107 Days, the greatest lie it put forward, and a great issue for the Democrats, Anti-Semitism.
Last month former Vice President Kamila Harris published her book, 107 Days, on her 2024 campaign. I will not pay for it but I may check it out of the library. I read the propaganda of my country’s enemies. A form of the wisdom of Don Vito Colorone, “Keep your friends close, but your enemies closer.” One point covered ad nauseum by the 4th estate was her decision on a running mate.
Honestly, Harris was a very weak candidate. In two election cycles, she never won one state primary. There was no groundswell of support for her in the Democratic base or leadership (See JEB!). There were calls for Joe Biden to dump her from the 2024 ticket. That would never happen, as the racist Dems would mutiny at her being removed.
Give the devil her due, Ms. Harris was dealt a very weak hand. Presidential campaigns are multiyear endeavors (see What It Takes by Richard Ben Cramer). One of the advantages is a campaign strengthens you. The effort, the discipline, the grind, all make you better (iron sharpens iron). You can bring opponents onto your team (see JD Vance and Ted Cruz with Donald Trump) and consolidate other support (e.g., fundraising). It also gives you time to adjust your campaign as needed (see Reagan 1980, Clinton 1992 or Trump 2016). That is not done in just over three months.
Again, Ms. Harris was dealt a weak hand and played with a very big pot. With a billion dollars raised almost instantly, a capable, experienced and disciplined staff could use these resources well. They did not. Classic example of using over 100 thousand dollars to change an interview studio. A nerd and twenty bucks could have handled it better. Countless other issues showed how unprepared she was for the arena. The classic example was her decision for running mate.
From her book, the choice boiled down to four men. Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro, former Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg, Arizona Senator Mark Kelley and Minnesota Governor Tim Waltz of. Normally this is where the writer says, “each has their own strengths and limitations,” but that cliche does not apply here. Remember, the running mate must bring something the candidate needs (e.g., a swing state, a certain demographic). Two of four men have none of that.
Secretary Buttigieg was the mayor of a medium sized city and did not distinguish himself while in office. After an unremarkable presidential run (being the first openly gay man doesn’t impress me), Joe O’Biden gave him a consolation prize in a minor cabinet position. By all accounts he was a failure there (supply chain issues, no move to update our antiquated air traffic control system, a disastrous installation of EV chargers funded by the Inflation Production Act). But, he was a gay man, and that will aways get coastal money flowing.
Tim Walz? Enough said. Ann Coulter first called then Vice President Joe Biden assignation insurance for Barrack Obama. Harris served that same role for Biden. This was Walz’s only useful purpose. One would think she’d select a running mate who could bring in a swing state. Minnesota has not voted Republican since Nixon in 1972, and there was little hope it would go for Trump (Harris/Walz won by 4.5%).
Senator Kelley does have strengths. He’s a popular senator, from a swing state, and has some credit on issues (e.g., the border, which Harris total screwed up). However, reportedly Kelley was part of the palace coup that took out Biden, and that would be too great an issue. Next.
Governor Josh Shapiro. A very popular governor of a battleground state Harris desperately needed for any chance of election. More than anything, he fills her greatest personal weakness, gravitas. No one, even those who differ with him on the issues questions he could step in as president. Without question, he is that man who fills all her voids. Except for the elephant in the room.
Governor Shapiro is Jewish and in her book Ms. Harris says, “There would be issues with the growing support of Palestinians in her party.” No the issue is not “Palestinian support,” it’s Anti-Semitism.
For decades support for Israel was a third rail, especially in the upper Northeast, where Jewish donors write big checks. The GOP has generally supported Israel, but Jews in the US support Democrats (that’s another post for another day). However, as the radical wing of the party (AOC, Rashida Tlaib, Ilhan Omar, Ayanna Pressley) gains control, they have not restrained their open hostility for Israel. Or Jews.
Reportedly Ms. Harris called “Buttigieg her ‘ideal candidate,’ but asking America to accept an openly gay man along with a multi racial woman at the top was ‘too much.’” No, putting an incompetent political hack next to you is the issue. If Harris selected Shapiro, she would have (to paraphrase Al Hunt) “Needed a ten and picked an eleven.” She ended up picking a one (I’ll give Walz credit for having a pulse).
This is not brain surgery. The Kennedy’s selected Lyndon Johnson because he could bring in Texas and, as the Don said, they wanted to “Keep their enemies closer.” Looking at her staff, I don’t see many big names in the Harris campaign upper tiers. If she would have an adult in the room to say, “Shapiro is your best selection, his religion is not that big an issue…” the election may have been more competitive. Thankfully her hubris (Feel the joy!) is almost as strong as Mrs. Bill Clinton.
Ms. Harris’s incompetence saved us from another radical in 2024. Hopefully the Democratics spend forty years in the desert purging themselves of their growing Anti-American/Anti-Sematic wing and leave America alone to grow and prosper. If Ms. Harris (and Mrs. Clinton) are examples of their best, they will be spending a long time on the outside, where they belong.
Michael A. Thiac is a retired Army intelligence officer, with over 23 years experience, including serving in the Republic of Korea, Japan, and the Middle East. He is also a retired police patrol sergeant, with over 22 years’ service, and over ten year’s experience in field training of newly assigned officers. He has been published at The American Thinker, PoliceOne.com, and on his personal blog, A Cop’s Watch.
Opinions expressed are his alone and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of current or former employers.
If you enjoyed this article, then please REPOST or SHARE with others; encourage them to follow AFNN. If you’d like to become a citizen contributor for AFNN, contact us at managingeditor@afnn.us Help keep us ad-free by donating here.
Substack: American Free News Network Substack
Truth Social: @AFNN_USA
Facebook: https://m.facebook.com/afnnusa
Telegram: https://t.me/joinchat/2_-GAzcXmIRjODNh
Twitter: https://twitter.com/AfnnUsa
GETTR: https://gettr.com/user/AFNN_USA
CloutHub: @AFNN_USA
Mr Thiac wrote:
The same thing made it mandatory that she be the presidential nominee when President Biden dropped out; the Dems could never dump a black female Vice President.
Other than George Bush in 1988, who was running against a total doofus, the last sitting Vice President to win the presidential election was Martin Van Buren in 1836; Vice Presidents just don’t do all that well, because they’ve personally accomplished little, and Americans love to switch party control of the White House when there is no non-incumbent running. Had President Biden resigned the office as well as the nomination, well who knows how President Kamala Harris Emhoff would have fared against former President Donald Trump?
Agreed, veeps have issues running on their own. If the administration they are tied to is unpopular, the opposition ties him to it. If the administration is popular (Bush 88), the opposition calls you a lapdog.
No question if the Democrats had an actual nomination fight it might have produced a more capable candidate (I double Harris would have stood on her own, she is pathetic). Something I didn’t put in this article (thought it was getting off the point) is reviewing the lead candidates on both sides. IMHO, the heir apparent is Vance, but DeSantis and Cruz round up the top three. The Dims leaders are likely Gruesome Newsom, Buttigieg, Shapiro and Pritzker. I really don’t see them appealing to a broad spectrum of the populace like Clinton in 1992 (maybe Shapiro). Then again three years is a long time.
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/5256736-2028-democratic-contenders-rankings/
If Vice President Vance is our nominee in 2028, he’ll lose unless the Democrats nominate a truly awful candidate — which is always possible — but if President J D Vance is our nominee, he’ll have a much better chance.
President Trump certainly seems vigorous and alert, but he’ll also be 82 in 2028, and he’s obese and eats pure junk, As President, he gets the best health care in the world, but he really needs to take better care of himself.