US Sutra | The reinvention of Kamala Harris: Reality or hype?

Aug. 31, 2024, 7:04 a.m.

Read time estimation: 6 minutes.

  2

Following her decisive selection as the Democratic presidential nominee, Vice President Kamala Harris's profile has undoubtedly risen. Her well-crafted and moving acceptance speech, delivered on the final day of the DNC last week, has seemingly energized and re-inspired party members. The speech, directed at ordinary Americans, aimed to portray Harris as a normal, friendly, and approachable person. It successfully humanized her and made her seem relatable, while also presenting a less domineering or aggressive image of the United States to the world.

Her running mate, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, also presents himself as an approachable and friendly, almost fatherly figure, rather than a potential Vice President of the nation. With his background as a school teacher, coach, and military veteran, he complements Harris' appeal among Black, Hispanic, Asian, and other minority communities. The entire Democratic National Convention (DNC) exhibited a strong focus on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). A significant number of women were prominently featured, alongside people of color. LGBTQ+ individuals and other minority groups were also well-represented. Clearly, the DNC showcased a significantly different America compared to the Republican party led by former President Donald Trump and his running mate, Ohio Senator J. D. Vance.

One might even argue that this election is not merely about politics, economics, race, and gender, but also a clash of masculine identities. The Democratic male candidates and their voices seem deliberately chosen from the less traditionally masculine segment of the male population. Some might even perceive them as lacking in traditional masculine qualities. On the other hand, the Republican ticket embraces a return to a more assertive, stereotypical image of the American male.

However, the main point of contention in this election revolves around two contrasting visions of what it means to be American. The Trump-Vance ticket promotes ideas of competency, self-reliance, entrepreneurship, and America's continued global dominance, embodying the 'Make America Great Again' (MAGA) ethos. In contrast, the Harris-Walz campaign advocates for a more socialist approach, emphasizing government intervention, supporting the less fortunate, and prioritizing the well-being of citizens through increased social programs, with the wealthier contributing more to achieve this.

Having listened to Barack Obama's acceptance speech at the 2008 DNC, also held in Chicago, I can't help but draw comparisons. This time, there was an overwhelming enthusiasm for a woman of color on the presidential ticket, whereas in 2008, the focus was on the US's first potential Black president. Nonetheless, I must acknowledge that the Obama moment felt magical, while Harris's return to the spotlight seemed more about hype than substance. The constant repetition of “joy, joy, joy” seemed somewhat artificial considering the hardships faced by ordinary Americans due to rising prices and economic difficulties.

Listening to Harris, I couldn't help but feel that her approach to the economy was deeply flawed and unconvincing. Furthermore, her perspective on the world and America's role in it appeared simplistic to the point of being underwhelming. Overall, her entire performance seemed to prioritize emotions over fundamentals. However, I wondered how far feelings could sway voters.

Outside the DNC, there were protests and incidents of violent street crime. Black Americans and Hispanics, too, expressed discontent with Harris's role and stance on opening America's doors to undocumented immigrants. It is the poorest citizens who face the greatest job insecurity. For instance, in Chicago, African American women were vocal about how undocumented individuals were receiving two years of rent-free accommodation, free food, and even free internet access, while they struggled to make ends meet.

Advertisement One stunning feature of the ongoing fight for the presidency is the extent to which the media is biased in Harris’ favour. All the major networks, led by CNN, seem to be fighting for Harris free of charge — with the sole exception of Fox, which is clear in its support of Trump. In the social media space, the Democrats are much more media savvy. Again, with the sole exception of Elon Musk, who put out an AI-created video of Trump and him jiving to the Bee Gees’ hit, “Staying Alive”.

The attempted assassination of Trump, occurring shortly after his decisive victory over President Joe Biden in their one-on-one debate, had propelled him into a dominant position. However, this advantage has not only been diminished but most polls now indicate Harris holding a slight lead over Trump by an average of 2 points. Registered Democrats significantly outnumber Republicans. Consequently, the outcome of US elections is determined by unregistered and independent voters.

Of course, US pollsters have been proven wrong, as have their counterparts in India. Hillary Clinton held a 12-point lead over Trump in 2016. I witnessed their final debate from a hotel in Manaus, the capital of the Amazonas state in Brazil. It was a surreal experience to be so geographically remote yet so close to history in the making. As we all know, Trump won, defying all predictions.

Will history, after a hiccup, repeat itself?

In the last three US presidential elections, the victories were so narrow that a small number of votes in key swing states and a few thousand votes nationwide determined the outcome. Furthermore, controversies surrounding allegations of election fraud, voter ID requirements, non-citizen voting, foreign interference, and other accusations have cast a shadow over the ongoing presidential race.

Who will emerge victorious in November? With less than 60 days remaining, this question is at the forefront of everyone's minds. However, one thing is clear: this will be a closely contested and decisive election, one of the most significant in US history.

The author is a writer and commentator. Opinions expressed in this article are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost's views.