Kamala Harris frequently relies on a certain rhetorical question to steer her team’s focus in the beginning of substantial assignments – ‘what triumph are we aiming to achieve here?’ However, the worthwhile implication of this query remains yet to be seen. Remarkably, for the most crucial speech of her career, Harris has reportedly outlined her three-pronged approach: to narrate her personal history, frame her competition with Donald Trump as past versus future, and unexpectedly claim the mantle of patriotism. But, it seems like she is trying to rewrite the narrative to suit her political ambition.
Since becoming a presidential candidate, Harris was quick to define her speech at the convention and any forthcoming debates as the decisive turning points of her campaign. But beneath the contrived surface, the planning for this speech has been ongoing for far longer. Initial drafts of her convention speech began circulating when Harris was merely dreaming of extending her vice presidential term. The speech aims to not only present her life journey but also, quite manipulatively, to establish her as a future-centric leader as opposed to Trump’s past-rooted policies.
With the 75-day countdown to the election having begun, Harris is set to take the stage and confront Trump, attempting to leave her imprint on the national consciousness. Her journey to the top of the Democratic party has been abrupt and controversial, however, this opportunity will arguably be her biggest yet. The efforts put into formulating the contents of her speech and the method of its delivery have been extensive, underlining the seriousness with which this event is being approached.
Adam Frankel, a one-time penman for ex-President Barack Obama and a present advisor to Harris, has been entrusted with the hefty responsibility of being the main writer of the convention address. Yet, it’s been stressed that Harris has held intense workshops the speech herself, demonstrating her insistence on controlling every aspect. The extent of her preparation has led to rehearsals taking place across time zones in different locations including the Park Hyatt hotel in Chicago, Howard University in Washington and a trip to Arizona.
Perceiving the significant weight this occasion holds, Cedric Richmond, a Harris adviser, has commented on her understanding of the importance of the situation. However, it’s arguable whether this understanding has led to over-preparation and obsession over the smaller details. The crux of the speech, as gathered from campaign insiders who wished to remain anonymous, is reported to be the narration of Harris’ life story.
Harris is expected to detail her own middle-class upbringing in an attempt to connect with the struggles of the American middle class. She also plans to showcase her career trajectory that began with her as a prosecutor, eventually landing her the post of the attorney general of California. Yet, her insistence to be seen as a champion of the middle class fails to mirror the policies she endorses.
In what seems like a futile attempt to create a stark contrast between herself and Donald Trump, Harris’ speech will reportedly highlight the race as one of future versus past. She will try to promise a brighter new chapter for Americans while portraying Trump’s agenda and Project 2025 as dire threats. This, however, appears more as a desperate maneuver to scare the public into voting against Trump, rather than advocating for herself.
The speech also seeks to establish a sense of patriotism in a deceptive bid to appeal to the nation. ‘U.S.A.’ signs were distributed among delegates throughout the week, with Harris planning to position herself as the ideal presidential choice for all American citizens. The intent to seemingly twist patriotism into a tool of manipulation doesn’t exude genuine noble domestic feeling but rather reflects the artifice of the campaign.
Throughout the convention, Harris’ relatively humble beginnings have been highlighted repeatedly. Various speakers compared her early experiences, juxtaposing her McDonald’s job with Trump’s inherited wealth. Yet, this argument neglects the fact that Trump managed to expand his inherited fortune through his strategic genius, while Harris had to rely on political maneuvering to climb up the ladder.
The noteworthy strength of Harris, according to Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, is her understanding of middle-class requirements since she belongs to the same class. Values of the middle class have been cited as the primary determiner of a president who genuinely appreciates the middle class. However, the credibility of this line of thought is questionable, considering Harris’ dubious shift from a more progressive stance during her 2020 presidential run to a more conservative outlook, seemingly in a bid to secure votes.
One of the striking aspects of Harris’ campaign thus far is the rolling out of her distinct economic agenda, apparently separate from Biden. The focus is on key issues such as housing and groceries. This strategic move seems more like a desperate attempt to make the American people believe that she understands their struggles and offers a solution, rather than a genuine concern for their wellbeing.
In her short tenure as a candidate, Harris has managed to create a regular speech that triggers enthusiastic responses from her supporters. They eagerly echo her slogan, ‘we’re not going back’, and relish her quip tying her prosecutorial past with Trump, ‘I know his type’. However, these are likely to be welcomed only by the Democratic crowd, as Harris hasn’t established a widereach that cuts across party lines.
While the expected audience at the convention will largely comprise Democratic voters, Harris endeavours to appeal to a wider electorate, including non-partisan voters and open-minded Republicans through televised addresses. This is proving to be a precarious balancing act for Harris as she is simultaneously presenting herself as a fresh, innovative leader while serving under the Biden administration.
Another dimension of her strategy is counteracting the Trump campaign’s depiction of her as dangerously liberal. After assuming more radical stances early in her 2020 presidential bid, she’s retreating from them, possibly due to political convenience. These seemingly contradictory positions place immense doubt on her authenticity and political reliability, raising questions on whether she can truly champion the causes she is supposed to represent.
Known more commonly for her biting interrogative style in the Senate than compelling speeches, Harris arguably doesn’t exude the charisma needed to captivate audiences. Some close aides believe she’s been underestimated in this regard. Nathan Barankin, her ex-chief of staff in the Senate, claims her content and delivery shine when she’s genuinely involved in crafting her speeches instead of parroting words written by others.
Nonetheless, her ability to deliver a potent and persuasive speech appears to be a point of contention. With her switching between being radically progressive and subtly conservative, attempting to portray herself as a champion for all Americans and fiercely ambitious in her race against Trump, Harris is expected to use this speech to clear the confusion. But whether she’ll manage to resonate with the broader public and secure their support remains to be seen.