Kamala’s Campaign Staffers Furious After What She Told Them Following Election Loss

Advertisement

Subscribe for free to eliminate ads

Disclaimer: The article may include the author's opinions.

Kamala Harris faced defeat against now-President-elect Donald Trump, some supporters and surrogates have pointed to President Joe Biden’s delayed exit from the race as a contributing factor. However, former campaign staffers have characterized this perspective as detached from reality, asserting that the candidate’s loss stems primarily from her challenges in appearing authentic and connecting with voters.

Among those attributing the outcome to Biden’s timing was Harris supporter and former 2020 Democratic candidate Andrew Yang, who expressed the belief that an earlier exit by Biden might have led to different results. Yang said that the biggest onus of this loss is on President Biden, noting that a withdrawal in January instead of July could have altered the race’s trajectory.

Yet, according to critics cited by Newsweek, accountability is being directed toward Harris herself and the campaign choices made under her leadership. Philadelphia Democratic Chair and former congressman Bob Brady noted that Harris’s staff operated independently, often neglecting to engage with local Democratic organizations and leaders. According to Brady, the staff’s perceived elitism may have alienated grassroots supporters and local party structures.

Reports from within the campaign suggest a lack of awareness among its leaders regarding what went wrong. A memo referenced by Axios indicated that certain campaign members considered the race to have been much closer than it was. One unnamed staffer conveyed a sense of frustration with what was seen as overly confident leadership. Describing the Thursday night all-staff call, the staffer noted a disconnect in tone, as Harris campaign manager Jen O’Malley Dillon was reportedly emotional, while Harris acknowledged the setback.

The message reportedly struck some as out of touch with the reality of the loss. Another anonymous staffer questioned the campaign’s strategy and financial decisions, asking, about How did she spend $1 billion without a win.

This sentiment was echoed by a Biden staffer who pushed back on the idea that Biden’s delayed departure had significantly affected the race’s outcome, shifting responsibility back to Harris’s campaign strategy. Some Democratic insiders voiced the view that Harris’s decision to sideline Biden might have contributed to her defeat, with Biden supporters speculating that her campaign choices, rather than Biden’s exit timing, influenced the election’s result.

Others argued that Harris allowed the GOP to define her image, failing to control the narrative and reach a broader audience. A senior Democratic operative observed that Harris missed opportunities to engage with voters across the political spectrum. Following the convention, she and running mate Tim Walz reportedly refrained from interviews, which left questions about her visibility during critical campaign periods.

One notable decision was Harris’s refusal to appear on Joe Rogan’s popular podcast, where Trump had previously participated in an extended interview. Harris’s team reportedly imposed certain conditions on her appearance, which included requiring Rogan to interview on her terms, away from his Austin studio. These stipulations ultimately led to the interview not taking place, as Rogan declined to accept specific demands regarding editing and topic restrictions.

With reflections on her campaign now surfacing, critiques have focused on the need for introspection regarding her strategy and public engagement choices. The outcome, as suggested by campaign insiders, underscores the importance of authentic voter connection and adaptability in campaign dynamics.