A year ago, then-Vice President Kamala Harris found herself in the midst of the briefest yet most significant presidential campaign in American history. With only 107 days remaining, after a disastrous debate showing by her aging superior, then-U.S. President Joe Biden, she was elevated to the leading position on the ticket, facing off against Donald Trump as he pursued a second term.
TL;DR
- Kamala Harris discusses her 107-day presidential campaign and the lessons learned from her defeat.
- She emphasizes the importance of addressing immediate American needs and her capitalist views.
- Harris reflects on breaking barriers for women and her perspective on the "glass cliff" concept.
- Her book, "107 Days," aims to share her unfiltered account of the unprecedented campaign.
During the remaining days, Harris spent only one night in her own bed. She aggressively campaigned on TikTok, generating more than $1 billion. She even managed to visit five states in just over 24 hours. However, it proved insufficient.
Ultimately, Harris didn't win, and she's since had an opportunity to consider the reasons why and what's necessary to restore public faith in the Democratic Party over the long haul. During an extensive discussion at the Coins2Day Most Powerful Women Summit, Harris and Coins2Day Editor-in-Chief Alyson Shontell addressed President Trump's initial eight months in the presidency, her latest book, and her strategy for understanding the concerns of the American populace.
You can watch the full video interview here or above, and subscribe to future episodes of Titans and Disruptors on Apple or Spotify.
Here’s some of what Shontell and Harris discussed on stage:
On 107 Days, the ex-Vice President's latest book
- How touring for the book is an opportunity “just to listen to people”
- Why telling the story of her campaign in her own words is important
Regarding the concept of the “glass cliff”
- Why she doesn’t identify with the term’s “finality,” implying her political career isn’t done
- Why breaking “glass” barriers is always worth it for women, despite the pain and destruction of “breaking things”
Regarding her defeat in the 2024 election
- Why the former Vice President believes President Donald Trump won
- How she sees the legacy of her 107-day campaign
- Why Democrats lost support from former supporters, including Elon Musk
Regarding capitalism versus socialism and the Democratic Party's future trajectory
- Why she contests descriptions of Democrats as “anti-capitalist” and identifies as a capitalist
- She supports the capitalist notion that “competition breeds the best”, yet she emphasizes that the key is to create a fair environment for everyone to have an equal chance at succeeding.
- It's become evident to her that the Democratic Party needs to prioritize the pressing concerns of Americans, including in-home elder care and making essential goods affordable.
On AI
- How the technology could deepen existing struggles with misinformation
- Why government policy could be too late to protect Americans from AI’s adverse effects
You can watch the vodcast or read the transcript, which has been slightly adjusted for conciseness and readability, further down.
An update on former Vice President Harris's status following her election defeat
Alyson Shontell: It's an honor to have you join us. To start, I'd like to ask how you're doing. I'm curious to hear about your experience over the past six to eight months.
Kamala Harris: I'm doing well, though it's a bit complex. My husband Doug and I departed D.C. On inauguration day, and I returned to Los Angeles, a city I hadn't fully resided in for eight years. A point I make in my book is that I believe a home possesses a certain karma. If it's been neglected, it can become problematic. Suddenly, the plumber becomes your closest confidant.
There was indeed work requiring attention, numerous matters both literal and metaphorical to address, and I spent considerable time preparing meals, a pursuit I genuinely enjoy. Concurrently, I embarked on writing a book and began to re-establish a semblance of routine. I also dedicated substantial time to my family, where I'm happiest. Consequently, everything is proceeding well.
I'm sure you experienced a wide range of emotions during the quickest presidential campaign ever, and you've compared the grieving process, not only to losing the election but to a profound personal loss you haven't felt since your mother passed away. So, how are you navigating this period? Do you feel you've genuinely had the space to process these feelings and move on? And what role did the book have in your healing?
The book's creation proved quite therapeutic. I find myself, much like every woman present, inclined to be highly focused on tasks, a trait that's both a strength and a weakness, I confess. Once I have a task, I'm driven to finish it before proceeding to the subsequent one. In reality, I seldom allow myself, and often my team as well, the chance to pause and acknowledge our achievements, as another issue immediately demands attention. During the 107 days, it was indeed a relentless sequence of daily tasks, and I felt I could never do enough.
Each evening, extending into the late night and occasionally the early morning, my prayer was, I hope I have done everything I could possibly do. During such periods, and I believe you'll all understand this, when you're in a state where a task absolutely must be completed, especially with a competitive drive and the presence of ambition—something I and we all should commend in one another—you inevitably reveal aspects of yourself. This can make you susceptible in various ways to others' validation or rejection, to their critiques or praise, echoing the old adage about presenting yourself openly. It's a path that inherently involves risk.
I was aware of a personal goal, which I also communicated to my team: I wouldn't get caught up in the emotional ups and downs. This meant I wouldn't be swayed by either extreme highs or lows. My focus was so intently on the immediate task that I dedicated all my energy to completing what I could each day before moving on to the next. Consequently, I didn't leave myself space for contemplation, as time was scarce and the situation wasn't about my personal feelings. It was only when I returned home and experienced a sense of calm that reflection started to occur.
While challenging and often difficult, there were also times when one consciously recognized the inherent beauty and satisfaction within the process.
The new book by Former Vice President Harris, 107 Days
So, when you wrote this book, what was your objective? Did you aim to record this significant election through your perspective? What prompted you to write it? Because the honesty is present. And honesty, incidentally, isn't always well-received. You've experienced this during your tour. But as you've stated multiple times in the book, I felt like I had to have this armor on, it seemed as though you were revealing your vulnerability in its pages.
As stated in the introduction, this situation was without precedent. A sitting President is seeking another term. Three and a half months prior to the election, he opts out of the race. The current Vice President then steps in to challenge the former President, who had been campaigning for a decade, with just 107 days remaining.
This event is a chapter in American history that will be documented. It has already been documented. Frankly, I wasn't going to allow history to recount these 107 days without my perspective included.
The story will get written either way.
It will happen. There's a common saying, perhaps overused now, that states, own your voice, use your voice. That sentiment holds significant truth. We, particularly ambitious, hardworking, and goal-driven women, despite the inherent strength and bravery involved, can sometimes be vulnerable to the explicit and implicit messages we receive, suggesting we shouldn't boast about ourselves or our experiences. The advice often is to simply endure or manage it without discussing it.
Throughout my career, I recall a remarkable encounter from when I first began working at the Vice President’s residence. We assumed office during the peak of COVID, meaning for several months, it was essentially just Joe and me interacting via a Zoom board.
The initial head of state I met with at the Vice President’s residence for a bilateral discussion was Chancellor Angela Merkel. As you might already know, this remarkable woman had been the de facto leader of Europe for 15 years. She was brilliant, and despite the media often depicting her as humorless, she was incredibly warm and possessed a fantastic sense of humor. We connected very well and discussed numerous topics. This conversation occurred before Russia's invasion of Ukraine, yet we covered the EU's future, China, and Russia, among many other subjects.
As an American, I was keenly aware, and I say this with utmost respect, that I was meeting with The German chancellor. I was determined not to be the American who was either unprepared or took too much time. Therefore, I instructed my team to pass me a note five minutes before the scheduled end of our meeting, ensuring I'd be punctual for all commitments. She, in turn, dismissed her team and stated, No, I want to stay longer. This was noteworthy, as she had another engagement to attend.
She then leaned in and recounted a tale from her early political ascent in Germany, a period marked by considerable criticism and mockery. Though our discussion had largely been in English, a translator was present. She explained that they began to label her with a specific term, then gestured towards the [translator], uttered a German word, and the translator conveyed, It’s an ugly bird. This was a derogatory epithet used against her. She then turned to me and stated,Never let them make you cry.
So when I say it’s right to tell our story and not be silent, that does coexist, at least for me, with—but I’m not going to wear my emotions on my sleeve, not publicly. But it is important to make sure one’s voice is present and that you tell your own story. My mother used to say to me, Kamala, don’t you ever let anyone tell you who you are. You tell them who you are.
Harris's experience with glass ceilings and cliffs
You truly dedicated yourself to the campaign, and that's evident throughout. For 107 days, you barely slept in your own home. In a single 28-hour period, you visited five different states without any sleep.
Even so, occupying that role with just 107 days remaining, you're a person who has broken through many barriers. You've been the pioneer, occasionally the second, but most often the first, in numerous environments you've encountered.
There’s another term that women have in their careers, which is the glass cliff. It’s when a job is impossible, and you get to have it. Was your 107 days the ultimate glass cliff?
Cliff, to me, signifies an ending, which I'm not fond of. However, I must acknowledge your excellent point. Similar to many others present, I've guided numerous individuals, especially young women. At times, with a degree of exasperation, I've told them, Do you think that breaking barriers means you start out on one side of the barrier and just end up on the other side of the barrier? No, it requires breaking things. And when you break things, you risk getting injured, even bleeding. Yet, it's consistently worthwhile. It's consistently worthwhile.
What we understand is that it's not without difficulty. And the other aspect of that, then, concerns how we navigate through it. And one of the things I'd urge us all to keep in mind—take in this stunning environment and observe what I observe—what Alyson and we observe from this platform. Because for a great many of you, there have been and will be numerous instances where you've entered a boardroom, or any professional setting, and you're the sole individual who resembles you or shares your life journey.
And I'd like to impress upon us the importance of always remembering, as we enter those spaces, to do so with our heads held high and our shoulders back, confident that we are not isolated within them. We should also recognize the multitude of individuals who are cheering us on for occupying that space, anticipating that we will articulate the perspective we've rightfully earned the right to share there. This is because overcoming obstacles frequently leads to feelings of solitude, and when one feels alone, it can be quite disempowering, ultimately hindering one's own leadership efforts.
The core message is straightforward: Never let yourself feel isolated. And when you do experience that feeling, recognize it for what it is and remember everyone who's with you.
What caused the Democrats' setbacks, and what's their future path
I'd like to discuss the future direction for Democrats, and to do that, I want to examine some of the election's outcomes. The election revealed that President Trump moved America in a more conservative direction, even in traditionally Democratic strongholds. I believe New York experienced a change, as did Los Angeles and San Francisco.
In San Francisco specifically, many of the tech billionaires who previously backed the Democratic Party are now quiet, or they're contributing substantial funds to Trump.
I'm interested—there's a lot to consider there, and the reasons for America's rightward shift in different areas, but examining it, what were the prevailing trends that caused this?
So, I’m going to put the tech…
…We can talk about that next…
My assessment is that their driving forces are considerably distinct from, shall we say, the typical voter for Trump. I am convinced that a substantial portion of individuals cast their ballots for the current president based on his promise to lower prices immediately, a promise he failed to keep. This constitutes a deception on his part. Consequently, grocery costs have risen. Inflation has increased. Unemployment has also gone up. Nevertheless, I maintain that this was a primary reason for their vote.
Another point I'd emphasize is that as we attempt to understand this division, and some voices actively work to maintain it between, for instance, my supporters and the president's supporters, and when we try to reconcile these groups or evaluate the opposing side, I'd suggest we consider that we might be assuming everyone shares the same understanding of current events domestically and globally.
What I'm getting at is that there's a significant effort to target populations with false and misleading information. This is a crucial aspect of our work when we attempt to analyze or comprehend what appears to be a national division. My view is that this division isn't necessarily rooted in differing beliefs about what's morally, ethically, or legally correct, nor is it based on what's best for our democracy.
I believe a significant, underlying element we must be prepared to understand and confront is the vast quantity of mis- and disinformation influencing public perception of national events and subsequently, their feelings towards fellow citizens. I'll further note that we, and I'm sure you as business leaders recognize this, are also contending, as a country, with a deep-seated lack of trust. While this has always been present, I feel it's currently at an elevated degree between the general populace and various institutions.
These systems could be industrial, institutional, or governmental. A deep distrust exists for systems. The pandemic likely played a role, as it disrupted many lives, leading people to doubt that things would function as expected. Furthermore, the level of distrust among Americans is at an unprecedented height in our lifetimes.
And I don’t mean, can I trust you so that I can leave my door unlocked? I mean, can I trust that you don’t want to attack my very existence, that you don’t want to harm me? We’ve got a lot of deep work to do as a country right now, I think.
The social platforms do, too.
Right. Talk about contributing and causal conditions.
One reality, though, is, and you say this in the book, too: Elon Musk had supported Democrats in the past. He, after the assassination attempt on Trump, decided to go all in and spent a ton of money on helping President Trump get elected. But I wonder how much of that, too, is, he wasn’t invited to the EV events, that—
Which I write about.
You also discuss this. I'm curious, how can the Democratic Party re-establish a healthy relationship with capitalists? And is it possible for this to coexist with the growing socialist sentiments within the party?
As you correctly pointed out, Alyson, my book notes my belief that it was a significant error not to include Elon Musk in our major EV event. He's, after all, the foremost American producer of remarkable innovation in this field, and indeed, in space exploration. The omission, based purely on merit, is something I feel a President of the United States must set aside political allegiances for, especially when they impede what should be a source of national pride: our creation of such technology and innovation. Therefore, I considered it a misstep, and while I don't know Elon Musk personally, I must surmise that this was a blow to him and influenced his viewpoint.
Regarding the Democratic Party's connection to capitalism, some opinions might suggest it's anti-capitalist. I identify as a capitalist. A core principle I hold is that competition fosters excellence. To grasp this fully, we must acknowledge that if individuals don't begin on a level playing field, we can't expect the best to succeed when some have an unfair advantage from the start. Therefore, we need to consider this by establishing conditions where everyone can compete and the most capable will emerge.
Regarding the party's trajectory, I believe it must be rooted in addressing the immediate concerns of Americans with a practical approach. This encompasses, for instance, the priorities I've championed on matters such as accessible childcare and paid family leave. My entire campaign centered on expanding Medicare to cover home health services for those in the sandwich generation.
The administration's choice to prioritize the infrastructure bill and the CHIPS Act was, in retrospect, an error. While undeniably crucial, these initiatives were advanced before addressing pressing immediate concerns. The infrastructure bill will indeed yield significant enhancements to America's infrastructure, which was sorely needed. However, if citizens' immediate needs aren't satisfied, they struggle to concentrate on other matters with confidence or even faith in their government, let alone any political affiliation.
Prioritizing the immediate requirements of Americans is crucial.
That's absolutely correct. A recent study suggested that the American dream now requires $5 million for a family with a couple of children, covering college tuition and a home. This figure is simply out of reach, illustrating a hierarchy of needs..
A reason I opted against a gubernatorial run in California is my current cross-country travel aimed at hearing from citizens. While many claim to be on listening tours, their actual intent is often listen to me. I genuinely aim to hear from people, as I believe our current approach to listening is lacking. And to your observation, many individuals find life exceedingly expensive, particularly when considering impending Medicaid reductions. For instance, I had my hair styled for this occasion…
…It looks great…
...Thanks, a great blow dry is wonderful. My hairdresser mentioned her three-year-old daughter has special needs, and currently, the Department of Education is cutting resources, leaving her child on an extensive waitlist for an IEP. Similarly, one of her friends has a child with autism and another with Down syndrome, both awaiting IEPs. To address this, they're considering hiring private providers, despite struggling to afford rent. If we fail to address fundamental needs, a backlash will emerge, seemingly about blame the rich, but fundamentally, I believe it concerns we need help for our basic needs, and please prioritize those needs..
Yeah, you can’t vote for stability if you need something to change.
And I think when we’re talking about people running based on a platform that is about bringing down rent or freezing rent, and that scares everybody—you know what I’m talking about, right?
And it scares everybody. I don’t live in New York, and I’m not telling New Yorkers what to do. But here’s my point: The guy’s running for mayor, and I think he’s really clear that he’s running for mayor, and he’s getting Trump supporters because they’re like, I have to take three buses a day to get to work, and I can’t afford it. They’re saying, I can’t afford my rent. Freeze my rent. And that’s appealing to people who, I think, are not really concerned about anything that’s about foreign policy or anything beyond, I need, at least at a local level, you to worry about my basic needs.
My point is that we ought to consider this. I'm not endorsing anyone, but it's something we need to consider. I'm particularly focused on Gen Z. They represent a larger demographic group than baby boomers. Their current age spans from approximately 13 to around 27 or 28, and they've only ever experienced the climate crisis. They've also lived through the pandemic. They are extremely concerned. If you have a high school or college-aged child in your family, you'll understand their deep anxiety that their chosen field of study, or any job they might secure upon graduation, will likely be something they aren't prepared for. It's projected that Gen Z will hold between 10 and 12 jobs throughout their careers. In contrast, when our parents finished school, the job they landed was their lifelong career, the "gold watch," so to speak.
They're going through what they've termed “climate anxiety,”, a fear stemming from shifts in extreme weather that makes them believe their future lives are significantly imperiled. My goddaughter, currently a college junior, confided in me just two days prior, expressing her anxiety about, what is the world going to be for me, Auntie? She stated, when I want to have kids, should I even be thinking about having children?
That's in addition to—unaffordable, not for her, but for a great many in that generation, they don't aim to own a home. They don't think it's achievable for them.
How America's Most Influential Women Can Offer Assistance
The positive aspect is that we're gathered with many influential individuals. These aren't merely powerful women; they are high-level executives representing diverse sectors. So, what is required of them? What does the nation need from them? What qualities should leadership embody at this moment? And how can those steering the world's most significant enterprises contribute?
You're all participating by being present, and I urge you to keep engaging actively in your professional and civic lives. Currently, many factors contribute to people feeling isolated and overlooked, so maintaining engagement in our communities' civic affairs is crucial.
This problem of false and misleading information is vital, and given the platform and the influential opinions everyone here possesses, I believe it's crucial we're ready to engage in challenging yet achievable discussions with individuals about disseminating the facts as we understand them. This means not assuming others share our information base. We must endeavor to construct those connections.
Alyson, we don't have sufficient time to delve deeply into this now, but we've discussed the consumer's influence. I'm convinced consumers currently wield considerable power, especially concerning social media's impact and our specific worries about its effects on children. I urge you to consider, in your work directly engaging consumers, how we can enhance their understanding of AI's future, encompassing both its benefits and its potential dangers. My concern is genuine.
Here's a condensed summary: I'm worried the industry won't adequately address the risks and potential harm, despite the significant benefits. I don't believe the industry, as a whole, possesses the necessary motivation, though there are exceptions.
It’s not going to come from Congress. And I say that as a devout public servant. The idea that Congress is going to catch up with the technology in real time and then get through its bureaucracy quickly enough to actually be relevant to a moment before that moment has passed—I hope it happens, but it hasn’t so far. So one has to ask that—and by the way, if the laws aren’t in place, then the courts really can’t act, because there’s no basis for the litigation.
There will be some, privacy and all of that, but you understand my point. So the question then becomes, well, then what are we to do? I think the other power base that we’re overlooking, in addition to the industry itself, Congress, legislation, and maybe the courts as an extension, to my point, the consumer.
So how are we educating parents, for instance, so that it's not just public advocacy groups and nonprofits leading the charge, but also business leaders stepping up to empower individuals? This enables them to request what they desire from the marketplace, provided they have sufficient knowledge. Some might then conclude they're content with the current situation, but at least they'll have made that decision with complete awareness.
In my past role as Attorney General of California, a primary responsibility involved serving as the chief law enforcement officer for the largest state and acting as a consumer advocate. A significant concern for consumers consistently revolves around their complete understanding of the potential risks and advantages associated with using a product or service. Therefore, I'd like to request your assistance with this matter, as the rapid advancement of this technology is pressing. If we are to proactively address it, I believe it will be due to the active participation of the leaders present here.
Mr. Vice President, we're very grateful you could join us tonight. Your insights are highly valued.
Thank you.