Harris’ new book has potential to sink her political career

Kamala Harris’s upcoming memoir, 107 Days, is being billed as a candid reflection on the final phase of the 2024 election cycle. It is more likely an effort intended to keep her name in the 2028 Democrat presidential sweepstakes.

Based on recently released excerpts and the ensuing controversy, it reads like a cynical attempt to reassert her relevance ahead of a likely 2028 presidential bid. The book’s tone—at once confessional and defensive — appears so far to reveal the former vice president trying to rewrite her legacy while distancing herself from the very administration she once fiercely defended.  In fact, when asked during her campaign what Biden policies she disagreed with, she did not articulate any.

Perhaps the most striking element in the book is Harris’ break with President Biden. After years of public loyalty, her decision to lay blame on Biden and First Lady Jill for the decision to run for a second term feels like a betrayal of that allegiance. “It’s Joe and Jill’s decision,” Harris writes — describing how that phrase became a refrain in the West Wing. But she now calls that deference “recklessness” — suggesting that the decision to run again should have involved broader consultation. This pivot is jarring, especially given Harris’s past insistence that Biden was “a man of empathy, wisdom and strength.”

Her criticism is complicated by the long-standing tensions between her staff and Biden’s inner circle. Harris claims that Biden’s aides saw her success as a threat, writing, “Their thinking was zero-sum.  If she’s shining, he is dimmed.” But this friction was not one-sided. Harris’s own office was plagued by dysfunction in the early years of the administration. A government watchdog report found that over 90 percent of her original staff had left by 2024. Former aides described the workplace as toxic, citing “an atmosphere of suspicion and disorder.” One insider told National Review, “She created a place where people felt like they were constantly walking on eggshells.”

These revelations cast doubt on Harris’s claims of being sidelined unfairly. If her own team struggled to function under her leadership, it is difficult to argue that Biden’s staff were solely responsible for her diminished public role. The internal chaos within her office undermined her credibility as a leader and raises serious questions about her readiness for higher office. (Actually, it answers those questions.)

The timing and tone of 107 Days suggest that Harris is attempting to position herself for a 2028 run. But the book may do more harm than good. Critics have already labeled it a “posturing” effort, with former White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany calling Harris “not cut out for the job” and accusing her of rewriting history to suit her ambitions. Even within her own party, support is tepid. Major Democratic donor John Morgan publicly stated he would not fundraise for Harris, saying, “It’s others’ turn now.” (Many believed that when Harris took the Democrat nomination after Biden dropped out.) Top figures like Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries have praised Biden’s legacy without having much to say about Harris’ candidacy.

In trying to thread the needle between loyalty and self-preservation, Harris may have miscalculated. Her memoir paints a picture of a vice president caught between obligation and ambition but it also exposes the fractures and failures that defined her tenure. Rather than galvanizing support, 107 Days risks reinforcing the perception that Harris is a divisive figure with limited appeal beyond her core base.

If this book was meant to add wind in her sails for 2028, it may instead become an anchor. Harris’s attempt to reclaim the narrative appears to be backfiring — deepening skepticism within the Democratic establishment and weakening her already fragile standing. In politics, timing is everything—and Harris’s moment may have already passed, though she apparently does not realize it.

So, there ‘tis.