OPINION:
For many Americans, at least from a psychological standpoint, Joe Biden could have selected a lame, deaf horse as vice-presidential running mate and they would still, with all the gusto in the world, pull the lever for his nomination. So fervent, it appears, is the anti-Trump mania on the left that anyone — anyone! — will do. Long gone (or, at least a few months gone) is any principled concern about running mates and their devotion to The Cause.
And so, on Wednesday, the internal monologue of many liberals would have been a joy to listen in on. “For the love of God, we just need to get the orange man out of the Oval Office. Sen. Kamala Harris will do just fine. She was a cop — great! We love law and order. And we wanted her all along. Bernie and Warren who?”
This all or nothing, zero sum political calculation that anyone but Trump will do is one way of looking at things. It has its virtues. Namely, it’s an uncomplicated way of navigating a complex political landscape. Displace the incumbent and all will be well in the land. Poof, bye-bye coronavirus. Good riddance rioters. Hello rebounding stock market. At least this is what much of the media tells us will immediately happen.
But here is a different, more nuanced way of viewing Sen. Harris’ elevation to the number two spot in the free world.
If Joe Biden is elected president, he will, on Inauguration Day, be the oldest person — at 78 — to make it to the White House. If even a fraction of the murmurs — and increasingly videotaped evidence — of his cognitive decline is true, there is a non-trivial chance an erstwhile California senator and attorney general will take over the presidency.
Put another way, when you go to vote in November, it’s not Joe Biden you should be thinking of as President Trump’s replacement, but Kamala Harris. So, ask yourself, what do you know about her foreign policy approach? Is China a friend or foe in her eyes? Where is she on the right to life? On one’s right to bear arms? Does she lean toward the progressive, increasingly revolutionary side of the Democratic Party or is she simply a corporatist, happy to jump as high as big business asks? Does she even have principles in the first place or is she etch-a-sketch?
It turns out, thanks to vetting involved during her failed primary campaign, we do know a few things about her governing sensibilities and that’s perhaps more valuable than where she purports to stand on any given issue.
What we know about her is not happy news. As Kevin D. Williamson summarized recently in National Review, the name of the game for Ms. Harris, honed during her time as a state attorney general, is “authoritarianism.” Take the following from Mr. Williamson:
“American prosecutors wield awesome and terrible powers that lend themselves easily to abuse, and Senator Kamala Harris, formerly the attorney general of California, is an enthusiastic abuser of them. Harris was a leader in the junta of Democratic state attorneys general that attempted to criminalize dissent in the matter of global warming, using her office’s investigatory powers to target and harass non-profit policy groups She demanded private information that the organizations were not legally obliged to disclose, including financial information and donor lists, in order to be able to subject the supporters of right-leaning groups to legal and financial harassment.”
Conservatives have been down this road before. We know how it ends.
The Harris mentality is what voters, especially wavering Republicans, should understand they are signing up for if Joe Biden is elected. Because, like the George W. Bush White House, it won’t be Mr. Biden running the show, but his vice president. And to go one step further, do not forget that Ms. Harris was championed by Barack Obama and Co. during the veep sweepstakes. She owes her success with Mr. Biden almost entirely to the Obama camp. And this means, perhaps, that we won’t get a Biden White House or even a Harris White House, but a third Obama presidency.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.