Kamala

WASHINGTON — Former Vice President Kamala Harris said Friday she was considering running for president in 2028, offering the clearest signal yet that she could seek to lead Democrats back to the White House.

“I might, I might,” she told an audience in New York. “I’m thinking about it.”

Harris was asked about her plans by the Rev. Al Sharpton during a conversation at a convening of his civil rights organization National Action Network, where several other likely Democratic hopefuls also were appearing this week. Some in Harris’ audience chanted “Run again!” before Sharpton asked whether she might do so.

“I served for four years being a heartbeat away from the presidency of the United States,” Harris said. “I know what the job is and I know what it requires.”

Harris’ loss to President Trump in 2024 was gutting for Democrats, who have faced persistent questions about the party’s direction and what type of candidate would be best positioned to retake the presidency.

Democrats have notched some wins against Republicans in recent state-level races as Trump’s popularity has declined and have set their sights on gains in this year’s midterm elections. Even if the party’s popularity rises, however, the 2028 race likely will be a tooth-and-nail fight as the country determines who will succeed Trump.

“Democrats can win in the midterm through protest votes against [Trump’s] direction of the country, but they’ll clearly need a vision for 2028 and beyond to win the presidency,” said Thad Kousser, a political science professor at UC San Diego.

The number of Democrats vying to put forth that vision is set to be high. Other potential 2028 candidates, including Gov. JB Pritzker of Illinois, Gov. Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania, Sen. Mark Kelly of Arizona and former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, also spoke or were scheduled to speak with Sharpton before the conference ends Saturday.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who is considering a presidential run, was not on the convention schedule. A recent poll found that Newsom would have a wide lead over Harris among Democratic voters in California for the party’s next nominee.

Whether Harris would seek the nation’s highest office again after a fast, truncated 2024 campaign following former President Biden’s withdrawal from the race has been the subject of speculation for months.

She announced in July that she would not run for California governor — leaving the door open for a presidential run or something else — then published a book in September rehashing her campaign.

Voters’ familiarity with Harris gives her both a strength and a liability — her name recognition and experience have helped put her at the top of recent national polls, Kousser said, but voters often turn to fresher faces by the time primary elections come around. Her loss to Trump also could cause voters to balk ahead of an election that will be largely a referendum on his leadership.

At a time when Democrats are in particular need of a bold vision, that ultimately could give Harris a challenge, Democratic strategist Joe Caiazzo said.

“Elections are about the future, and I think it’s really tough for people who are part of our past to make that case. There’s a yearning for something fresh, new, exciting,” he said.

On Friday, Harris said she was considering who could do the best job for the American people.

“I’ll keep you posted,” she said.

This is the April 14, 2021, edition of the Essential Politics newsletter. Like what you’re reading? Sign up to get it in your inbox three times a week.

Former President Trump‘s banishment from Twitter has had a calming effect on the country that even some of his sharpest critics did not foresee.

Yet political discourse on social media has not fundamentally changed. It remains nasty and brutish at times.

Good morning and welcome to Essential Politics, Kamala Harris edition. This week, I’ll talk about my takeaways from reporting on the vice president’s biggest online cheerleaders, the KHive, a loose-knit network of supporters who say they are responding to the toxicity of social media by fighting back when it comes to Harris. Their critics say they are part of the problem.

KHive and the political questions it raises.

The story about the KHive, published online last week and in print on Sunday, told of the comradery, celebration and mutual sense of purpose its members find, mostly on Twitter, where they defend Harris against what they see as an unfair standard applied to political women of color. The Harris fans’ biggest fights, with fellow liberals, have gotten personal at times. Some members have had their accounts suspended by Twitter.

I hope you will read the story, because they are an interesting group of people. A few broader political points are worth considering as you do:

These kinds of online groups will be an important force in 2024 and beyond.

Ashley Bryant, a Democratic strategist who specializes in digital politics, told me she sees the early fights among the KHive, Bernie Bros (the nickname for Bernie Sanders’ progressive fans) and other groups as a precursor to the party’s next presidential nomination fight.

That could come in 2024 or 2028, depending on whether President Biden runs for reelection. Hard-core partisans are getting a head start.

Republicans have their social-media fights as well. But Trump’s still-dominant presence in the party, combined with his Twitter ban, has given the Republican version of this battle a different flavor.

Many in the NeverTrump faction seem to have given up on the Republican Party, while the post-Trump crowd of potential presidential aspirants and their followers is paralyzed by Trump’s hold on the party’s base. This week, for example, former United Nations Ambassador Nikki Haley backtracked on her prior comments disavowing Trump, telling reporters she would support him if he chose to run in 2024.

But I thought Twitter isn’t real life!

This is an important point. The Biden team’s motto, both when he was a candidate and now that he’s president, is that Twitter is not real life. By that they mean that some of the strongest opinions shared by the partisans and pundits who dominate the platform do not often reflect the broad swath of voters who decide primaries and general elections.

That posture helped Team Biden avoid overreacting to criticism or praise shared on Twitter. And the contrast with Trump, who exhausted Americans with his constant provocative presence online and in the news, appears to be playing a big part in Biden’s relative popularity. Politico published a smart story on Biden’s lower-volume media strategy this week, summarizing his approach as “First, do no self-harm.”

One important caveat: Online debates may not be the driving force in public opinion, but they can stoke debate in Congress. For example, the fight over whether to abolish the filibuster in the Senate — which requires many bills to garner a supermajority of 60 votes to pass — has been much hotter online than it is with the general public, though a change in that relatively obscure practice could have significant policy implications for the country.

Notwithstanding Biden’s relatively low-key online persona, Harris has courted the in-your-face KHive. And it’s easy to see why. Its members provide a sense of passionate support, something she lacked in her 2020 presidential primary run. Some members I spoke with spend 20 hours or more online each week. Others said they are active offline in volunteering for her and the Democratic Party.

But such occasionally confrontational groups also pose risks for her, if she becomes too reactive to online debates or gets dragged into some of the more personal and provocative squabbles among partisans.

Democrats are content right now but still divided.

There is also risk for the Democratic Party. Online, Sanders and Harris boosters accuse each other of all manner of attacks, including a practice known as doxxing, in which a target’s personal information is posted online.

Among many, anger lingers from the 2016 nomination contest between Hillary Clinton and Sanders — when Clinton supporters blamed the other side for costing her the election by resisting her candidacy, and Sanders supporters accused Clinton proxies of controlling the party apparatus to stymie Sanders. Some of the Clinton supporters are now behind Harris.

If Democrats want to hold on to the White House and Congress, they need to hash out policy debates but stay unified.

“I don’t have a crystal ball, I don’t know what 2024 could potentially look like,” Bryant said. “But you don’t want voters not even being willing to open their eyes to another candidate just because they’re aligned to one that may not get the nomination.”

The latest from the White House

— From David S. Cloud and Tracy Wilkinson: Biden is planning to withdraw all remaining troops from Afghanistan and will complete the pullout before Sept. 11, the 20th anniversary of the terrorist attacks that sparked the United States’ longest war, according to a senior U.S. official.

— Biden began to fill the top posts at the Homeland Security Department on Monday. Its ranks were hollowed out by his predecessor amid politicization and record vacancies. Almost all the appointees have California ties, reports Molly O’Toole.

— Lifting kids out of poverty could be Biden’s legacy. Yet the future of his policies remains uncertain as the administration’s ambitions run into spending limits, writes David Lauter.

— Biden spoke Tuesday morning with Russian President Vladimir Putin, warning him against aggressive moves toward Ukraine but also inviting him to a summit meeting, Lauter and Wilkinson write.

— Biden will address a joint session of Congress for the first time on April 28 after receiving an invitation from Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi.

The view from Washington

— Congress has a very short window to reverse regulatory actions approved by President Trump’s administration before he left office. Sarah D. Wire writes that at least two are expected to get Senate votes in the coming weeks. Also from Wire: Can Biden really cancel student debt? Here’s where the debate stands.

— The Supreme Court is set to decide soon whether conservative Christians can refuse to work with same-sex couples in a city-funded foster care program. David G. Savage writes that it’s the latest clash at the high court between religious liberty and marriage equality.

— Democrats and Republicans on Capitol Hill are negotiating a modest bill designed to help law enforcement combat the rise in hate crimes targeting Asian Americans, a rare moment of potential bipartisan compromise on legislation, Jennifer Haberkorn reports.

The view from California

— In 2020, demonstrators began ditching traditional protest venues to instead chant, fulminate and sit-in outside the front doors of officials’ homes. Sacramento has begun to push back, with officials saying “no more,” reports James Rainey.

— There have been hundreds of attempts to break up California. Those forces are driving the effort to recall Gov. Gavin Newsom, writes columnist Mark Z. Barabak.

— And speaking of the recall effort: a colorful cast of hopefuls who want to replace the Democratic leader has started to emerge, including former porn star Mary Carey and Los Angeles billboard icon Angelyne. Both ran in the 2003 recall election to replace then-Gov. Gray Davis, writes Faith E. Pinho.

— A far-reaching proposal to outlaw hydraulic fracturing and ban oil and gas wells from operating near homes, schools and healthcare facilities failed in the California Legislature on Tuesday, writes Phil Willon.

— From John Myers: California law enforcement officers could lose their certification based on the decisions of a panel that includes victims of police misconduct under legislation that moved forward Tuesday in the Legislature. Lawmakers also supported an expansive ban on policing techniques that obstruct a person’s breathing.

When I read all the hype being heaped on Kamala Harris’ lead in early polls for the 2028 Democratic nomination, I have to chuckle to myself.

The release of a Rasmussen Reports poll in February was titled, “Kamala Harris Still Leads 2028 Field for Democrats.” One headline in the Hill predicted, “Kamala Harris may yet be the Democratic nominee in 2028.” A Washington Examiner piece about polling warned, “Democrats won’t get rid of Kamala Harris that easily for 2028.”

I chuckle not because I don’t believe the numbers, but because I don’t believe any poll this far out in an open contest is meaningful, let alone determinative. I’ve seen this movie before, and it didn’t end well.

In 2003, after managing the successful 2002 reelection campaign of California Gov. Gray Davis, I signed on as an advisor to the presidential campaign of Connecticut Sen. Joseph Lieberman — who, I needn’t remind anyone, had been the Democratic nominee for vice president in the 2000 election, which he and Al Gore lost in a nail-biter to George W. Bush.

Based simply on his high name identification from that hellzapoppin’ race, and the fact his name had been on the ballot in all 50 states just two years before, Lieberman initially led the Democratic field quite handily in almost every national poll.

An ABC News/Washington Post survey in January 2003 found Lieberman leading the Democratic field with 27%. A Gallup poll from that same month also placed him first, ahead of both John Kerry and Richard Gephardt.

A Pew poll in the summer of 2003 also found Lieberman atop the field, as the best-known candidate at 85% name recognition, and 58% support, ahead of Kerry, Gephardt and Howard Dean.

Boy, did we brag about Lieberman’s lead at every stop and in every press release. But in the end, the promising early numbers meant nothing. When actual votes were cast, Lieberman totally flamed out, receiving a measly 8.9% of the vote in the critical first primary in New Hampshire, finishing dead last, and dropping out of the race in February 2004, having lost every primary and caucus up to that point.

Why? A lot of reasons, including mistakes made by the candidate and campaign. But fundamentally because, when Democrats started to take a close look at and assess the full field, they relegated Lieberman to the status of a loser, and they wanted to move on. We heard a lot of, “He had his chance and lost.” Does Harris come to mind?

The fact is, we Democrats tend to put defeated presidential nominees in the rear-view mirror pretty quickly. Think of Michael Dukakis, Gore and Kerry. And let’s not forget, Harris obtaining the nomination in 2024 was a fluke; she didn’t compete in one primary or receive one primary vote. The first time she ran for president, in the 2020 cycle, she also didn’t win one primary or receive a single primary vote, because she ran a bad campaign and hightailed it out of the race before a single vote was cast. Two strikes and you’re out?

We Democrats just don’t renominate losers. The last time we did it was exactly 70 — yes, 70 — years ago, with Adlai Stevenson in 1956 after he had lost the 1952 presidential race to Dwight Eisenhower. Stevenson rewarded Democrats for this recycling effort by losing to Eisenhower a second time — by an even worse margin. Democrats learned their lesson: Reheating doesn’t work with failed candidates.

And, come on, Harris not only lost to Trump, not only lost all seven swing states, but was the first Democratic presidential nominee in 20 years to lose the popular vote. And her weak showing also helped Republicans wrest control of the Senate from Democrats. We’re supposed to imagine that’s a credible record on which to run again for the nomination?

All of these breathless stories about Harris leading the field nationally also never mention her perilous standing in her own home state of California. A Berkeley IGS survey in August revealed that by a margin of 18 percentage points, even her fellow Democrats in California did not want her to run again. A Politico poll this month showed Gov. Gavin Newsom with a 2-to-1 lead in California among voters leaning toward voting in the 2028 Democratic primary.

So have fun, Kamala Harris, enjoying your name-ID high while it lasts (although maybe a mite longer than your 107-day presidential effort).

Garry South is a Democratic strategist who has managed four campaigns for governor of California and played significant roles in three presidential campaigns, including that of Al Gore.