top of page
Staff Writer

New York Times Calls Harris "Least Electable"

The New York Times has cast doubt on Vice President Kamala Harris's electability for the 2024 presidential race, labeling her the least viable among potential Democratic candidates to replace President Joe Biden.



The New York Times has identified Vice President Kamala Harris as the least "electable" among potential Democratic candidates to replace President Joe Biden on the 2024 ticket, according to a recent analysis by top writers at the publication.


The report highlights the absence of a democratic process within the Democratic Party to select a new de facto nominee, potentially disregarding the approximately 14 million votes cast for Biden during the Democratic primary. Many perceive the decision to replace Biden as a "coup." Sources told the New York Post on Monday that Biden stepped aside after top Democrats threatened to invoke the Twenty-Fifth Amendment to force his removal.


The Times' analysis rated Harris as the "most risky" and least viable candidate, while identifying Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro as the most likely to defeat former President Donald Trump. Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer was described as the most "exciting" candidate, whereas Connecticut Senator Chris Murphy and Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker were labeled as the most "Meh" options. Other candidates, such as California Governor Gavin Newsom, Maryland Governor Wes Moore, Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear, Arizona Senator Mark Kelly, and Georgia Senator Raphael Warnock, were positioned somewhere in the middle.


The Times' evaluation scored potential candidates on two scales: one for electability and one for enthusiasm. A score of 0 on the electability scale indicated no chance of beating Trump, while a 10 indicated a strong likelihood of victory. Similarly, a 0 on the enthusiasm scale suggested no public excitement, whereas a 10 indicated strong public support.


Ross Barkan of the Times rated Harris’s electability at five and her excitement factor at six. Barkan noted Harris’s weak electoral history, citing her struggles in the 2020 presidential primary and her narrow win in her first attorney general race in California. However, he acknowledged that Harris could benefit from a unified Democratic establishment and her ability to strongly advocate on issues such as abortion rights. Additionally, her potential to become the nation’s first female president and only the second nonwhite politician to occupy the Oval Office could work in her favor.


Doug Sosnik, a longtime Democratic adviser, wrote in the New York Times that seven states—Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, and North Carolina—will be pivotal in deciding the next president. If Trump wins any of Pennsylvania, Michigan, or Wisconsin, Harris’s path to securing 270 electoral votes would be significantly more challenging.


Harris faces obstacles among voters due to her intersectional candidacy and progressive policies, which may not resonate in the Blue Wall states. Additionally, she appears to have limited appeal in Sunbelt states with larger minority and younger populations. A Quinnipiac poll released on Monday found that 55 percent of voters aged 18-34 view Harris unfavorably.


A Democratic operative close to Harris told Politico Playbook on Tuesday, "The Midwest is not where the opportunity is for her. The opportunity with her ... is going to be Nevada, Arizona, Georgia, Pennsylvania. And however those four states go, the rest of the country will follow."

bottom of page