Readers discuss Kamala Harris: Weak leader or held to a double standard?
Editor’s note: Readers responded to AJC Opinion Editor David Plazas’ Nov. 2 column, “The Rise and Fall of the Kamala Harris campaign began in Atlanta.” If you would like to add your opinion, send a letter of 250 words maximum to letters@ajc.com and include your full name and city or town. The AJC welcomes a broad spectrum of insightful commentary.
Harris proves in “107 Days” that she is no leader
David Plazas uses over 1,800 words in his column to perform a postmortem on Kamala Harris’ lost 2024 presidential election and her campaign memoir.
The shorter version: Harris wasn’t elected president in 2024 because she was a terrible presidential candidate, as she had already proven in her failed 2020 run for the Democratic nomination and her lack of accomplishments as a U.S. senator and vice president.
She was, and is, a product and symbol of Democratic patronage in an ultraprogressive state marked by geographic splendor, rich resources and ruinous Democratic policies.
Though she claims Donald Trump exploited her race and gender, it was she who exploited those traits as comprising her resume, which she couldn’t expand with examples of competence and substance.
She continues to think outside factors caused her 2024 loss, when the reason was — and still is — internal. Should she again choose to run for president, that poor judgment alone should be enough to defeat her, as she doesn’t understand her own weaknesses and the futility of her numerous failed makeovers in attempting to be something she’s not: a leader.
Gregory Marshall, Marietta
Public held Harris to a higher standard than Trump
David Plazas’ column is premised on a perception of the American electorate that does not seem to square with reality.
Though it is clear that former Vice President Kamala Harris was not the perfect candidate (newsflash to some: No perfect candidate will ever be on any ballot), all of Plazas’ criticisms are even more applicable to President Donald Trump.
It should not be lost on us that not only was Trump allowed to avoid telling the country how he planned on keeping the grand Day One promises he made but was also given a free pass regarding the unpopular Project 2025 agenda (the implementation of which we can now tragically see all around us).
The figures Plazas cites about life under the current Trump administration should not surprise anyone who paid attention during Trump’s first term.
No debate performances or media appearances from his opponents should have been necessary for us to clearly see that Donald Trump is not someone who should be our president.
Thinking about why so many voters held Harris to such a different standard than the one Trump was held to indicates that the electorate is probably not worthy of Plazas’ positive perception.
Sanjay Lal, Stockbridge
Readers may read more of AJC Opinion Editor David Plazas’ columns at this link and email him directly at david.plazas@ajc.com.
