The Dog That Caught the Car
How a Desperate Strategy Against Kamala Harris is Backfiring
There’s a great idiom, cited in a variety of spots, whether it be in politics or films like The Dark Knight, of “the dog that caught the car”—for a person who reached a milestone or goal or obtained something and doesn’t know what to do with it. This perfectly captures Donald Trump's campaign. After Joe Biden’s historically disastrous debate performance, followed shortly by Mr. Trump escaping an assassin’s bullet by millimeters courtesy of a quick turn of the head, and in doing so gifting us one of the most viral images in politics—that of a bloodied Trump shaking his fist in defiance, it seemed his victory was inevitable.
Riding into the convention, Mr. Trump boasted he had a consistent lead over Mr. Biden—even beginning to edge ahead or come within striking distance in states like New Jersey and Minnesota, which a Republican hasn’t won in decades. And after a triumphant convention, a celebration of his survival, the pick of J.D. Vance, and an outreach to his newfound friends in Silicon Valley, it seemed that “45” was destined to become “47”. That was, of course, until Joe Biden decided to get the last laugh—shifting ego and pride aside to instead bow out and endorse his Vice President, Kamala Harris, for the Democratic nomination.
And just like that, the campaign was transformed overnight. Instead of running against a tired and unpopular Biden with four years of incumbency to run against, the 2024 campaign has become a tale of “young vs. old,” “future vs. past.” While Mrs. Harris may be 60 (though this is juvenile by D.C. standards) and the incumbent Vice President, she presents herself as “unburdened by what has been,” a quote she is fond of, and comes off as young and hip. In contrast, a more lethargic and weathered Mr. Trump seems like a record player spinning the same song for the last eight years.
As Mrs. Harris rides a wave of grassroots momentum, Mr. Trump suddenly found himself besieged by an unrelenting flood of negative press smashing the walls of Mar-a-Lago. J.D. Vance has proven to be the most unpopular vice presidential pick in modern history, kicking off the campaign with an inspiring and moving convention speech before finding himself on the defensive for comments about “childless cat ladies,” similar to Hillary Clinton’s “basket of deplorables” remark and poor performances at rallies. Things haven’t gone swimmingly for Mr. Trump either.
On Wednesday, he accepted an invitation to Chicago to be interviewed by the National Association of Black Journalists, which went about as well as you’d expect. Rachel Scott began by asking why Black voters should support him, citing his controversial comments, such as questioning Barack Obama's birthplace and telling four Congresswomen to “go back to where they came from.” Mr. Trump immediately snapped back, saying, “I don’t think I’ve ever been asked a question in such a horrible manner, a first question.” He then questioned Mrs. Scott, asking, “Are you with ABC? Because I think they’re a fake news network, a terrible network.”
When asked if he believed Mrs. Harris was a DEI hire, as some of his surrogates suggested, Mr. Trump said he didn't know but then went on a rant that revealed his campaign strategy for the upcoming months. To improve his margins with Black voters, a demographic he performed better with than previous Republican nominees, his strategy is to claim Kamala is not Black. “She was always of Indian heritage, and she was only promoting Indian heritage,” Mr. Trump explained. “I didn’t know she was Black until a number of years ago when she happened to turn Black, and now she wants to be known as Black. So I don’t know, is she Indian or is she Black?” He quickly added, “I respect either one, but she obviously doesn’t, because she was Indian all the way, and then all of a sudden she made a turn—she became a Black person,” before suggesting that “somebody should look into that too.”
Mrs. Harris, whose mother is Indian and father is Jamaican, embodies both Black and Indian heritage—a concept some critics, including Mr. Trump, appear incapable of grasping. It's hilarious to suggest that Kamala is “pretending to be Black” for politically advantageous reasons; I'm sure that when she enrolled at Howard, an HBCU, 42 years ago—the 18-year-old Kamala Harris was secretly planning a campaign of deception decades prior. It’s ludicrous.
After drawing bewildered laughter from the audience, he spent the rest of the interview remarking on how Ms. Scott “treated [me] so rudely... because—she was very rude,” prompting a hot-mic moment from Harris Faulkner, one of Mr. Trump's most sympathetic interviewers, who was heard muttering “oh my goodness” in disbelief. Eventually, he was pulled from the stage by his campaign team just 34 minutes into what was slated as an hour-long interview. With the shockwaves reverberating, it's quite clear that Mr. Trump’s campaign is on the verge of imploding.
It’s not wrong to suggest that Mr. Trump could only mount an effective campaign against Joe Biden and that the switch of candidates has totally blindsided him. He’s spent the last two weeks desperately searching for avenues of attack against Mrs. Harris as the polls tighten and voter registration and enthusiasm increase for the Democrats. And when he’s not pouting about being “refunded” for campaign funds spent against Mr. Biden or going off on odd tangents about Hannibal Lecter, he’s shooting himself in the foot.
His plan to attack Mrs. Harris for her “phoniness” is a lazy rehash of his 2016 strategy against Hillary Clinton, an unsurprising move for a man who seems stuck in the past. Attacking her on this avenue, bound to offend, lose votes, and be outright baffling rather than on policy avenues, where one could ascribe ‘phoniness’ for her flip-flopping, is not the hallmark of a winning campaign. Her mixed heritage is a fact, and attacking it only highlights his campaign's desperation.
Attacking Mrs. Clinton as a “phony,” “corrupt,” and “untrustworthy” worked because she had been the archenemy of conservatives for the 30 years she spent in Washington—while Mr. Trump was a “fresh” and “exciting” political outsider. Mr. Trump does not boast the same freshness nor excitement this time; many Americans, even those voting for him, regard his candidacy and potential return to the White House with palpable dread. Thus, these attacks on Mrs. Harris will not prove as effective and, if anything, serve as a detraction.
The last two weeks have possibly been the worst in any of Mr. Trump’s three campaigns, and indeed, many of his staff and supporters alike are dealing with a rather queer feeling that the walls are closing in.