong and backward to think that more police officers will create more safety."
And during her 2020 campaign she said: "Private prisons are making money off the incarceration and suffering of human beings. One of my first acts of business as president will be to begin phasing out detention centers and private prisons."
During the same campaign, Harris favored Medicare for All – a Bernie favorite –while acknowledging that would abolish private health insurance. Joe Biden refused to go that far left.
Harris also promised to ban fracking – but has backed off that through an aide’s comments.
When the media instantaneously switched their allegiance from Biden (of course he can serve another four years!) to Harris (she’s a young, fresh voice!), they quickly formed a defensive squad.
Several top news organizations tried to debunk the notion that she’d ever been named border czar. The most embarrassing case was Axios, which said that "the Trump campaign and Republicans have tagged Harris repeatedly with the ‘border czar’ title — which she never actually had."
Except that in 2021, Axios said: "Harris, appointed by Biden as border czar…"
It’s true that it was just journalistic shorthand, and that Harris was assigned to work on the root causes of illegal immigration, and did work diplomatically with Mexico and Guatemala. But why deny that she had that unofficial title?
Those who call the vice president a DEI pick justify it by saying Biden had essentially promised to pick a Black woman.
One guest on FOX Business went far lower by comparing Harris to the Hawk-Tuah girl. (It involves a sexual act. Google it if you need to.)
Trump, meanwhile, has accused Harris of engineering a "coup." (Nobody ran against her.) He also said Jews should have their heads examined if they vote for the Democrats (Kamala, of course, is married to a Jewish guy).
The former president may have lowered expectations by calling Harris "dumb as a rock," given the almost flawless execution of her first week.
I get the impression that Trump is still trying to figure out how to run against the 59-year-old Harris. (The Washington Post has a nice TikTok on how Donna Brazile and other allies spent weeks planning a Kamala candidacy in case Biden bowed out.)
Now contrast that with the media’s treatment of JD Vance, where no older remark is deemed too small to be resurrected.
The Harris team is trying to paint both Trump and Vance as weird, with a statement referring to his "weird and extreme views." The Trump camp is trying to depict Harris as weird. The whole thing is, uh, very strange.
Vance’s biggest controversy is his 2021 Fox interview saying that a "childless cat lady," naming Harris among others, doesn’t have a "direct stake" in society and are miserable in their own lives. He has broadened that to include childless media people.
The remarks got him into a spat with Jennifer Aniston, which is not exactly where you want to be – and brought him a scolding by the Wall Street Journal editorial page.
At first, the Ohio senator told Megyn Kelly he was being sarcastic and loves cats.
On Sunday, Fox host Trey Gowdy, a former GOP congressman, told Vance that George Washington and James Madison were among those who had no biological children.
"If you look at what the left has done," said Vance. "They have radically taken this out of context and, in fact, aggressively lied about what I’ve said. What I do think is true, Trey, and this goes to the heart of what I was talking about three years ago in those comments, but it’s going to be something I continue to talk about, is that the left has increasingly become explicitly anti-child and anti-family.
"They’ve encouraged young families not to have children at all because of concerns over climate change. They’ve suggested that people who do have children are somehow being selfish when I think being a parent is actually the most selfless thing that you can do, and again, really does transform your perspective.
"So this is not a criticism. It was never a criticism, Trey, of everybody without children."
Harris, by the way, has been deeply involved in raising her husband Doug Emhoff’s children — so says a statement from Doug’s ex-wife.
This is, without question, the most bizarre campaign in American history – and could well turn on perceptions of weirdness. But it sure seems like there’s a double standard, given the media consensus that Trump is a danger to democracy.
Footnote: With Trump backing off a debate or debates with Harris for now –claiming he’s still not sure who the nominee will be – it’s important to remember one thing.
Trump negotiated those terms with Joe Biden, accepting Biden’s terms. Now he has every right to renegotiate with Harris because she abruptly became the new nominee. Fox News has pitched a debate in September after Trump rejected ABC as biased. I don’t know if any debates will happen, but the former president has every right to work out a new deal.
By the way, it was Biden who insisted on an early debate with Trump so he could shake up the campaign. It was the beginning of the end. Knowing what we know now, how could his team have sent him out there?
