Are Kamala Harris and the Democrats Making the Right Choice?

In the ongoing saga of the 2020 U.S. Presidential election, the selection of Kamala Harris as the Democratic nominee has sparked significant debate and controversy. Critics question whether she is truly the best candidate that the party has to offer, while others defend her candidacy, emphasizing her legislative experience and qualifications. This essay aims to uncover the reasoning behind Harris' nomination and explore the broader implications for the Democratic Party.

Why Kamala Harris?

Supporters of Kamala Harris argue that she was the most strategically sound choice for the Democratic Party. With a background in law and political experience, Harris brings an invaluable combination of skills that aligns with the Democrats' agenda. Her double-barrel approach as both a former U.S. senator and California’s attorney general allows her to speak with authority on issues ranging from criminal justice reform to international diplomacy.

Challenging the Conventional Wisdom

Critics, however, challenge the assumption that Harris is the best candidate, pointing to her controversial past and moral weaknesses. An allegation that Harris accepted the district attorney position in San Francisco in exchange for suppressing evidence, including cases involving pedophiles, has cast a shadow over her character. Some critics claim that Harris has no moral compass and has betrayed her ethical duties, which could be a concerning sign for constituents expecting a leader with strong ethical standards.

Spiritual and Family Allegations

Other critics, including some on the far right, allege that Harris is the descendant of modern-day slave owners, linking her family's past to the Democratic Party's foundation. While these claims are difficult to substantiate, they highlight the deep-seated concerns harbored by some segments of the electorate about the values and principles that the Democratic party stands for.

Balancing Complexities in Governance

The complexity of modern governance is another factor that explains the Democratic Party's choice of Harris. The era of Trump has made it evident that the U.S. requires leadership that can handle complex domestic and international challenges. In this context, Harris’ experience in both the U.S. Senate and the Attorney General’s office makes her a capable leader. While Truman and Reagan were unexpected picks, their subsequent success suggests that the Democratic Party may have made a shrewd choice in Harris.

Voter Disillusionment and Future Consequences

Despite the strategic rationale behind her nomination, Harris’ likability remains a point of contention. Some argue that the party leadership’s choice was driven by a need for a compromise candidate after Biden's debate performance. This decision inadvertently sidelined a broader conversation about the preferences of the ordinary Democratic voter, many of whom may have favored someone more likable or skilled in politics.

As the election approaches, the choice of Kamala Harris could play a pivotal role. Her detractors fear that her unlikability and perceived moral failings could lead to a significant shift in voter support, potentially costing the Democrats the presidency. Conversely, her supporters maintain that Harris is a far better alternative to the highly controversial and legally questionable Trump.

Ultimately, the question remains: was the choice of Kamala Harris the best the Democratic Party could do? While the answer may not be straightforward, it is clear that the political landscape and the complexities of modern governance have played a significant role in shaping the Democratic Party's decision.