We support our Publishers and Content Creators. You can view this story on their website by CLICKING HERE.

Vice President Kamala Harris’ weak response to President Joe Biden’s calling Donald Trump supporters “garbage” matches her hyperbolic, incendiary claims that Trump is a “fascist” who relies on the tactics of Adolf Hitler. 

Meanwhile, Harris’ running mate, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, compared Trump’s Madison Square Garden rally to a Nazi gathering. 

Even high school debate coaches erect a key boundary: When you label your opponent a Nazi, you’ve lost.

StopAntisemitism, which describes itself as a grassroots watchdog organization, called foul, posting a statement on X that went viral: 

Equating either candidate or their supporters to the Nazi regime diminishes the genuine horrors of Hitler and his followers. It dishonors the millions who perished under his orders and disrespects those who gave their lives to bring his tyranny to an end. Save the reprimand for the actual Nazis.

As Harris struggles in polls to reach the necessary Electoral College tally of 270 votes, and also in the betting markets, the Democratic presidential nominee reeks of desperation while trying to shake her obvious association with the unpopular Biden-Harris administration. 

Yet the vice president also conjures a certain familiarity. Numerous examples illustrate how Harris is poised to become Hillary Clinton 2.0. (Clinton, of course, lost to Trump in 2016 as the Democratic presidential nominee.)

Both women are nearly lifelong politicians who never faced the average U.S. voter (e.g. median political ideology vs. blue state extremism). As U.S. senators, both hailed from states that are safe and cushy for liberals. 

Their core voters are disconnected from the rest of America—a key factor in an Electoral College-based, states-empowered republic. 

The Cook Political Report’s Partisan Voting Index ranks Harris’ California as +13 Democrat margin compared to the nation as a whole; it ranks Clinton’s New York as +10 Democrat. This helps explain why both women have a tin ear about Middle American values. 

Because of her last-minute party coronation after Democrats forced Biden out of the race, Harris didn’t earn one single vote in the 2024 Democratic primary season (nor did she as a candidate in 2020). This means she hasn’t faced the average nationwide Democrat voter, either.

Sure, Harris and Clinton both might have relatively middle-class or humble roots (as Harris desperately trots out in the most awkward fashion to any question she gets on the campaign trail, no matter how unrelated). 

However, the two women truly have floated in economic and social “privilege” their whole adult lives. 

And the fact that Harris was the child of two parents who worked for elite colleges—her mother for the University of California, Berkeley and her father for Stanford—gifted her a childhood of socioeconomic privilege that reverberated into adulthood. 

Like Clinton, Harris is out of touch with average Americans. And while Harris at 60 is younger and perceived by some as more likable, Clinton is more articulate and better informed—so perhaps this cancels out. 

Even though Clinton, now 77, comes off as more rigid and cold, Harris’ many verbal gaffes mean the vice president projects incompetence instead of endearment.

Tellingly, behind the scenes, Harris’ staff apparently doesn’t experience her as likable. Blistering levels of staff turnover beset the vice president’s office due to allegedly hostile work environments. Harris is ultimately the source of this breakneck turnover. 

Whatever Harris enabled or did to cause this excessive turnover is something she can’t hide from voters or the camera. Like Clinton, Harris projects unlikability and doesn’t evoke the deep, fierce loyalty of Trump voters.

Like Clinton, Harris also projects inauthenticity, a sense that she loves celebrities more than everyday people. 

Both women like power but don’t seem to care about the people in front of them. This is the opposite of Bill Clinton—numerous reports paint Hillary’s husband as a magnetic politician who makes each person feel like he or she is the only person in the room. 

Both women, to compensate for their liberal elite bubbles, selected a balding, white-haired, supposedly inoffensive white man as their VP choice. 

In both cases, it screams of pandering. And in both cases, it appears headed for failure.

Carrie Sheffield is a senior policy analyst at Independent Women’s Voice.

We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal.