Note to opinion editors: editorial It represents the opinion of the Star Tribune Editorial Board, which operates independently of the newsroom.
•••
An assassination attempt on former President Donald Trump. President Joe Biden decides not to run for reelection. Vice President Kamala Harris will run in his place.
The recent breakneck speed of news has many of us thinking back to 1968. That year marked the height of national upheaval in a long time outside of the Civil War, with then-President Lyndon Johnson deciding not to seek a second term, Vice President Hubert Humphrey, a Minnesota native, rising to the top of the list of candidates to replace him, and the tragic deaths of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. and Robert F. Kennedy.
But the political fallout from Biden’s decision, the subject of Wednesday’s presidential address, also evokes memories of another, more recent political era: the 1980s, when President Ronald Reagan campaigned on a platform of sunny optimism and handily defeated Democratic opponents including incumbent President Jimmy Carter in 1980 and former Vice President Walter Mondale in 1984.
Reagan’s confidence and optimism were understandably a source of encouragement to voters tired of high inflation, high unemployment, the energy crisis and the Iran hostage crisis. He offered a fresh start, which appealed to voters then, and it’s a scenario that could resonate again this year.
The renewed energy and positivity surrounding Harris’ entry into the presidential race is very similar to Reagan’s “morning in America” moment. Though Harris is not yet an official candidate, she has already secured enough delegate support to win the nomination in August, including endorsements from Bill and Hillary Clinton and Barack and Michelle Obama. The endorsements, along with the historic amount of money her campaign and party have raised in less than a week, reflect voter fatigue with Biden, 81, and Trump, 78, at the top of the presidential race, and the need for both generations to pass the baton of leadership.
The Star Tribune editorial board had hoped for a mini-primary to test Harris’ mettle, but she is almost certain to make the shortlist. Her presence there would feel like an adrenaline shot to the 2024 race. So far, Harris has campaigned on hope and stressed what will work in America, a hackneyed strategy that stands in contrast to the “America is hell” narrative pushed by Trump, who is now using it in his third presidential campaign.
As the incumbent vice president, Harris is not a new face. But her relative youth at 59 eases concerns about Biden and Trump’s potential weaknesses. And her resume is impressive. Harris is the daughter of a Jamaican immigrant father and an Indian immigrant mother. She attended public schools in California and later earned a law degree. She served as San Francisco’s district attorney and later as California’s attorney general. In 2016, she was elected to the U.S. Senate.
In 2020, she shattered a high and solid glass ceiling to become the first female vice president of the United States, and the first South Asian and Black woman to hold that office. And now she is on the cusp of shattering an even more stubborn glass ceiling to become the first female commander in chief of the United States.
This potentially historic appeal has undoubtedly contributed to her meteoric rise, but her challenge now is to convince voters that there are other reasons to support her beyond her gender-bending potential.
Early in her term as vice president, Harris struggled to find her place in the Biden administration. The traditional role of the vice president is to act as a liaison with Congress to help pass legislation, something Biden, Dick Cheney and Al Gore excelled at when they served under Barack Obama, George W. Bush and Bill Clinton. Harris didn’t have enough years as a U.S. senator to do that well.
She also drew a tough challenge from Biden: tackling the root causes of migration to the US: brutal regimes in Central America and endemic poverty among their people. These problems won’t be solved overnight, but it’s unclear how much progress Harris would have made. It certainly didn’t help that Republicans, at Trump’s behest, blocked funding and solutions in Congress earlier this year.
Harris has struggled to communicate effectively in interviews and speeches, but her recent efforts to defend reproductive health as the Biden administration’s voice on the issue have eased some of those doubts, as has her recent impassioned campaign rally.
Harris’ current policy stances are harder to gauge than they should be. As of Friday, her campaign page was only soliciting donations and selling merchandise. This needs to change quickly so voters can make an informed decision. During her short-lived presidential campaign, she supported a Medicare for All proposal that would leave room for private insurance companies to operate. Medicare is the federal program that provides health insurance to Americans over 65, and the Medicare for All proposal would allow younger people to enroll. Does she still support it?
Other key questions are: Will her foreign policy differ from Biden’s? If she wins, she will inherit two crises, in Ukraine and Gaza. How will she address both?
Her trade, agriculture, energy and education policy positions also need to be made clearer.
Harris’ political honeymoon over the past week has made it easy to project a sunny optimism. That positive attitude could be a game changer, so long as she can maintain it amid understandable scrutiny of her record. The campaign is important, and there’s still a long way to go between now and Election Day.
