Former Vice President Kamala Harris has taken a critical look back at her time in the Biden administration, specifically reflecting on the decision for Joe Biden to run for re-election in 2024. In her upcoming book, “107 Days,” Harris articulates a sense of regret, calling the choice to let Biden pursue a second term “recklessness.” This candid assessment comes amid a swirl of political posturing where loyalty seems to have become a double-edged sword.
With an eye on both the past and future, Harris remarked, “It’s Joe and Jill’s decision.” We all said that, like a mantra, as if we’d all been hypnotized. She questions whether the decision stemmed from humility or ego, ultimately concluding that the stakes were too high to leave such a crucial choice to personal ambition. This marks a stark contrast to her previous public defenses of Biden, where she remained a steadfast ally.
Harris’s admissions in the book reveal not only a complicated relationship with Biden but also expose her feelings of being scapegoated within the administration. She has faced significant criticism regarding Biden’s presidency, often caught in a balancing act of defending her boss while trying to carve out her own identity in the political landscape. Harris noted that during her short-lived campaign, she often felt the weight of her own ambitions overshadowed by the need to support Biden.
In a telling moment, Harris acknowledged that “perhaps” she should have urged Biden to reconsider his candidacy. Despite her feelings about the situation, she was acutely aware of the potential backlash that advice could provoke. “I knew it would come off to him as incredibly self-serving if I advised him not to run,” she noted, reflecting her internal conflict over loyalty and ambition.
Harris continued to justify her silence by reasoning that the American public had previously supported Biden against Trump. Yet she acknowledges the difficulties inherent in that decision, stating, “I don’t believe it was incapacity. If I believed that, I would have said so.” The emphasis on loyalty was apparent, as she described proving her fidelity to Biden time and again, resulting in what she labeled a “rebuttable presumption” against her due to past criticisms during her presidential campaign.
Throughout her time in the Biden administration, Harris frequently faced scrutiny, including attacks over her role as “border czar.” She expressed frustration that the White House rarely pushed back against criticisms, acknowledging the environment where her gaffes were amplified for public ridicule. Her words capture a deep-seated tension: “Their thinking was zero-sum: If she’s shining, he’s dimmed.” This perspective on competition within the administration illustrates the fraught dynamics at play.
Harris emphasized the importance of her success, suggesting it would serve as a testament to Biden’s judgment in choosing her as a running mate. “My success was important for him,” she stated, indicating that a strong performance on her part would reflect well on the administration as a whole. Yet, she found that Biden’s inner circle “seemed glad” to let her take the spotlight even while they neglected the broader implications for their shared leadership.
This frank examination reveals Harris grappling with the complexity of her position. There’s a palpable sense of recognition that her achievements might have benefited Biden, yet they were not wholly embraced by those within his orbit. This dynamic has fostered an atmosphere of discontent, where perceptions of self-interest and ambition clouded the very alliances meant to bolster their joint endeavors.
As Harris steps away from her role, the insights given in “107 Days” serve as both a warning and a reflection on the political theater of loyalty amid ambition. Harris’s reluctance to challenge Biden about his candidacy speaks to a larger narrative of power within the Democratic Party and raises critical questions about leadership and accountability.
In what could be a sign of changing tides, Harris’s candidness about her experiences may resonate deeply, prompting discussions about loyalty, ambition, and the high stakes of political leadership. The revelations within her book not only provide a perspective on her own journey but also open a dialogue on the complexities that accompany relationships in political hierarchies.
"*" indicates required fields
