In yet another moment that raises questions about her leadership and competence, Vice President Kamala Harris was left speechless when asked how she was chosen as Joe Biden’s running mate. During an interview, Harris struggled to provide a coherent answer when asked about the process that led to her nomination, underscoring the doubts many Americans have about her role in the administration and her readiness for higher office.
The Vice President’s inability to articulate even a basic explanation of how she ended up as Biden’s running mate highlights a growing concern among conservatives: Harris appears to have been selected based on identity politics rather than merit. It’s no secret that Biden had promised to choose a woman of color as his vice-presidential candidate, a pledge he made well before the vetting process even began. But Harris’ fumbling response suggests that her rise to one of the most powerful positions in the country was less about qualifications and more about checking off a political box.
A VP in Over Her Head?
Since taking office, Kamala Harris has faced a wave of criticism from both sides of the aisle for her performance—or lack thereof. From the border crisis to voting rights, Harris has been handed a series of critical issues to address, and she has consistently fallen short. In the midst of a border catastrophe, she famously avoided visiting the actual problem areas for months, even as illegal immigration surged to record levels. Her weak performance only adds to the perception that she is out of her depth and was never truly prepared to handle the weight of the vice presidency.
Harris’ confusion about the process behind her own nomination simply adds fuel to the fire. How can someone effectively lead when they can’t even explain how they got there in the first place?
Identity Politics at Its Worst
Kamala Harris’ nomination represents the worst of identity politics—where qualifications and experience take a backseat to optics and political expediency. When Joe Biden made his promise to choose a woman of color as his running mate, he narrowed the field to a small pool of candidates, effectively sidelining more qualified individuals who didn’t fit the identity profile he’d predetermined. It’s no wonder that Harris struggled to explain her path to the VP role—the process was political from the start.
And let’s not forget Harris’ disastrous performance during the Democratic primaries. Despite being touted as a rising star within the party, her campaign floundered. She failed to connect with voters, and her support collapsed so quickly that she dropped out before the first votes were even cast. Yet, despite her poor showing and lack of momentum, she was still handed the vice-presidential nomination. The reality is that Harris wasn’t selected because she was the best person for the job; she was selected to fulfill Biden’s promise to appease the progressive wing of the Democratic Party.
What This Means for the Future
The question of how Kamala Harris got her nomination is about more than just the past—it’s about the future of the Democratic Party and, more broadly, the country. With President Biden’s age and cognitive issues frequently in the spotlight, Harris is seen by many as a likely successor, should Biden be unable to complete his term or choose not to run for re-election. The fact that she can’t articulate the process behind her own rise to power raises serious concerns about her ability to step into the top job.
As conservatives, we know that leadership is earned, not given. America deserves leaders who are chosen for their experience, their vision, and their ability to deliver results—not for their ability to check off a box on a political wishlist. Harris’ nomination is a clear example of how far identity politics has taken over the Democratic Party, and it’s a dangerous path that weakens the very fabric of our nation.
The next time Kamala Harris is asked about how she got her nomination, she might want to focus less on dodging the question and more on how to provide a meaningful answer—if she even has one. Because as it stands, her vague and empty responses won’t cut it when Americans are looking for serious leadership.
Conclusion
Kamala Harris’ inability to explain how she was nominated as vice president is just another example of the incompetence and misplaced priorities of the current administration. Americans deserve leaders who can deliver real solutions and represent their interests—not politicians who were selected based on a promise to satisfy the demands of the radical left. As Harris continues to stumble through her role, conservatives will continue to demand better for our country, because this administration’s approach simply isn’t cutting it.
