It’s possible to call this NY Times article a hit piece but it does have extensive background even as it seems pessimistic about a turnaround. Even with a couple of months away from the Iowa caucuses, the Harris campaign must address the charges of leadership problems and staff turbulence.
“The 2020 Democratic field has been defined by its turbulence, with some contenders rising, others dropping out and two more jumping in just this month. Yet there is only one candidate who rocketed to the top tier and then plummeted in early state polls to the low single digits: Ms. Harris.”
Yet, even to some Harris allies, her decline is more predictable than surprising. In one instance after another, Ms. Harris and her closest advisers made flawed decisions about which states to focus on, issues to emphasize and opponents to target, all the while refusing to make difficult personnel choices to impose order on an unwieldy campaign, according to more than 50 current and former campaign staff members and allies, most of whom spoke on condition of anonymity to disclose private conversations and assessments involving the candidate.
Many of her own advisers are now pointing a finger directly at Ms. Harris. In interviews, several of them criticized her for going on the offensive against rivals, only to retreat, and for not firmly choosing a side in the party’s ideological feud between liberals and moderates. She also created an organization with a campaign chairwoman, Maya Harris, who goes unchallenged in part because she is Ms. Harris’s sister, and a manager, Mr. Rodriguez, who could not be replaced without likely triggering the resignations of the candidate’s consulting team. Even at this late date, aides said it’s unclear who’s in charge of the campaign.
This response probably reflects some of the necessary responses to the NY Times article, as well as the resignation and move of one person to the Bloomberg campaign.
(Avis A. Jones-DeWeever)
- From those standpoints I will say, it’s not unusual for the media to pick it’s darlings for an election cycle, those they ignore, and those they tend to cover from a negative perspective. What is unusual here is the sheer volume of pieces this early in the process
- that collectively seem to have as its goal essentially forcing a candidate to end her campaign before one vote has actually been cast. The extraordinary level of singular focus on a campaign that despite its challenges STILL polls above several others that go completely without
- critical analysis IS highly unusual. But at the same time it feels all too familiar in that it is the type of double standard that I’m sure EVERY Black woman in America has experienced in her career.
- I find it interesting, for example, that we’ve seen more negative coverage of Kamala’s campaign woes than of the seemingly out of the blue collapse of the Beto campaign.
- I also find it interesting that more ink has been spilled on her staffers than on a rival’s staffer who actual STOLE data from Kamala’s campaign.
- Kamala’s shortcomings? And wouldn’t you think one of these great bastions of investigative journalism would be interested in finding out exactly why Pete chose to fire a Black Sheriff for reporting racist activity in his police department rather than fire the racists themselves?
- I, for one, would like to read that story. But apparently they’re too busy penning the 5011th Kamala implosion piece.
- In fact Kamala’s coverage is so singularly and consistently negative it seems to me the goal may be beyond this specific campaign cycle and ultimately meant to do permanent damage to her political career…
- as well as serve as a warning to any future Black woman considering running for President, “This ain’t for you, Boo” —while also messaging through other coverage that instead, it’s perfectly okay to run as “The Help” (aka Vice President)
- One day some ambitious graduate student will do a content analysis on the news coverage in this pre-primary period and document the blatant bias occurring in this campaign cycle.
- Until then, I’ll be waiting for the white boy hit pieces that apparently never seem to materialize. 💅🏽
“This campaign is by no means dead,” says Bakari Sellers, reacting to a New York Times article, “How Kamala Harris’ campaign unraveled,” highlighting the recent resignation of a key Harris campaign aide and the campaign’s fluctuating TV and digital ad messaging. pic.twitter.com/2JwkMYkqzc
— CNN (@CNN) November 30, 2019
— DianaW (@DianaW99) December 1, 2019
Damn, this is good. pic.twitter.com/8VLQnCiIB5
— Matt Rogers 🎙 (@Politidope) November 30, 2019