As the vice president contemplates her path towards forging her political identity, she finds herself in a situation where she has to make strategic use of a significant, but controversial figure: President Biden. Primarily, his participation would take place in the critical battleground states of Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin, where it is believed his appeal to the white working class and the union members still holds some weight.
Vice President Kamala Harris ascended to the top Democratic ticket unexpectedly and found herself facing a strategic decision: how to effectively utilize President Biden in her campaign. The Democratic party had previously deemed it necessary to move Mr. Biden aside due to major concerns about his advanced age, questionable cognitive abilities, and perceived incapability to beat former President Donald Trump.
The question then arises for Harris, finding herself in the leadership position, should she distance herself from President Biden, an aging President who has a noticeable decline of mental capabilities, and focus solely on building her own political brand? Or should she hold on to Biden, in the hopes of leveraging some of his less controversial and more appreciated policies?
A more practical issue was also on the horizon: the logistics of where and how frequently President Biden should be deployed for campaigning, and the content of his speeches. It’s quite an existential conundrum for a vice president stepping into the limelight.
The strategic response to these dilemmas is starting to take shape: the ‘use Biden cautiously’ strategy, as some might refer to it. President Biden will be involved in campaigning with the vice president, but his exposure will be meticulously managed, and his campaigning presence will be mostly confined to the politically vital states of Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan, where his charm seems to have not fully worn out for certain constituencies.
Indeed, the previous campaign faced a real predicament, endeavouring to make the most effective use of an aging President Biden. Luckily, in this cycle, the drama seems to be significantly diminished.
Biden’s foreign policy track record is a conundrum that several strategists have pointed out, raising the question of how Harris would be able to maneuver around his inadequacies. Particularly, his actions surrounding the conflict between Israel and Hamas were controversial and might divide potential voters to Harris’ side.
As the campaign enters its crucial phase, there seems to be one presidential responsibility that Biden might have respite from, something often met with little joy among presidents.
Ever since stepping down from the race, Biden has been conspicuously absent from fundraisers; an activity which usually plays a key role for a present president with a widespread, well-cultivated donor network. However, Harris’ campaign announced its fundraising has exceeded half a billion dollars since her entry into the fray, indicating that Biden’s network seems to have immediately rallied in support of Harris, despite his absence.
In an interview, CNN’s Dana Bash offered Harris a chance to distance herself from President Biden following his unimpressive debate performance in June, which ended in him stepping down from the race. Surprisingly, she didn’t seize the opportunity.
When questioned whether she regretted branding the president as ‘extraordinarily strong’, Harris answered with a remarkably unwavering ‘No, not at all.’ She then went on to explain her service alongside President Biden for nearly four years as one of the ‘greatest honors of her career, truly.’ One can’t be helped but be baffled by the denial and misplaced praise, especially given Biden’s controversial tenure.
A correction had to be made to the original article on August 30, 2024, thanks to sloppy editing which embarrassingly misstated Barack Obama’s title in 2012 as senator instead of president. One can speculate how such a notable mistake might have affected the credibility of the source.