Whenever I muse about a book that is commanding enough attention and/or sales–or comes from someone I know personally–that I deem it worthy for your attention I actually buy a copy (well, ok, sometimes the friends do gift me one). Which may not mean a lot to you, but if your net worth were like mine toward the end of yet another disturbingly frustrating calendar month–with a minus sign in front of it–you might grasp why it’s a VERY big deal for me to make any investment at all in content.
I’ll grant you that the hype and the hoopla, let alone the early sales figures on Kamala Harris’ battleground memoir 107 DAYS which finally became available to the general public early this week qualifies it for attention. Heck, it was nearly two full months ago when she graced the stage of the then solidly employed Stephen Colbert’s show to announce its imminent publication, in effect kicking off her return to the public eye after a few months of soul-searching and an occasional Clippers game (in the cheaper seats, no less) where she licked the wounds inflicted upon her by a Republican campaign that had the benefit not only of a full cycle but a determination and a game plan that can best be described as zealotic and comprehesive. But at least they had one, and for better or worse found a way to put words into the mouth of their Chosen One that was able to effectively convey it.
So I hope you’ll forgive me for not being able to personally weigh on with my own detailed thoughts about 107 DAYS–though thanks to the 56 days that the firehose of excerpts and anticipation more than enough of the tome’s contents were out there for anyone to weigh in upon. Not that I’ve held back on my thoughts on her before. I’ve mused about her priorities as vice president, the skeletons in her closet when she was effectively handed the presidential nomination, her struggles to articulate a cohesive platform in the aftermath of said nomination and the cautionary note that was struck even in the wake of her high note in outdebating her opponent last 9/11. I think you’ve got a good idea how I feel about her–and if you somehow missed it along the way, now’s as good a time as any to catch up.
Besides, there’s been plenty of coverage from a wide swath of what one would assume to be friendly media outlets that have dropped in the last coupla weeks. And they’ve been even less gunshy about their feelings. Take THE NEW YORK TIMES’ Jennifer Szalai:
Political figures aren’t known for baring their hearts and souls in their books, especially if they are keen to keep their options open. When news broke that Harris had worked with the Pulitzer Prize-winning novelist Geraldine Brooks, there was speculation that this might be a different kind of memoir. But even Brooks’s estimable talents can’t entirely make up for an obvious reluctance on Harris’s part to let down her guard, even now. Harris, the former prosecutor, seems most comfortable when she is recounting facts and making a case; in the acknowledgments, she admits that she tends “to be task-oriented” and isn’t prone to allowing herself “enough space or time to reflect.”
Or THE WALL STREET JOURNAL’s Tunku Varadarajan:
Anyone reading Kamala Harris’s “107 Days” will ask why the former vice president wrote this book. Its title refers to the number of days she was given by President Joe Biden to launch and win “the shortest campaign in modern presidential history” and is her effort, she tells us, to capture what she “saw, experienced, and learned” in her run for president. But what does she gain from the exercise? Is she, in defiance of all sane calculation, going to run for president again? If so, this book will do anything but help.
Except for a few pages where she snipes at Mr. Biden for his grudging support of the presidential candidacy that he thrust upon her—and which she accepted with such entitled ardor that she shut down any idea of “a mini primary or some other half-baked procedure” that would have given other credible candidates a shot—Ms. Harris’s book serves only to show how achingly dull she is. It also shows how disconnected she is from the many ordinary Americans who don’t share her entrenched progressive values.
As we read page after page of assertions that she “was able to work on so many issues that mattered to me,” it becomes clear once again that she didn’t really have a chance of beating a venomously charismatic Donald Trump to the White House. She’s obsessed with identity and with the nobility-of-diversity she believes was conferred on her by her mother, “a small brown woman with a foreign accent.” She can’t even say the words illegal immigration, preferring the phrase “irregular migration.” And she’s convinced that celebrities matter in politics, dwelling proudly on the endorsements she received from the rapper Quavo and the British singer-songwriter Charli XCX. (The latter, we’re told, posted “Kamala is brat” on social media. “Brat” is the title of a Charli XCX album; thus the post, writes Ms. Harris, “identified me with her brand: edgy, imperfect, confident, embracing.” Too bad this didn’t help her win any of the seven swing states.)
Or the LOS ANGELES TIMES’ Leigh Haber:
For those who are cynical about politics, “107 Days” will not alter your view. After Biden announces his withdrawal, First Lady Jill Biden welcomes Second Gentleman Emhoff into the fray, advising: “Be careful what you wish for. You’re about to see how horrible the world is.” Her senior adviser David Plouffe encourages Harris to distance herself from the president on the campaign trail, because “People hate Joe Biden.” Again and again, Harris provides examples of being left out of the loop or not robustly supported by his inner circle. She writes that her feelings for the president “were grounded in warmth and loyalty” but had become “more complicated over time.” She claims never to have doubted Biden’s competence, even while she worried about how he appeared to the public.
Even the normally supportive POLITICO took on a somewhat disbelieving tone via yesterday’s boots-on-the-ground report from Alex Bronzini-Vender:
Many Democrats are still mired in a state of low-level depression after Kamala Harris’ devastating defeat in the 2024 election. President Donald Trump has steamrolled Washington, and the party’s favorability has plunged to historic lows, including among Democrats, as the circular firing-squad continues over exactly why the party lost. Harris herself has come in for her share of blame, and in recent weeks, she has tumbled in the 2028 presidential polls; she now stands well behind her longtime frenemy California Gov. Gavin Newsom.
But you wouldn’t know it from the crowd assembled Wednesday at the cavernous Town Hall auditorium in New York City for an 8 p.m. “Conversation with Kamala Harris,” a book talk for the former vice president’s recently-released — and surprisingly sharp-edged — memoir of the campaign trail, 107 Days.
Here, the audience buzzed with excitement at the prospect of seeing Harris up-close, and the mood was festive. The event’s “featured cocktail” was the Madam VP, a tall drink made with gin, cassis, cardamom, honey and lemon. It was priced at $24, a likely reference to the campaign year.
And that fact alone seems to define who still see Harris as both relevant and viable in a deeply divided and confused Democratic party that can’t seem to get out of its own way even as the schmuck-in-chief and his merry band of syncophants are rapidly escalating their barrage of deflections, personal grievances and braggadacio to new levels of disgust and division. If you can afford $24 for a freaking smidge of alcohol, spices and fruits, you’re definitely out of my league. I can’t even afford the book itself, let alone anything attached to it.
What Harris is doing is no less self-centered and questionably timed as the money grabs of those who waited until after Trump 1.0 came to an end–in the minds of at least some of America–to share their truths with the class. If you’re ticked off by the likes of John Bolton, Andrew McCabe, Anthony Scaramucci or the dozens of others who willingly took publishers’ blood money to wait for the too little-too late moment to foist their insights and apologies onto a perpetually gullible public, you should be ripping mad at Harris’ timing and, even still, relative lack of come-uppance.
Stephen A. Smith, perhaps the Yin to the Yang that is Harris’ level of transparency, pretty much summed up my feelings earlier this week which FOX 11 LOS ANGELES’ Kelli Johnson, among others, reported on:
On Tuesday night, Smith appeared as a guest on NewsNation’s “Cuomo.” During the interview, he and Chris Cuomo discussed Harris’ new book, which was released the same day. “I think Democrats should have won that election,” Cuomo said. “So that is my statement about Kamala Harris and her role in this.” “I’m incredibly disappointed from what I’ve seen in terms of her promoting this book,” Smith said. “She’s saying things she should have said when she was running for the presidency.”
And yet, I’m not as upset at Harris as I am, say, of the enablers and supporters who effectively brokered her into the national elected office she did win (at least according to a plurality of America) who had somehow forgotten exactly how weak she was the first time she attempted a run at the presidency–one that had a lot more than 107 days to prepare for. NPR’s Scott Detrow and Asma Khalid memories from December 2019 were easily available as a reminder for those with selective retention:
California Sen. Kamala Harris is dropping out of the presidential race, citing a lack of funds. She informed her campaign staff of the decision on a conference call and later sent an email to supporters, in which she wrote “my campaign for president simply doesn’t have the financial resources we need to continue.” Harris kicked off her campaign in front of 20,000 supporters in Oakland, Calif., and consistently drew large crowds in Iowa, South Carolina, and other early primary states. She was among the top tier of candidates in both polling and fundraising and briefly surged toward the very top of the field shortly after the first presidential debate, when she confronted former Vice President Joe Biden about his early opposition to federal busing policies. But that exchange was a high-water mark of sorts for her campaign.
Sure sounds a lot like how those other 107 days unfolded. With the same end game of playing victim and blaming other factors besides one’s own inability to connect with people who just can’t understand how the f anyone could possibly ask $24 for a freaking DRINK?!
So, yeah, Jim Clyburn, I’m especially pissed at you. You had the party over a barrel and dangled South Carolina as the kickoff state for 2020 and demanded a series of appointments for people of color to be appointed to key positions. Great, I’m sure the King family, living and dead, is proud of you for doing that. But the best you could offer up was Harris, and the best the party could find was Ketanji Brown Jackson for the Supreme Court and Karine Jean St. Pierre for press secretary. How sadly ironic that you foisted upon the Biden White House a KKK that has been rejected by more of your party–let alone virtually anyone who’s not part of it–than the original acronym was.
Can’t wait for your book. Rest assured even if my financial sich isn’t as dire, I won’t buy yours, either.
Until next time…