It's one of the fiercest debates in politics these days: Who is the worst American politician of the 21st century? Some say Hillary Clinton, for obvious reasons. Others insist Kamala Harris is worse, also for obvious reasons.
Correction: It was one of the fiercest debates in politics. For now, the matter has been settled. Kamala is definitely worse. Sorry, Hillary. Or congratulations.
Our analysis is based on a recent NBC News report about Harris's ongoing flirtation with another presidential run in 2028, among other news items from the past several weeks. The NBC article contains one of the most baffling paragraphs ever written about an American politician who almost became president—not that she could ever win a national election, but because she served four years as vice president under Joe Biden, who was barely alive.
NBC notes that Harris is struggling to articulate what she actually thinks about Israel. She often struggles to express coherent thoughts, but this is different. Democrats have grown increasingly hostile to the Jewish state—for reasons that include toxic empathy, geopolitical ignorance, and antisemitism—and many fault the Biden-Harris administration for being insufficiently supportive of Palestinian terrorism.
Accordingly, a "person close to Harris" tells NBC that a "potential pivot" could be on the horizon. Harris "is signaling privately that she has more to say about the Middle East now that she is freed from the Biden White House policy, this person said, adding that she is likely to do so after the midterm elections," the outlet reported. "That could be done from the perspective of a party elder or from the perspective of a candidate seeking votes, this person said."
In summary: A professional politician has authorized an anonymous source to reveal that she plans to weigh in on an issue of heightened political importance roughly six months from now—pending the results of the midterm elections (and assuming those results can confirm that her thoughts on the matter are actually her thoughts).
This is classic Harris behavior, bordering on self-parody. She is a bumbling incompetent, incapable of forming opinions—presumably because she doesn't actually believe in anything beyond her own advancement. Reporting from the campaign trail revealed that she "spent weeks agonizing" over basic decisions. Where to do her first sit-down interview. How to respond to a Washington Free Beacon report raising serious doubts about her alleged employment at McDonald's. She is uniquely ill-suited to the job of being president, which requires the ability to speak coherently and—above all—the ability to make decisions in a timely fashion.
It's not the first time Harris has used anonymous sources to reveal that she is considering the possibility of potentially doing something at a later date. In March 2025, amid speculation about her plans to run for governor of California, pro-Harris reporter and fashion icon Eugene Daniels published his "final scoop" at Politico, the Virginia-based news blog located many floors beneath the Free Beacon. According to Daniels's exclusive reporting, Harris was getting "serious" about "considering" a gubernatorial bid and would decide by the end of the summer.
Few candidates have ever been able to match Hillary's relentlessly charmless and tedious political style, but Harris is one of them. The recent NBC report notes that the former VP has "identified a series of issues that she wants to advance that fit into three buckets: reviving the 'American Dream,' the intersection of artificial intelligence and the public interest, and boosting civic education." No thanks. That sounds like the worst PowerPoint presentation of all time.
It's clear that Harris is trying to be normal, but it hasn't been working. For example, she shouted the word "bullshit" on Thursday at a Democratic conference in Las Vegas. She was attempting to explain her opposition to the war with Iran. It was slightly more coherent than her previous attempt at a book tour event in North Carolina, when she ranted against Donald Trump while demonstrating her unmatched capacity for using the most words to say so little.
"Part of what we have always believed, we know that individuals are flawed—they're all flawed—but we have a right to expect that an individual who is such a leader, at such a level would assume a responsibility—flawed though they may be, imperfect, though we all are, that they would assume some responsibility for moral leadership," Harris explained, sort of.
Speaking of flaws, it would seem that Harris and the people around her still don't understand why she was such a bad candidate and why Democrats aren't thrilled about the prospect of her running for president again. NBC reports that the view among some (anonymous) allies is that Harris is "battle-tested" and has "learned from mistakes," and her "negatives are already built into her candidacy."
They said the same thing about Hillary Clinton in 2016. Nevertheless, Harris continues to lead in early polling among potential 2028 candidates. It's way too early, and these polls are meaningless, but they could influence Harris's eventual contemplation of potentially thinking about making a decision.
Bottom line: Harris should definitely run for president again. What's the worst that could happen?
