Kamala Harris, former vice president and 2024 White House frontrunner, starred in a viral montage revealing terrifying implications of a potential second term for Donald Trump. This montage, widely shared on TikTok in February 2025, was beamed straight from Harris’ ineffective campaign. She attempted to shrill about Trump’s plans causing price increases and the alleged dismantling of the Department of Education under Project 2025, a misunderstood initiative.
In an ill-fated October 2024 interview, Harris was informed of Trump’s denial of any link to Project 2025. Predictably, Harris retorted with the usual rhetoric, ‘He says everything’s not true.’ Harris’ campaign further propagated fearmongering narratives such as the flimsy allegation of Trump ‘wanting to eliminate the Department of Education.’ It’s almost laughable when you consider that she was trying to exploit the Education Secretary, Linda McMahon’s, reasoned advocacy for streamlining the department.
Additionally, Harris seized on a misleading email from March that ambiguously instructed the closure of several department offices throughout the US. The attempts to sow mistrust were crystal clear, but perhaps even more questionable was Harris’ claim of Trump’s plans inflicting harmful cuts on Medicaid. Such hollow scare tactics surely lost its appeal as it’s obvious that governments need to adopt cost-cutting measures in various domains to maintain national budgets.
Back in March, the Congressional Budget Office predicted that Republican promises couldn’t be held up without slicing billions from governmental health programs. Unsurprisingly, a Democratic budget analyst warned, ‘This is an instruction to take health coverage away from people.’ However, it should be noted that managing budgets is a difficult task, requiring tough decisions rather than false promises.
Throughout his 2024 presidential campaign, Trump sharply declined to adhere to the conservative blueprint for governance. This only highlights the absurdity of the claims made by Harris and her camp, linking Trump directly to Project 2025. He even nominated Russell Vought, a known associate of the project’s authors, to the position of director for the Office of Management and Budget in November 2024 – another instance of Trump breaking the usual conservative molds.
A report released in January highlighted that earlier actions of Trump’s presidency mirrored aspects of Project 2025, including implementing comprehensive deregulation measures and stern immigration reform. Though critics harp about it, such decisive leadership contrasts starkly with Harris’ leadership or lack thereof. In fact, insiders within the Democratic Party likened Harris’ political maneuvering to a game of ‘Where’s Waldo?’ insinuating a lack of initiative.
Harris was evidently ‘MIA’ (missing in action), as numerous sources claimed, a detail that once again brings into question her leadership. Apparently, Harris’ leadership style—or absence of it—didn’t seem in tune with global requirements or the momentum of the modern world. The expressing of frustration with Harris became an all-too-familiar sentiment inside and outside the party. Context is necessary here, remembering this is a candidate the party had sunk $2 billion into promoting.
One of the Democratic insiders stressed their discontent saying, ‘She’s MIA.’ Further amplifying their exasperation, the insider pointed out, ‘The person you just spent $2 billion on trying to elect? I’m glad she’s having a good time going to a musical and being repped by CAA.’ The lack of commitment and decisive action had always been Harris’ Achilles heel. The ‘do not do anything, or say anything’ strategy seemed to be a failing leadership style of the past, unsuited to current world needs.
Another source had contrasting views on Harris, begrudgingly admitting, ‘At least he’s out there doing stuff.’ However, the remark seemed to encapsulate the general sentiment towards Harris’ abysmal attitude towards governance. It revealed a dated mindset that failed to resonate with the changing times. The source added, ‘It shows how kind of old the thinking is. Like, ‘Welling I’m not going to run for a year and a half, so I’ll go away.’
While these observations serve as a window into the disarray that surrounded Harris’ leadership, they also offer a comparison point to Trump’s active and dynamic approach. Harris’ political strategy, or lack thereof, appeared to be more fitting of the inactive ‘politics as usual’ rather than for a transformative era.
The post Harris’ Flagging Campaign Further Indicative of Lackluster Leadership appeared first on Real News Now.
About Author
