In what can be viewed as a desperate statement, former Kamala Harris communications director, Jamal Simmons, recently threw around the suggestion that the only realistic shot Harris has at taking the mantle of president in 2024 is if Joe Biden resigns. This recommendation took place amidst a discussion on CNN’s ‘State of the Union’ when tactics for the remaining 71 days leading to President-elect Trump’s inauguration were being considered. Panelists Scott Jennings, Ashley Allison and Brad Todd were primarily focusing on pressing international matters such as the release of Israeli hostages in Gaza or Trump’s potential strategies in administration set-up. However, Simmons had a different, perplexing course of action for the Democratic party at hand.
Suggesting a shocking departure for Biden, Simmons confidently declared that the current president could vacate White House within the upcoming 30 days, thus affording opportunity for Kamala Harris to take over. He crafted a depiction of Biden’s tenure that dares one to question reality, crediting him as an ‘exceptional’ President who has allegedly fulfilled numerous promises, bar one– that of being a ‘transitional figure’. There appears to be little logical indication of Biden considering abdication prior to his term end, making Simmons’ proposition seem more like wishful thinking than a calculated strategy.
Speaking strategically, Simmons’ proposition seemed grounded in preemptively saving Kamala Harris from the humbling political spectacle that would be a decisive defeat in the presidential race when certified in Senate. He believed this sudden shift would stun the news cycle at a time when the Democrats are struggling to captivate public attention. Given the Vice President’s role as the Senate president during the Congress-certified presidential election results, this theory held some tactical merit from his perspective.
Simmons further argued that this drastic change would provide an opportunity to transform the foundational approach of the Democratic party. But despite his best efforts, the panel was far from convinced about this seeming pipe dream. Jennings, formerly an assistant to ex-President Bush, wittily suggested that Simmons might be thinking more in terms of scripting a political drama series than offering a viable plan of action.
The consensus seems to be that such an unprecedented move is an unlikely eventuality and largely appears to be mere conjecture conjured by Simmons. Continuing in his fantastical vein, Simmons remarked confidently that Biden exerting his control in this manner would fulfill his alleged promise of being a transitional president. The resultant situation would place Kamala Harris, whether ready or not, in the position to potentially become the 47th President of the United States of America.
Simmons couldn’t resist adding another illogical supposition, suggesting that such an abrupt change in leaders would severely disrupt all of Donald Trump’s momentum, especially concerning his widely popular merchandise branded with ’47’. Apparently, the rebranding everything necessity would cause enough turmoil to tip the scales. This conclusion seemed more rooted in conjecture than productive strategy, once again leading Simmons to sound like a scriptwriter for a convoluted political drama than a seasoned strategist.
In hindsight, Jamal Simmons’ Sunday discourse seems like a dramatic departure from the realm of genuine strategizing and into the world of political fantasy. Even when considering the possibility of Biden possibly quitting his presidency in the upcoming 30 days, it raises a Macbethian prophecy that may only stand to benefit Kamala Harris. His assertion about Biden being an exemplary president hits a jarring note of discord when considering the inadequacies and failures of the administration.
Simmons’ anticipation of Harris standing to gain from Biden’s potential abdication may rest on the crust of political manipulation rather than solid, effective strategizing. His thesis of saving Harris from witnessing her defeat during the presidential election certification in the Senate might grab onto attention-seeking machinations more than a well-thought-out plan. Our political discourse surely deserves a more reality-checked compass.
Simmons’ rabbit-out-of-the-hat idea of transforming the foundational approach of the Democratic party by simply changing the presidential figure could do more damage than good to the party’s credibility. If Simmons’ scenario were to play out and Biden did step down prematurely, it wouldn’t facilitate a smooth Harris ascendancy but a potential leadership crisis. Perhaps Simmons’ suggestion does not carry the gravitas expected from former administration members.
Jennings’ quip associating Simmons’ theory with a dramatic political show plot might do a fair job at capturing the absurdity at hand. This eventuality of Biden resigning from the presidency seems far-fetched, even by the standards of political surprises. Such a strategy seems minimized in practical effectiveness and maximized in fanning the flames of political confusion and unpredictability.
Any experienced political strategist would likely balk at the idea of Biden, potentially, stepping down as president to fulfill his ‘promise’ of being a transitional president. It seems like an unnecessarily convoluted measure to ease Harris into the presidency. A party success should never hinge on such whimsical tactics. It further reiterates the desperate need the Democrats have for grounded, coherent, and effective tactics.
Lastly, the claim of a Biden resignation disrupting Donald Trump’s ‘paraphernalia’ comes across as a feeble attempt to interject turbulence in a perfectly functioning campaign. Trump’s ’47’ branded merchandise merely stands testament to the popularity he enjoys, and can any strategizing truly sway those who have made their choice clear? It simply reiterates that the Democrats’ desperation seems to be clouding their objectivity.
In conclusion, while Jamal Simmons’ scenario might fare well in a suspenseful Netflix series, it is doomed to fall flat in the unscripted theater of real-time politics. The supposed proposal of Biden stepping down, to let Harris slide into the presidency, is nothing more than an airing of desperate wishes opposed to grounded strategy. Despairing at the potential of Harris facing defeat against the backdrop of a presidential race certification in the Senate may be evidence of a gross miscalculation from the Democratic camp.
Although Simmons’ attempt to present a novel strategy may have captured some momentary attention, it seems to lack the anchoring in solid political reality that would render it a truly compelling course of action. It would behoove the Democrats to come up with a strategy that has more substance and less drama. This entire discussion raises important questions about the state and future of the Democratic party’s political strategizing if such far-fetched theorizing is the best they can come up with.