‘Kamala Harris for president 2028.’ Sure, why not? Why not keep banging your head against that brick wall?

I alluded to this in today’s Morning Jolt, but we should do some more scoffing at Politico’s report that Kamala Harris is “instructing advisers and allies to keep her options open — whether for a possible 2028 presidential run, or even to run for governor in her home state of California in two years.”

Why?

Why should Californians entrust her with the governorship when she hasn’t even lived in the state for the past four years? Why should the seven declared candidates and other potential candidates stand aside, because Harris thinks she deserves the governor’s mansion as a consolation prize? Just how closely has Harris followed issues and developments in her home state? Right before the election, she refused to say how she voted on a referendum on criminal penalties.

As for the notion of “Harris 2028” . . . what advantage would Harris have four years from now that she didn’t have this time around? This cycle, she had a cleared field, a billion dollars, and about a month and a half of gushing media coverage focusing on “joy” and coconut tree memes. Harris underperformed among just about every demographic against a rival the Democrats had spent about nine years painting as the devil incarnate. She went 0-for-7 among swing states. Why should Democrats believe that she’ll be a better candidate four years from now than she was this cycle?

Will Harris finally think of something she would have done differently than Biden?

Maybe you can argue that four years from how, Harris will have shed the baggage of Joe Biden and his administration. And yes, there won’t be an incumbent president. We don’t know who the Republican nominee is but there’s a good chance it will be Vice President–elect J. D. Vance. It’s conceivable that by 2027 and 2028, Americans will be tired of Trump and Republican rule. But that would just make them eager to elect a Democrat, not necessarily eager to see Harris in the Oval Office.

And while I think racism and sexism make all-too-convenient scapegoats for a candidate who always had glaring flaws, particularly when speaking off the cuff, if Democrats genuinely believe America is too sexist and too racist to elect a black-Indian woman . . . why would they renominate Harris?