If the 2020 Democratic primary is former Vice President Joe Biden's to lose, then he made a decent stab at it this week. Biden, as you all know, was masterfully challenged by California Sen. Kamala Harris over his record on desegregation and the late ‘60s- and ‘70s-era busing programs intended to integrate public schools. Grounding her advance in her personal experience with being bused to a Berkeley elementary school as a child in 1969, Harris said she found Biden's remarks last week about finding common ground with segregationist senators personally painful.
"It’s personal," Harris said, looking at Biden from little more than several arms lengths away. "I was actually very—it was hurtful to hear you talk about the reputations of two United States senators who built their reputations and career on segregation of race in this country. And it was not only that, but you also worked with them to oppose busing," she explained.
Harris later told MSNBC host Chris Matthews, "If those men, those segregationists, had had their way, I would not be a member of the United States Senate and I certainly would not be a serious candidate for the president of the United States."
Though the precision and effectiveness of Harris' advance could not have been fully appreciated prior to the debate, the prospect that Harris would very likely level some type of charge against Biden on his most recent civil rights comments was predictable. The fact that Biden wasn't well prepared for that moment and didn't effectively parry it in the moment drew into question his ability to spar with Donald Trump in the general election. But what's even more concerning to me personally is the fact that Biden still hasn't found a way to simply own up to his hurtful remarks and put them to rest—something he could have done in advance of the debate and on his own terms. Just imagine how much of the sting he could have taken out of that moment if he had been able to say, "I hear you, Kamala, and that's why I made a point of saying XXX."
Biden's campaign has clearly made the strategic choice not to have their candidate apologize for or really even acknowledge that his remarks poured salt on a decades-old wound that has never healed for so many Americans of color. It's reminiscent of Biden's inability to apologize amid a kerfuffle in April after several women revealed that they were uncomfortable with his touchiness and felt he had invaded their space. At first Biden put out a video saying "I get it," then he turned the idea of getting "consent" into a punchline in front of a mostly white male audience. When he was pressed by reporters after the event about whether he was sorry about his actions, Biden gave sorry-not sorry response.
“I’m sorry I didn’t understand more,” he offered. “I’m not sorry for any of my intentions. I’m not sorry for anything that I have ever done."
This appears to be Biden adopting the exact wrong lessons from the Trump campaign: Never apologize. Clearly, Biden could never be as repugnant as Trump—who could? But when a white man is running to be the standard bearer of a resurgent party powered disproportionately by women and people of color, it is beyond indefensible that he would adopt a policy of absolute rightness and non-accountability for his actions. That is especially true for a candidate who is drawing the bulk of his strength from the, thus far, loyal support of black voters.
We have yet to see whether Harris' debate performance disrupts the support Biden has enjoyed among the Democratic party's most reliable voters. But the visual of Harris deftly picking apart an older white male with the forcefulness of the seasoned prosecutor she is certainly left viewers hungry to see her level the same withering treatment at Trump.
The data we do have from 538 regarding which candidates helped themselves most this week based on their pre-debate favorables puts Harris within the top three.
Among all 20 candidates, Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren and Julián Castro earned the highest scores for their debate performances relative to their favorability rating before they took the stage, according to the voters in our poll.
Here's the specifics for them:
- Harris favorables: Before, 56.2%; After, 66.9%
- Warren favorables: Before, 63.4%; After 71.4%
- Castro favorables: Before, 29.3%; After 47.8%
Biden was the only candidate whose favorables dropped, but he also started off the highest (Before, 76.5%; After 75.6%); Bernie Sanders ran a very close second in terms of high favorables (Before, 74.3%; After 76.3%).
Harris' weakest moment from my perspective was her inability to be precise about her very first priority should she be elected, a question that was asked of all the candidates on the second night.
"So, passing a middle class and working families tax cut. That’s one," she responded. "DACA, guns," she added, echoing the priorities of some of the candidates who came before her. By no means was this a mortal sin, but it did give one a sense of indecisiveness on her part. And what we know from President Obama's first term is that priorities are everything—you may actually only be able to get one or two major pieces of legislation through in your first two years, even if Democrats manage to win the White House and both chambers of Congress.
Having crystal clear priorities and a narrative that all hangs together is where I think Warren has an edge. Though she did not answer a specific question about her very first priority that I recall, Warren's devotion to taxing the mega rich and taking on giant corporations on behalf of average Americans is the same drum she has been pounding for over a year in her stump speech. It’s also a natural outgrowth of the biography that informs her as a politician. So it's not hard to imagine how Warren might respond to such a query.
Regardless of who comes out of this week up or down, what was perhaps most refreshing was spending a couple nights this week imagining a government that isn't run by a self-obsessed autocratic mad man. Democrats have some very viable and capable candidates in this pack and we will benefit from fielding a competitive race that gives primary voters a real glimpse of how they perform under pressure. Don’t be afraid of the scrum—our nominee must both inspire the masses and annihilate Trump. Onward!