As a momentous, historic weekend in US politics unfolded, analysts and commentators grasped for precedents and comparisons to help explain the significance and power of the choice Joe Biden had made. The 46th president had swept the Democratic party’s primaries but just over 100 days from the election had chosen to stand aside.
Some talked about Lyndon Johnson, who had initially wanted to run for another term in 1968 but a surprisingly slim victory in the New Hampshire primary and deteriorating health made him change his mind and pull out. But that was before most of the primaries, seven months before the election. Others talked about Harry Truman, who pondered another run in 1952 and even put his name on the New Hampshire primary ballot. But advisors convinced him he was too old and unwell to continue.
So both share similarities with Biden’s decision, but neither made their call as late or as dramatically as Biden.
“There is no direct historical analogy that I’m aware of,” said Russell Riley, a presidential historian at the University of Virginia, told the Washington Post.
Well, not in America. But there’s a recent one here in New Zealand. Not exactly analogous, of course, but pretty close. It’s the story of a man, a loyal servant of his party, who read the polls, the mood of his country, and recognised that in “putting people first” it was his duty to stand aside (however reluctantly) for a new generation. He stood down for a younger woman, his deputy, and a candidate who would break barriers just by standing. The man won praise for a “selfless masterstroke” putting country and party first.
I’m sure you get the comparison. In 2017, Andrew Little stood aside for Jacinda Ardern. In 2024, Biden has now stood aside, endorsing vice-president Kamala Harris. Events in the first 12 hours after his announcement have made it very unlikely any serious competition will stand against her. So commentators are now grappling with whether Harris has it in her to seize her moment, just as many of us watching Ardern’s rise to leader wondered if she had it in her to turn around National’s double-digit poll lead.
The answer here was “Jacindamania”. As Labour’s youngest ever leader, the 37 year-old held a stunningly impressive first press conference, told a breakfast TV host to butt out of women’s reproductive lives and harnessed a “mood for change”. Ardern failed to win the popular vote, but Labour’s surge and coalition partners meant she won power.
There are lots of reasons why the late resignation of a leader here in New Zealand may not have the same impact in the US. For one, Ardern an Opposition leader up against a tired, third term government. Harris, 59, has to defend an incumbent government, which has become poison in these fast-changing, polarised times.
But already there are similarities on many fronts. Harris moves centre stage with many in her own party harbouring serious doubts about her electability. Some talk about her “uneven history as a campaigner”. Others have described her as a “promising” politician who flamed out on the national stage. Others still, a politician who knows what she knows but is weak on some cornerstones issues, especially the economy.
Ardern faced just those criticisms, and in both cases they aren’t without some merit. Harris and Ardern were both flawed candidates in some similar ways; both experienced yet somehow under-prepared, both people who wrestle with their own self-confidence, and both measured politicians who seem to act more on caution than on vision. Both have struggled with what these days is called “delivery” when in power.
But sometimes a moment propels a person and a person can capture the mood of that moment; sometimes not having too long to prepare allows a person to be authentic and inspirational in a way they never could have if they had more time to think; sometimes just by being someone else they become precisely the person the public wants. Dismiss it as “stardust” as some did in 2017, but that won’t stop them winning.
Harris has the potential to speak to a better future, in a way Ardern did, contrasting with familiar, older, male opponents. She has the potential to connect with younger voters just as Ardern did. And just by being something new, she can shake the cobwebs off what people thought they had to choose between at the election. Just like Ardern did.
Immediately following Ardern’s election as Labour leader, the party was swamped with donations, peaking at $700 per minute. In just seven hours after Biden stood aside, Democratic online fundraising platform ActBlue raised US$46.7m, mostly from small donors. Democratic-aligned analysts spoke on-air of a phone call organised Sunday (UST) by the Win with Black Women network. A thousand women had been expected to join the call. More than 34,000 called in (some sources say as many as 40,000).
Former advisor to President Barack Obama turned commentator, Van Jones, said on CNN, that he had his doubts about Harris even in recent weeks, but in just 12 hours the public response to her had changed his mind. “I’m watching a rocket take off,” he said. Yeah, we’ve seen that here in New Zealand, I thought.
So soon after Biden’s big call, there’s no way of knowing if Harris will be able to follow Ardern’s path to victory. But the comparisons are clear and worth considering. It’ll be fascinating to see whether Harris can manage her launch as well as Ardern did and capture the public’s imagination in the same way. To see whether Kamalamania will capture the US in the short months until election day.