In New Appearance, Kamala Harris Excludes Biden from List of Influential Presidents

Once again, former U.S. Vice President and Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris is stirring fresh debate about her relationship and views on her former boss, President Joe Biden, after revealing in her most recent public appearance that she does not consider the 46th U.S. president an influential figure in American history.

When asked to evaluate presidents she believes had a profound impact on the nation's history, Harris said she sees President Roosevelt as an influential figure due to his actions benefiting Americans during a complex historical period.

She added that she views President Kennedy as another leader who performed exceptionally well during his brief presidency, followed by former Democratic President Barack Obama, whom she considers highly impactful in Americans' lives through his success in passing healthcare legislation, along with other decisions she sees as having broad influence on ordinary Americans.

This is not the first time Harris has voiced clear criticism of a presidency in which she herself was at the center and deeply involved in decision-making; however, since losing the recent presidential election, she has publicly expressed a series of criticisms toward President Biden in both public and private settings, opening the door to widespread debate among Democrats and their voter base regarding her motives behind these media appearances—whether she seeks to settle scores from the previous phase with Biden and his inner circle, or whether, by taking this stance, she is paving the way for a still-pending option in her plans: the possibility of running in the next presidential election.

Open Presidential Ambitions

In multiple prior instances, the former vice president—who succeeded Biden on the Democratic ticket in 2024, just three months before the general election—has shown clear readiness to reconsider her earlier decision, which she announced after her historic loss to Donald Trump, marking a second attempt by a Democratic nominee against the 45th and 47th presidents in U.S. history.

At the time, Harris stated she did not plan to repeat the experience, content with her previous run, yet she simultaneously rejected Democratic calls urging her to run for governor of California, her home state.

Later, seemingly reversing her prior decision, Harris said she is now considering running again in the 2028 elections.

This shift in position became evident immediately after the release of her memoir, which recounts her 107-day campaign journey—the title she chose for her book.

During her national book tour, Harris revealed numerous details about her conflicting views with President Biden during their four full years together in the White House.

Old Conflicts Surface Publicly

The California senator wrote in her book that she views President Biden’s decision to seek a second term as a major mistake. She explained that during her time in the White House, she feared raising this issue in discussions with her former boss would portray her as someone ambitious for the top office at the expense of unwavering loyalty to the president who selected her as his running mate.

Harris notes that merely suggesting the national and democratic interest lay in blocking the other man—implicitly referring to Trump—would not have prevented questions about the depth of her hidden ambitions.

She clarifies in this context that Biden’s age at the time (81 years old) visibly affected him, with noticeable physical slowness and stumbling in speech, ultimately leading to Biden’s withdrawal and Harris entering the race as the Democratic nominee.

Even this move by Biden was insufficient for Harris; she claims his decision to continue the presidential race to such a critical juncture was reckless and showed little regard for the country’s interests, the party, or American citizens.

Political Timing or Pragmatic Choice?

Conversely, many Democratic leaders do not view Harris’s statements over the past two years favorably, seeing them as damaging to the party and its chances in future presidential elections. They also highlight once again that the party is suffering from internal disunity—a factor they believe contributed to the recent defeat to Republicans in both the White House and Congress, when Democrats were divided over whether to support the first woman of color as a presidential candidate or whether better alternatives existed for the party’s prospects at that moment.

Democratic leaders openly express frustration with what they describe as Harris’s lack of respect toward her former president, particularly due to the disagreement over timing during a highly sensitive period.

Critics argue that Harris herself fully supported Biden’s decision to remain in the race at the time, but now, after the Democrats’ historic loss, she expresses discontent with that internal choice, which was part of several conversations she had with the president in the Oval Office.

On the other hand, newer activists known as “Democratic Socialists” see Harris’s statements as adding to the legacy left by the previous generation of Democratic leadership, which, according to them, must step aside to make room for new names and alternative voices capable of connecting more effectively with ordinary Americans and addressing urgent social demands in American families, especially under the current Republican control of the White House and Congress.

Meanwhile, centrist Democrats argue that Harris’s public campaign of criticism against the former president and her preference for the legacies of other Democratic leaders reveals her political calculations aimed at balancing options between exploiting the current political timing—during which Democrats are still searching for their best candidate in the upcoming presidential contest—given that multiple choices and voices are vying to dominate the scene at this stage.

Additionally, centrist Democrats say Harris aims to adopt a pragmatic approach by distancing herself from responsibilities in the previous administration and portraying herself as holding differing opinions during Biden’s tenure on various issues, though she lacked the final voice in crucial decision-making moments; this serves as preparation for her potential return to the presidential race, detached from Biden’s controversial legacy.