Kamala Harris Should Explain WHY She's The Underdog
Kamala Harris Should Explain WHY She's The Underdog
She's running into antidemocratic headwinds and must foil Donald Trump's dirty tricks—more people should know that!
Over the weekend, I inserted myself into an argument between
and , two political thinkers I admire a lot, about the wisdom of this familiar line of Harris campaign messaging.
Rich argues there’s strategic value in “running scared,” and corresponding peril in strategic arrogance—what if you start believing your own bullshit and let your guard down? Sargent, by contrast, counters that claiming the “underdog” mantle is soporific—akin to saying ‘don’t believe your eyes, we’re actually losing.’
I only weighed in because I found myself turned 180o from my usual instincts. Dominating your opponents and projecting confidence are politically attractive. Swagger will rally allies better than the fetal position. People like associating with winners. But, conceptually, underdogs and losers are quite different. Most of Harris’s messaging is on the forefoot. “We’re not going back” is an assertion of inevitability. “When we fight, we win,” isn’t what losers say. Daniel Laruso became the All Valley Karate champion. The less said about the original Rocky the better (he lost 🙁) but in the sequels he wins the rest of his main events.
Americans like to root for underdogs, and we feel admiration when they prevail. We brace for them to lose, but we understand that the idea isn’t synonymous with deficiency. A top dog might be a top dog only through the upper hand of experience, or home-field advantage. We suspect that the underdog will study their weaknesses and work harder than their opponents to overcome them.
In this regard, as confident underdogs, the Harris campaign offers its supporters both hope and encouragement to put in work. It’s a simple strategy, and I think it’s a good one.
But I also think Harris herself might benefit from being a bit more explicit about why she and Tim Walz, despite leading steadily in national polls, consider themselves underdogs. They have a good case to make. It cuts right to the heart of critical weaknesses and corruption in our political system. And the messaging might work even better if more of her supporters understood why she’s running into the wind.