THIS HAS BEEN an extraordinary period in American politics. One month ago, with President Joe Biden reeling from an abysmal debate performance on 27 June and Donald Trump riding high in the wake of an attempt on his life and Democratic disarray over his rival’s weakness, it was probable that the 45th President of the United States would become the 47th and the Republicans would control the US Senate and House of Representatives.
But Biden finally succumbed to the inevitable and withdrew. His party coalesced swiftly and anointed his deputy, Vice President Kamala Harris, to replace him. The campaign has been transformed, utterly. Harris is enjoying a sustained bounce in the polls that has the Trump people deeply concerned and has surprised many observers, this one included.
States like Georgia and Arizona – even Nevada and North Carolina – which had appeared increasingly out of reach for Biden are now in play for Harris. That might render Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin non must-wins for the Californian. An Electoral College landscape that gave Trump a solid lead is fundamentally changed. Harris and her running mate, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, have the momentum – BIG LEAGUE – to paraphrase the man who their adherents loathe at his signature rallies.
Meanwhile, the 78-year-old, who spends a huge amount of time on the golf course, has been flailing around uselessly. The data suggests that he is losing the support from that vital constituency of floating voters who will determine the result in November. Trump’s conversation with the controversial Elon Musk on Twitter/X, evidently intended to right the ship, did not work to that effect, to describe it euphemistically.
Prior to offering unsolicited advice to both camps as to how they can win what is destined to be a close contest, notwithstanding the irrational exuberance that afflicted some Republicans in mid-July and is infecting a decent-sized swathe of Democrats currently, another truth is worth noting. This so-called battle for the future of the country is arguably a policy free zone.
As James Pindell writes in the Boston Globe, Harris vs Trump is not “about two different sets of plans to address leading issues of the day. That’s because neither candidate has released comprehensive policy positions and voters don’t seem to be asking for them either. Instead, it’s an election driven by vibes.”
Cognisant of that reality, yet also mindful that each aspirant will have to outline major and minor initiatives to tackle the vexing problems confronting the US and its citizenry, the following is what I believe Team Trump/Vance and Team Harris/Walz should do in the coming weeks and months.
Those in Trump’s inner circle have the unenviable job of trying to reign the bombastic billionaire in and keep the ill-chosen JD Vance from committing more offensive verbal gaffes. Whether the former is possible or not is an open question. But he cannot prevail unless he ceases listening to conspiracy theorists and indulging in nasty personal condemnations of his opponents that will simultaneously make his base chuckle and alienate white suburban women, among other crucial demographics.
The thing is that the panic that has manifestly engulfed him since Harris’s ascension is wholly unnecessary. Harris has been so unpopular and inept that prominent Democrats privately deemed her unsuitable to be commander-in-chief. She is largely untested and hasn’t spoken an unscripted word as of late. The mainstream media will stop fawning over her if she doesn’t give them material for copy soon.
The Electoral College system equips Trump with an in-built advantage; a majority of Americans are furious with the Biden administration, of which Harris is a key cog in the wheel, on immigration and inflation; and it is a fact that the San Franciscan daughter of Jamaican and Indian parents is considerably to the left of Middle America. It is equally a fact that her number two, Governor Walz, is vulnerable to attack for exaggerating his military service and a slow response to the appalling, destructive rioting that occurred in his home state after the murder of George Floyd.
Harris and Walz have their own tricky tasks ahead. The latter must establish that he actually is a regular guy from the Midwest, despite a very liberal voting record as an elected official, and has to refute persuasively the criticisms of his career and status in the National Guard, as well as the looting and violence in Minneapolis that was linked to the widely denigrated Black Lives Matter movement.
As a district attorney, attorney general, US Senator and vice president, Kamala Harris has an objectively strong CV. Still, however, in fielding queries from probing journalists or on a debate stage, she will be tried as she never has been before. In some respects, her fate is in her hands. It will be down to how she meets the challenge when the spotlight is on.
Further, as alluded to in this space previously, she needs to convince centrists that she is not as far left as her foes allege and pivot subtly in a credible fashion on immigration et al. That can be done, but it will require getting progressives to recognise that they have to “suck it up” for the greater good on this occasion. There is the Middle East, too. Reports are that there will be protests imminently in Chicago at the Democratic National Convention that could damage the Harris/Walz ticket and other Democrats on the ballot.
The potential for intraparty upheaval on Israel’s disproportionate, horrific war on Gaza can’t easily be dismissed. I continue to regard scenarios of an ugly split as extremely implausible, though. In realpolitik terms, Americans see events there differently than the rest of the western world. Most are broadly apathetic or generally pro-Israel.
Additionally, it is hard to fathom that advocates of the Palestinian cause in the US would reject Harris/Walz and abstain when the alternative is Trump/Vance, who would be infinitely worse from their point of view. With her better nuanced messaging on an awful situation, I think Harris is doing just fine – politically speaking that is, as grim as it may sound.
Taking a step back from the nitty-gritty of strategy that animates us anoraks, it is all to play for at this juncture. And promises in August that Kamala Harris will be the next occupant of the White House are as pre-mature as forecasts in July that Donald Trump was a dead cert to return to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue were.
Larry Donnelly is a Boston lawyer, a Law Lecturer at the University of Galway and a political columnist with TheJournal.ie.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
have your say