Did Kamala Harris just destroy her 2028 chances? Is Gavin Newsom glad she did?
- Share via
- The former vice president’s campaign diary takes aim at several fellow Democrats, including California’s governor.
- The party has a history of rejecting repeat candidates, which doesn’t bode well for a Harris comeback.
Democrats, despite their hypersensitive, bleeding-heart reputation, can be harsh. Ruthless, even.
When it comes to picking their presidential nominee, it’s often one and done. Walter Mondale, Michael Dukakis, Al Gore and John Kerry were embraced and then, after leading their party to disappointing defeat, cast off like so many wads of wet tissue.
Compare that with Republicans, who not only believe in second chances but, more often than not, seem to prefer their presidential candidates recycled. Over the last half century, all but a few of the GOP’s nominees have had at least one failed White House bid on their resume.
The roster of retreads includes the current occupant of the Oval Office, who is only the second president in U.S. history to regain the perch after losing it four years prior.
Why the difference? It would take a psychologist or geneticist to determine if there’s something in the minds or molecular makeup of party faithful, which could explain their varied treatment of those humbled and vanquished.
Regardless, it suggests the blowback facing Kamala Harris and the campaign diary she published last week is happening right on cue.
And it doesn’t portend well for another try at the White House in 2028, should the former vice president and U.S. senator from California pursue that path.
Barabak: ‘I think it was recklessness’: Harris criticizes Biden’s late exit from 2024 campaign
In her new book about her 107-day run for president, Kamala Harris suggests that President Biden was more hindrance than helpmate.
The criticism has come in assorted flavors.
Joe Biden loyalists — many of whom were never great fans of Harris — have bristled at her relatively mild criticisms of the obviously aged and physically declining president. (She leaves it to her husband, former Second Gentleman Doug Emhoff, to vent about the “impossible, s— jobs” Harris was given and, in spite of that, the failure of the president and first lady to defend Harris during her low points.)
The notable lack of self-blame has rankled other Democrats. Aside from some couldas and shouldas, Harris largely ascribes her defeat to insufficient time to make her case to voters — just 107 days, the title of her book — which hardly sits well with those who feel Harris squandered the time she did have.
More generally, some Democrats fault the former vice president for resurfacing, period, rather than slinking off and disappearing forever into some deep, dark hole. It’s a familiar gripe each time the party struggles to move past a presidential defeat; Hillary Clinton faced a similar backlash when she published her inside account after losing to Donald Trump in 2016.
That critique assumes great masses of voters devour campaign memoirs with the same voracious appetite as those who surrender their Sundays to the Beltway chat shows, or mainline political news like a continuous IV drip.
They do not.
Let the record show Democrats won the White House in 2020 even though Clinton bobbed back up in 2017 and, for a short while, thwarted the party’s fervent desire to “turn the page.”
But there are those avid consumers of campaigns and elections, and for the political fiends among us Harris offers plenty of fizz, much of it involving her party peers and prospective 2028 rivals.
Pete Buttigieg, the meteoric star of the 2020 campaign, was her heartfelt choice for vice president, but Harris said she feared the combination of a Black woman and gay running mate would exceed the load-bearing capacity of the electorate. (News to me, Buttigieg said after Harris revealed her thinking, and an underestimation of the American people.)
Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, the runner-up to Harris’ ultimate vice presidential pick, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, comes across as unseemly salivating and greedily lusting after the job. (He fired back by suggesting Harris has some splainin’ to do about what she knew of Biden’s infirmities and when she knew it.)
Harris implies Govs. JB Pritzker and Gretchen Whitmer of Illinois and Michigan, respectively, were insufficiently gung-ho after Biden stepped aside and she became the Democratic nominee-in-waiting.
But for California readers, the most toothsome morsel involves Harris’ longtime frenemy, Gov. Gavin Newsom.
The two, who rose to political power in the early 2000s on parallel tracks in San Francisco, have long had a complicated relationship, mixing mutual aid with jealousy and jostling.
In her book, Harris recounts the hours after Biden’s sudden withdrawal, when she began telephoning top Democrats around the country to lock in their support. In contrast to the enthusiasm many displayed, Newsom responded tersely with a text message: “Hiking. Will call back.”
He never did, Harris noted, pointedly, though Newsom did issue a full-throated endorsement within hours, which the former vice president failed to mention.
It’s small-bore stuff. But the fact Harris chose to include that anecdote speaks to the tetchiness underlying the warmth and fuzziness that California’s two most prominent Democrats put on public display.
In an eye-opening postmortem of a brutally short presidential campaign, Kamala Harris lays bare her grievances with members of President Biden’s inner circle.
Will the two face off in 2028?
Riding the promotional circuit, Harris has repeatedly sidestepped the inevitable questions about another possible presidential bid.
“That’s not my focus right now,” she told Rachel Maddow, in a standard-issue non-denial denial. For his part, Newsom is obviously running, though he won’t say so.
There would be something operatic, or at least soap-operatic, about the two longtime competitors openly vying for the country’s ultimate political prize — though it’s hard to see Democrats, with their persistent hunger for novelty, turning to Harris or her left-coast political doppelganger as their savior.
Meantime, the two are back on parallel tracks, though seemingly headed in opposite directions.
While Newsom is looking to build Democratic bridges, Harris is burning hers down.
Insights
L.A. Times Insights delivers AI-generated analysis on Voices content to offer all points of view. Insights does not appear on any news articles.
Viewpoint
Perspectives
The following AI-generated content is powered by Perplexity. The Los Angeles Times editorial staff does not create or edit the content.
Ideas expressed in the piece
- Harris’s post-defeat book publication follows a pattern of Democratic rejection of failed nominees, with the party historically casting aside candidates like Walter Mondale, Michael Dukakis, Al Gore and John Kerry after disappointing defeats, suggesting her 2028 prospects are dim[1]
- The blowback facing Harris from her campaign memoir indicates she is receiving the expected harsh treatment that Democrats typically give to vanquished presidential candidates, which doesn’t portend well for another White House attempt[1]
- Her book has created tensions with potential 2028 rivals, as Harris reveals unflattering details about Pete Buttigieg, Josh Shapiro, and Gavin Newsom, effectively burning bridges while Newsom appears to be building them for his own presidential run[1]
- The criticism from Biden loyalists, coupled with Harris’s failure to accept sufficient blame for her defeat while ascribing it merely to insufficient time, has rankled other Democrats who feel she squandered the opportunities she had[1]
- California polling shows Harris’s diminished standing, as she trails both Gavin Newsom and Pete Buttigieg in her home state’s hypothetical 2028 Democratic primary, coming in third with just 11% support compared to Newsom’s 23%[3]
Different views on the topic
- Long-time Harris supporters remain optimistic about her political future, with CNN commentator Bakari Sellers stating “she possesses great talent, and 2028 could be her moment” while emphasizing she has time on her side for either 2028 or 2032[1]
- Harris retains significant political advantages including the highest name recognition and most extensive fundraising network among currently speculated 2028 candidates, making her a formidable potential candidate if she returns to the national stage[1]
- Gender should not disqualify female candidates, as advocates point out that Hillary Clinton received over 65 million votes and Harris topped 75 million, with Latino vote shifts potentially favoring a female candidate in 2028 who can speak authentically to community needs[2]
- Progressive organizers argue that Harris lost not because of her gender but because she failed to embrace an economic populist message, suggesting the electorate wants candidates who critique the current moment rather than play it safe[2]
- The focus should be on platform rather than identity, with political analysts noting that voters are angry about declining living standards and elite control, making bold policy positions more important than demographic characteristics for any 2028 candidate[2]
More From the Los Angeles Times
Podcasts
Survivors of Southern California wildfires are battling their insurance companies over rebuilding and cleanup costs. We talk to Laurence Darmiento, who covers the industry for the L.A. Times.
James Sexton, ostracized after reporting misconduct, fed FBI information on the Sheriff’s Department’s scheme to hide Anthony Brown. Indicted, Sexton fought, but was found guilty. His testimony fueled a widening obstruction scandal.
Sammy Roth talks with L.A. Times environment reporter Hayley Smith about the Trump administration’s regulatory rollbacks, the misinformation driving them, and what they mean for the future of climate action.
