Opinion - It's Kamala Harris's nomination to lose in 2028 — and she's already losing it
Maybe the Democratic insiders in Washington were right about Kamala Harris.
Despite a wealth of advantages, Harris and her team don't seem to know what to do next. Her reappearance in the public has been rather unremarkable, rehashing Democratic tropes about Donald Trump along with the expected policy bromides. That's just not going to cut it.
From the outside, it is astonishing how quickly the political cognoscenti have dismissed the former vice president. There should be no question about her being the leader of the Democratic Party, and she's an obvious front-runner for the 2028 nomination. Harris got more than 75 million votes in 2024 with 95 percent of Democrats voting for her, according to the exit polls. In a party still mired in identity politics, Harris checks more boxes than any other putative Democratic candidate.
She remains popular as well, with the most recent YouGov poll showing Harris at 87 percent favorable against 9 percent unfavorable with Democrats. The McLaughlin poll has Harris at 88 percent favorable against 10 percent unfavorable.
But the cracks start to show with her ballot tests versus other Democratic hopefuls.
The most recent polling by McLaughlin has Harris with just 30 percent of Democratic primary voters, while Echelon Insights has her at 32 percent. She remains far ahead of any rivals, leading second-place Pete Buttigieg by 22 points in the Echelon poll and Gavin Newsom by 22 points in McLaughlin.
As long as Harris is in the mix, she is likely to lead all Democrats just based on name recognition. If she does run in the next election, she will lead in all national polls until the first Democratic primary contest. But can she actually win the nomination once she has to get votes on her own? Her first run in 2020 ended rather ignominiously and the 2024 nominating contest involved not much more than a spate of phone calls and allowing the weight of being the incumbent vice president to crush any potential opposition.
The last few months are showing why the D.C. establishment was extraordinarily unimpressed during her veep tryout.
The return of Harris has been, at best, desultory. Her first major address was a ChatGPT-inspired cataloguing of Democratic complaints about President Trump and perfunctory praise for her grandstanding potential rivals. Her follow-up was a private address to Australian real estate agents. Who is scheduling this nonsense?
This tentative, scattershot rollout shows the fundamental problem with Harris and her team: They lack any strategic vision, and Harris herself seems petrified of angering or even slightly annoying anyone in her fractious party. She lacks confidence, and what charisma she has is definitely low wattage. Her polling numbers, identity qualifications (as a non-white woman) and former vice presidential status should be intimidating to other Democrats, but nobody is afraid of Kamala.
Her flirtation with running for California governor in 2026 is not helping, since that would end her presidential ambitions. She cannot run for governor in 2026 and president in 2028. Between the bad timing, the unfortunate Nixon comparisons and the immediately violation of the pledge not to run for president that she would have to make on the gubernatorial campaign trail, it's just not feasible.
That puts Harris in the mix for 2032 at the earliest. If a Democrat wins in 2028, Harris will be staring at 2036 — 72 years old and likely needing to knock out an incumbent vice president and whoever else jumps in.
To make matters more difficult, California is a mess policy-wise, fiscally and politically. It is hard to believe that Harris can make a dent in the state's myriad problems. Plus, the politics of the state are far to the left of the rest of the country, meaning her own politics will necessarily be drawn in that direction in order to get anything done.
Harris should re-emerge aggressively — not just attacking Trump, but presenting at least a skeleton of ideas for the future. She should have a real theme. The term 'opportunity economy' that she used in 2024 wasn't great, but it is serviceable. She could be riding that. And she should absolutely ignore all other potential rivals, with the idea that they are politically beneath her. Harris is the leader — Buttigieg, Cory Booker, J.B. Pritzker and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez can be helpful to her.
But the most important task for Harris is to escape culpability for Trump 2.0 by pinning the blame on Team Biden for losing. That doesn't mean attacking Joe — after all, he is a sick, confused old man, taken advantage of by his dissolute son and scheming inner circle. Given the revelations in the recent books 'Fight' and 'Original Sin,' this task should be easy.
It is a challenging weave, but not too difficult for a decently competent politician. Given the reporting, the best line she can deliver is that Biden's inner circle only did two things well: hide former President Joe Biden's mental infirmity and get Trump elected. In a Democratic Party where the grassroots are as hostile to the establishment as the Republican grassroots, that line is a sure crowd-pleaser.
Harris has to establish herself independently. She has to take some risks bashing the Democratic insider. They never were on her side when she was vice president, so she doesn't really have much to lose.
The bottom line for Harris is that the 2028 nomination is not going to be handed to her. She is going to have to work for it and show she has the political chops to run for president on her own. That cannot be done trying to be all things to all people. Harris has all the advantages, but she is showing she doesn't know what to do with them.
Keith Naughton is co-founder of Silent Majority Strategies, a public and regulatory affairs consulting firm, and a former Pennsylvania political campaign consultant.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
38 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Republicans roast Democrats in trying to ban ‘Chiefs,' Native-American mascots in NY schools
Republicans are planning to attack their Democratic opponents over New York's effort to force Massapequa to drop its Chiefs mascot as part of a ban on Native-American imagery in school logos. The GOP sees the mascot controversy as another example of Democratic-run Albany pushing fringe issues, and wants them to pay a political price for it. 'We have a lot of chiefs in volunteer fire departments in New York,' said John McLaughlin, a pollster for New York Republicans and President President Trump — also known as the commander-in-chief. 'Hochul and the Democrats should focus on improving reading and math and not indoctrinating our students,' he said. McLaughlin noted that Hochul is already unpopular on Long Island — she has a 55% unfavorable rating in the New York suburbs compared to 36% favorable in a recent Siena College poll. She is up for reelection next year. The comments come after US Secretary of Education Linda McMahon visited Massapequa on Friday and threatened to bring a civil rights case against the Empire State for forcing the high school to ditch its mascot. The event was coordinated by Nassau County Executive and Trump pal Bruce Blakeman, who is up for re-election this fall. 'Denigrating whole communities like Massapequa and Wantagh is not a good look for Governor Hochul, who seems hell bent on making as many enemies as she can on Long Island,' Blakeman, who also is also eying a run for governor next year, told The Post Sunday. Blakeman's Democratic opponent for county executive, Seth Koslow said, 'School pride matters, but it's hard to believe this is the top concern of the federal government right now.' The New York Board of Regents' and state Education ordered schools to ban Native American mascots back in 2023. The members of the education policy-making board are appointed by the Democratic-controlled state legislature. The National Republican Congressional Campaign Committee is using the controversy to tar Democratic incumbents up for re-election next year on Long Island and elsewhere, including Reps. Tom Suozzi and Laura Gillen. 'It's another day that ends in 'y,' so obviously Tom Suozzi and Laura Gillen's Democrat Party is more concerned with demonizing a high school mascot than lowering taxes and costs for Long Island families,' said NRCC spokeswoman Maurenn O'Toole. 'Democrats are completely missing the plot, and voters will hold Suozzi and Gillen accountable for their utterly foolish, destructive, and out of touch agenda next fall.' But Suozzi told The Post Sunday, 'I support the Massapequa Chiefs.' Suozzi said Republicans are engaging in cheap politics to change the subject. 'This is nonsense, and just another distraction from national Republicans. Congressman Suozzi supports the Massapequa Chiefs, but not the petty partisan politics that people can't stand,' said Suozzi senior campaign adviser Kim Devlin. 'National Republicans should spend their time reducing prices, negotiating a bipartisan fix on immigration, lowering their own proposed record-breaking deficits, and protecting people's healthcare—not cutting it. Congressman Suozzi has always stood with our communities, and no amount of desperate distortion will change that.' State Democratic Party chairman Jay Jacobs, a close ally of Hochul who also is the Nassau County Democratic leader, said Trump and the GOP are trying to deflect from their unpopular policies in DC by focusing on mascots. 'This is a Republican distraction. The Democrats have not made this an issue,' Jacobs insisted. 'The Republicans are trying to distract from all the damage they're doing in Washington. They want to talk about mascots instead of tariffs, cuts to Medicaid, SNAP benefits and education programs,' Jacobs said. 'This is what Republicans do every election — they try to scare and anger people.' Hochul, through a rep, sought to distance herself from the mascot controversy. 'The decision being discussed was made by the independent State Education Department, which is not under our Administration's jurisdiction,' said Hochul spokesman Gordon Tepper. 'While Secretary McMahon focuses on WWE-style distractions, Governor Hochul is focused on what matters: fully funding Long Island's public schools and making sure every kid gets a high-quality education.' Last year, Trump and the GOP successfully slammed Democrats for supporting the unpopular policy of allowing transgender athletes to compete against biological females in sports. Republicans said they are pleasantly surprised — even baffled — at state officials going after local school districts on Long Island, of all places. Numerous Long Island towns have native American names — honoring tribal history — Massapequa, Wyandanch, Manhasset, Mineola, Quogue, Amagansett, Patchogue, Hauppauge, Patchogue, among others.
Yahoo
38 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Australian woman accused of triple mushroom murders gives evidence
By Alasdair Pal SYDNEY (Reuters) -An Australian woman accused of murdering three of her estranged husband's elderly relatives by serving them a lunch laced with poisonous mushrooms began giving evidence during her trial on Monday, in a case that has gripped the nation. Erin Patterson, 50, is charged with the July 2023 murders of her mother-in-law Gail Patterson, father-in-law Donald Patterson and Gail's sister, Heather Wilkinson, along with the attempted murder of Ian Wilkinson, Heather's husband, in a case that has gripped Australia. All four fell ill after a lunch of Beef Wellington, mashed potatoes and green beans, the court has heard. Prosecutors allege the accused laced the meal with highly poisonous death cap mushrooms at her home in Leongatha, a town of around 6,000 people some 135 km (84 miles) from Melbourne. Erin Patterson denies the charges, with her defence saying the deaths were a "terrible accident". Beginning her evidence towards the end of the day's session, Erin Patterson said on Monday her relationship with estranged husband Simon Patterson had been in difficulty shortly after they married in 2007. "We could never communicate in a way that would make each of us feel heard and understood," she told the court. She had also grown apart from Simon's parents, Donald and Gail, at the time of their deaths, she added. "I had felt for some months that my relationship with the wider Patterson family, particularly Don and Gail, had a bit more distance or space put between us," she said. Earlier on Monday the prosecution rested its case, following a month of evidence from witnesses, including relatives and medical, forensic and mushroom experts. Simon Patterson gave evidence earlier in the trial, characterising the relationship between him and the accused as strained at the time of the alleged murders. The trial, that began on April 29, has seen intense interest from Australian and international media, with podcasters, journalists and documentary-makers descending on the town of Morwell, around two hours east of Melbourne, where the trial is being held. Erin Patterson is expected to resume her evidence on Tuesday, when the trial continues.
Yahoo
38 minutes ago
- Yahoo
ADL says it's not aware of Stringer's plan to work with group to combat antisemitism despite mayoral candidate's claim
Longshot Big Apple mayoral candidate Scott Stringer's claim that he'd work with the Anti-Defamation League to root out antisemitism is news to the non-profit. An ADL spokesperson said Sunday that the organization is not aware of 'any authorized plans' to work with the former city comptroller, who said over the weekend he would use tech to help cops 'predict and prevent' biased attacks while referencing the ADL. 'We are not aware of any authorized plans to partner with Mr. Stringer and, as a nonprofit organization, we would not partner with any candidate for elective office,' the spokesperson told The Post. But Stringer's team stressed the candidate wasn't offering a campaign plan and would only implement a version of something that the ADL already has online if elected mayor. The apparent divide between ADL and Stringer comes after the lefty mayoral hopeful told members of Congregation Kehilath Jeshurun synagogue on Manhattan's Upper East Side he would have the NYPD and Office of Emergency Management use 'advanced monitoring tools' to flag social media posts that incite violence or signal threats during and after an international emergency. The ADL Center on Extremism uses a 'first-of-its-kind' interactive map that allows users to detail specific incidents of hate, extremism, antisemitism and terrorism by state and across the country. 'One of my first partnerships will be with the Anti-Defamation League on a project that goes beyond monitoring antisemitism after the fact,' Stringer said, according to remarks provided by the campaign. 'Instead, we will work to predict and prevent violence before it happens.' A spokesperson for Stringer also claimed Sunday the pol was only promoting the ADL's resources when asked about the claimed partnership. 'The ADL has one of the best tools available, and this one has been widely cited by Jewish thought leaders and elected officials,' the spokesperson said in a statement. 'It's been broadly promoted and positioned as a best practice. We should use the best tools and resources available to fight antisemitism — especially from groups that have long led the way on this issue. 'Employing best practices is good leadership, not an implication of a formal campaign partnership. The ADL has welcomed others promoting their resources.' Jewish New Yorkers have faced a disturbing spike in hate since Hamas launched its Oct. 7, 2023 attack on Israel, leading to the war in Gaza. Stringer, who is Jewish and a Zionist, has been polling in the single digits with the Democratic primary for mayor just weeks away.
