×

Home-state skepticism of Harris foretold trouble

FILE - In this Nov. 21, 2019, file photo, then-Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., listens to a question in the spin room after a Democratic presidential primary debate in Atlanta. (AP Photo/John Amis, File)

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — When Sen. Kamala Harris entered the presidential race in January, her California roots were supposed to give her special access to the cash and delegates required to win the Democratic nomination. Instead, she faced headwinds in her home state that would become a microcosm for the trouble that ultimately forced her sudden departure from the contest.

One by one, politically active celebrities lined up behind Harris’ rivals, such as Mayor Pete Buttigieg of South Bend, Indiana. Many of the state’s energized progressive activists lent their passion and small-dollar donations to Sens. Bernie Sanders of Vermont or Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts. And those who weren’t yet paying close attention to the 2020 race — and there were many in a state of nearly 40 million people — gravitated to the name they knew best: former Vice President Joe Biden.

A quiet but significant turning point came in late March, when prominent California donor Susie Tompkins Buell, who had backed Harris, began supporting Buttigieg as well.

“When she started lending her name to other candidates, I think that was the first sign of trouble that things were not well,” said veteran California Democratic strategist Rose Kapolczynski.

Harris told staff and supporters on Tuesday that she simply didn’t have the money to stay in the race. She ended her first White House bid before more than a dozen of her rivals despite being a political superstar in a state with the most convention delegates and with premier access to a donor class that is widely considered the political world’s piggy bank.

In the end, it wasn’t enough to help her stand out in the Democratic Party’s 2020 crowded presidential class.

Having raised close to $12 million in each of the year’s first three quarters, Harris was on pace to raise closer to $3 million this quarter, according to a campaign operative who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss her struggling fundraising operation. It was barely enough to keep the lights on, never mind fund the television ads she needed to compete in the primary states that matter most.

Although Iowa had become the epicenter of her campaign in recent weeks, Harris hadn’t run a television ad there since August.

She had at least six California fundraisers planned through December with lawyers, entertainment executives and others, though those involved in the planning conceded that it was becoming increasingly difficult to sell tickets.

A Santa Monica-based attorney and co-host of one of the events, Shawn Holley, said on the eve of Harris’ departure that she was encountering skepticism from donors following a flood of negative news coverage. Holley called it a “vicious cycle” of people not wanting to contribute to a downhill campaign, making it harder for the campaign to rebound.

“They believe she’s awesome. They believe that she would be the best person to debate Trump,” Holley said. But they were concerned “she’s not going to get the chance to do any of these things, and therefore why should they put their money behind something that can’t win?”

Yet those who followed her campaign closely suggest the California senator’s fundraising challenges were a lagging indicator of a more fundamental problem that plagued her almost from the very day she announced her candidacy on Martin Luther King Jr. Day more than 10 months ago.

She never really answered the most important questions facing any candidate running for office: Who are you and what do you stand for?

Her slogan “For the people” referenced her career as a prosecutor, a record that was viewed skeptically by the party’s most progressive voters. Through the summer, she shifted her focus to pocketbook issues and a “3 a.m. agenda,” a message that fell flat.

Newsletter

Today's breaking news and more in your inbox

I'm interested in (please check all that apply)
Are you a paying subscriber to the newspaper *
   

Starting at $4.62/week.

Subscribe Today