July 18, 2019--Wither Kamala Harris?

It began so auspiciously. Kamala Harris's campaign for the Democratic nomination. 

20,000 turned out in Oakland for her announcement ceremony. Millions in cash and pledges poured in with promises of more to come. Hollywood gazillionaires have deep pockets.

Then there was The Debate. She took frontrunner Joe Biden down in a preemptive strike by attacking him face-to-face on the most vaunted part of his legacy--his record of support for civil rights. 

Harris knew that Biden's core constituents are African Americans, especially African-American women, and unless she could attract some to support her candidacy it was doomed. So she went after him. Almost calling him a racist by saying she didn't think he was a racist. She just let that hang in the air. And it seemed to work.

For a week after the debate things were looking good for her. No matter that she slammed Biden for his position on court-ordered school bussing, which though designed to reduce segregation all evidence shows was a disaster for blacks as well as whites. Schools were no more integrated and neighborhoods were shredded by White Flight though some individuals such as bussed second-grader Kamala, by her account, benefited.

Harris's poll numbers rose five to 10 points while Biden's plummeted by similar amounts.

But then something seemingly surprising happened--her campaign appeared to stall. She began to slip in the polls and contributions to her campaign went from flow to trickle. 

And on Monday of this week an NBC/Wall Street Journal poll showed Harris slipping to fourth place in head-to-head competition with Trump, trailing still frontrunner Biden (who led Trump by nine points) by eight points, trailing second-place Sanders by six points, and third place Warren by five.

Well within the margin of error, unlike the other three who did well in the poll, Harris led Trump by just one percentage point.

None of this is good news for Harris.

What happened?

I suspect over time underlying race and gender issues are coming into fuller play.

Too many Democratic voters were turned off by the overly-aggressive way in which Harris raked Biden over the coals. She was perceived to be more angry than assertive. It was too much a beatdown than a disagreement about ideas and policies. And too many women as well as men, white as well as black, think of this as you will, felt she was acting in an emasculating manner. Instead of confronting his political history she was attacking his manhood.

Biden came away from the confrontation looking like a punished child.

As I did, on YouTube replay the confrontation to see if she crossed some of these tripwire lines. 

We should probably be beyond these kinds of reactions in our public discourse. But sadly we aren't and it may be costing Kamala Harris a potential path to the nomination. We are not yet that enlightened to be OK with a black women taking down a 70-plus year-old white man. We still have a long way to go.

July 13, 2016--Trump's VEEP

Even after the FBI director essentially indicted Hillary Clinton, according to yesterday's NBC tracking poll, she still leads Donald Trump by three percentage points. Though this is within the margin of effort, Clinton remains in the lead. And a lead is a lead.

With the GOP convention only five days away, to overtake Clinton, Trump needs to do at least three things--

The convention itself needs to be engaging, even entertaining since so much of what got Trump here in the first place was, how else to put it, amusing. Even his frequent but unpredictable gaffs.

Then he has to deliver a vice presidential candidate who is relatively uncontroversial--which should rule out Chris Christie (Bridgegate) and Newt Gingrich (forced to resign the House speakership). Trump needs a VEEP who has gravitas, knows the world, and could credibly step into the presidency if Trump is in one way or the other unable to serve.

Third, equally important, he has to stop being a jerk.

This latter requirement will likely prove to be most difficult because just by not inviting Clint Eastwood to speak to a stool will assure he has a better convention than Mitt Romney. And almost any VP candidate, compared to Trump, will add seriousness to the ticket.

But a jerk he will likely still continue to be.

In regard to his vice president, without Christie and Gingrich, the consensus seems to be swinging toward Mike Pence, the governor of Indiana.

He has the right kind of congressional and gubernatorial experience to fill in some of those gaps for Trump, but he is unknown and so boooooring.

This has some advantages considering that Trump now might benefit politically by being a bit more boring--to demonstrate that he is not devoid of gravitas--but Pence would not bring any sizzle to the ticket. And some sizzle, some energy could be useful as Trump's act begins to feel stale.

With Jack at the Bristol Diner, like us a liberal, we discussed Trump's VEEP conundrum, made much more challenging because of his alienating so many senior Republicans. To the point that every day one or another announces he or she will not attend the convention or vote for him.

Of course, with the GOP and Trump's base having the Bushes stand him up and hint they will not be voting for him, this alone to many on the right is encouragement enough to firm up their decision to vote for him.

But this election, like most, will be determined by the five-to-10 percent who are truly independent and undecided. What Trump VEEP would appeal to them?

"Easy," I said, "Condi Rice." Feeling proud of myself for this long-shot prediction, I looked from Jack to Rona.

"She'd never agree to it," Jack said, "The Bushes would never talk to her again."

"The Bushes are finished," Rona said. "Who cares if they won't talk with her?"

"Doesn't she feel any loyalty to them?" Jack said.

"Look, she thought seriously about running for the GOP nomination in 2008 and Jeb had his eye on that. There's loyalist and then there's ambition."

"What does that mean?" I wondered, thinking further about what Jack had said.

"She's only 61," Rona pressed on, "Prime time for anyone who wants to be president. At the moment she's on the faculty of Stanford and on a few corporate boards and after being George W. Bush's National Security Council advisor and then his Secretary of State, life must feel boring to her."

"She could help continue to fight the wars that Bush and his team started."

"She's actually less hawkish than Hillary," I said.

"And if she agreed to do this for the party," Jack said, getting into the possibility, "it would help line up support for her for 2020 if they lose or for that matter if they win and Trump gets bored after one term and decides not to run for reelection."

"Of course," Rona said, "there are the obvious demographics she would bring to the ticket."

"Another thing that would appeal to Trump is that she's a football fanatic and loves golf."

"She's one of only two female members of the Augusta National course. She might even be able to sneak Trump in for a round or two. For certain he's not a member. They wouldn't have him even if he somehow managed to become president."

"I like it," Jack said, "I don't mean I like it enough to vote for them, but from an excitement, gravitas and political junky perspective, it would be a home run."

"And satisfy Trump's and the public's desire to shake things up," I said, rising to my own idea, "To do the unexpected since the same-old-same-old isn't getting the job done."

"Maybe it's making things worse," Rona said.

"I still think it's a long shot. But it's fun to speculate."

"It could prove to be an interesting week."

"He'll probably go for Pence," Rona said, sounding glum.