Kamala X J T.
Who is Kamala Harris? That’s the question the Democratic nominee for president tried to answer in her highly anticipated acceptance speech at the party’s national convention in Chicago.
Although she has been vice-president for three and a half years, recent polling showed that around one-third of Americans knew little about what Harris stood for heading into the speech. This result is in part because she earned the nomination without winning a single primary vote after President Joe Biden was pressured out of the race.
The keynote was Harris’s primetime introduction to the country, and undoubtedly the defining moment of her campaign – and political career – to date. Penned by Barack Obama’s former speechwriter Adam Frankel, part of a fresh team of Harris insiders that also includes Obama’s former campaign manager David Plouffe, the address was a call to arms, urging moderates and progressives alike to cast aside their differences and rally behind the Democratic ticket.
In the days leading up to Thursday night, Harris secluded herself in a nearby hotel, where she honed and practised her speech. Known more for her prosecutorial skills than soaring oratory, Harris nonetheless commanded the stage at the packed United Center.
She leaned heavily into her identity as the daughter of Jamaican and Indian immigrants, presenting herself as embodying the the nation’s diversity. She portrayed her rapid professional ascent, including to become the highest-ranking female government official in history, as reflecting the American dream.
Building up the middle class
From prosecuting criminals as a California district attorney to her time in the Senate, Harris suggested that her life experiences give her a clear view of the challenges faced by everyday Americans. She underlined that her background animates her policy agenda, which she champions as pro-family and pro-working class.
She added: “We know a strong middle class has always been critical to America’s success, and building that middle class will be a defining goal of my presidency.”
Where Biden has depicted Trump as an existential threat to US democracy, Harris tempered her language, highlighting the stakes without fully embracing Biden’s harsher tone.
“In many ways, Donald Trump is an unserious man,” she declared. “But the consequences of putting Donald Trump back in the White House are extremely serious.”
An end to the honeymoon
Harris’s speech capped off an electrifying week for Democrats, sparking a surge of excitement that was unthinkable just weeks ago when Biden was fighting a war against both Trump and internal dissenters within his own party. Some polls now show Harris with a slight lead nationally and in several key swing states.
The honeymoon will end, however. Honeymoons always do.
For weeks, Harris has been swimming in glowing media coverage and adulation from within her party. The focus has been on what it would mean for her to be the first female president in US history, and on her rapid rise in the polls.
Yet amid the flurry of excitement, Harris has yet to give a major press conference where she’s been grilled by opposition media. She has yet to do any sit-down interviews.
Harris’s successful roll out of her campaign has arguably been more about personality than policy. She’s benefited from an image rebrand with the help of new-generation “influencers” creating online memes and “fan cams” portraying her as a “girl boss” poised to take Washington.
But TikTok videos and social media hype can’t substitute for substance. Harris’s agenda will invariably come under scrutiny, testing her mettle.
In her only notable policy address delivered so far, Harris called for a federal ban on “price gouging” on food and groceries, a proposal that was panned by many economists as a gimmick that could actually worsen inflation. She’s now said that her proposal was misconstrued.
Despite echoing Obama’s call for “hope and change” for the future, Harris needs to contend with the fact that it is Democrats, not Republicans, who have occupied the White House for nearly 12 of the last 16 years.
On one of Trump’s signature issues, immigration, Harris insisted in her DNC speech that she “brought together Democrats and conservative Republicans to write the strongest border bill in decades”. Yet the bill never became a law, and Harris’s role of tackling the “root causes” of of illegal immigration is largely seen as an area of vulnerability.
On abortion, Harris said that she would “proudly sign … a bill to restore reproductive freedom”. However, she falsely suggested that Trump wants to “enact a nationwide abortion ban”.
Policy proposals
Harris also needs to make clear where she is aligned with Biden – and where she’s distancing herself from her boss. That includes on the radioactive issue of the Gaza war, which Harris has mostly tried to evade.
She gave some clues in her speech to her foreign policy approach, saying that she was working with Biden to find an immediate ceasefire in Gaza and that she would be supporting Ukraine and working with Nato to strengthen the US’s global leadership. This approach would be in contrast to Trump’s suggestions that he will pull funding for both.
Then there’s Harris’s own record of governing. She was once rated the second-most left-wing US senator in the 21st century following an analysis of Congressional votes by political scientist Mark P. Jones.
Trump has had trouble defining Harris, fumbling in figuring out which criticisms will land. In calling her everything from a “DEI” (diversity, equity, and inclusion) candidate to not sufficiently Black, Republicans’ attacks have largely missed the mark. Even Trump’s nicknames for Harris — “Kamala Crash” or “Kamabla” — don’t seem to pack the same punch as “Crooked Hillary” or “Sleepy Joe.”
Trump will learn. The primary knock on Harris, as it’s always been, is that she’s a “San Francisco liberal”. That’s the line that Trump will eventually settle on in giving his own answer to the question: who is Kamala Harris?
The country will definitely want to know more about her than that.
Thomas Gift, Associate Professor and Director of the Centre on US Politics, UCL
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
About Post Author
