The following article, Racist Democrats: Intentionally Sidestepped Kamala Harris and What It Reveals, was first published on The Black Sphere.
Those rascally Democrats know how to pretend to appease Black people, while slapping them in the face. What a clever strategy they imposed during the Biden Era.
In the final years of Joe Biden’s administration, whispers about his cognitive decline grew from quiet concerns to deafening alarms. Yet, despite mounting evidence—slurred speeches, moments of confusion, and a visibly diminished presence—the Democratic Party refused to invoke the 25th Amendment. Doing so would would have transferred power to Vice President Kamala Harris.
Given that this would have been the easiest way for Leftist to claim victory on two fronts–quasi-Black and woman–the decision not to declare Joe Biden competent raises critical questions: Was this purely political calculus, an unwillingness to admit weakness before an election? Or did deeper, unspoken biases—racial and gender-based—play a role in sidelining the first Black and South Asian female vice president?
If Republicans had been in the same position—hesitating to elevate a Black woman to the presidency—accusations of racism would have dominated headlines. Yet, Democrats faced little backlash for their inaction. This double standard forces us to ask: Do Democrats truly support Black leadership, or is their commitment to diversity merely performative?
The 25th Amendment: A Path Not Taken
The 25th Amendment exists for moments like these—when a president is unable to fulfill the duties of office. Section 4 allows the vice president and a majority of the Cabinet to declare the president unfit, transferring power to the VP. Yet, despite Biden’s visible struggles, neither Harris nor Democratic leaders took this step. Was Harris told not to invoke the 25th?
Instead, calls for invoking the 25th Amendment against Joe Biden came almost exclusively from Republicans. Congressman Derrick Van Orden (R-WI) publicly urged Harris to act, stating, “If the roles were reversed, and this was a Republican president, Democrats would be screaming for the 25th Amendment.” He was right.
Harris herself dodged questions about Biden’s fitness. When pressed, she refused to affirm his capabilities, saying only, “Joe Biden is our nominee.” Her reluctance spoke volumes—was she protecting the party, or was she being sidelined?
Political Calculations Over Principle?
Democrats had strong political incentives to avoid invoking the 25th Amendment:
-
Fear of Party Division – Removing Biden would have sparked a civil war within the Democratic Party. Progressive factions might have pushed for a more left-wing alternative, while moderates would have resisted.
-
The Trump Factor – Biden’s team wrongly believed only he could defeat Donald Trump in 2024. They feared that replacing him—especially with Harris, whose approval ratings were low—would guarantee a GOP victory.
-
Denial and Image Control – Admitting Biden’s decline would have shattered the carefully crafted narrative of a strong, competent administration. Instead, they opted for damage control, shielding Biden from unscripted appearances.
But this strategy came at a cost: It prioritized political survival over democratic integrity. By refusing to address Biden’s decline, Democrats undermined public trust and missed an opportunity to make history by elevating the first woman of color to the presidency–a clearly anti-Harris attitude.
Racial and Gender Bias: The Unspoken Factor?
The Democratic Party prides itself on diversity and inclusion. Yet, when the moment came to stand behind Kamala Harris, they hesitated. Would a white male vice president—say, a Tim Kaine or a John Edwards—have been treated the same way?
1. Would a White Male VP Have Been Sidelined?
History suggests no. When President Woodrow Wilson suffered a debilitating stroke in 1919, his white male Cabinet concealed his condition rather than transfer power to Vice President Thomas Marshall—but Marshall was also seen as unserious, a figure of little consequence.
In contrast, when Dick Cheney was vice president under George W. Bush, he wielded immense influence, even during Bush’s medical procedures. There was no hesitation in temporarily transferring power to him.
Kamala Harris, despite being next in line, was never given that level of trust. Was it because of her competence—or her identity? Or both?
2. Is Democratic Support for Black Leaders Performative?
Democrats love symbolic Black leadership—Barack Obama’s presidency was a historic milestone. But when it comes to real power, the party often balks.
-
Obama’s Treatment by the Party Establishment – Even Obama faced resistance from Democratic elites during his 2008 primary against Hillary Clinton.
-
The Disappearing Black Cabinet Members – Biden’s administration initially included several high-profile Black officials (e.g., Lloyd Austin, Marcia Fudge), but their influence waned over time.
-
The Harris Problem – Despite being vice president, Harris was given politically toxic assignments (border crisis, voting rights) with little support, setting her up for failure.
If Democrats truly believed in Black leadership, why didn’t they rally behind Harris when Biden faltered?
The 2024 Election: A Missed Opportunity
When Biden finally stepped aside, Harris became the Democratic nominee by default. But her campaign struggled from the start:
-
Underperformance with Key Demographics – Black voter enthusiasm dipped. Latino and young voters, crucial to Democratic victories, did not turn out for her as they had for Biden in 2020.
-
A Weak Campaign Strategy – Harris focused heavily on reproductive rights, but this failed to energize working-class voters worried about the economy.
-
Lack of Full Party Support – Many Democrats seemed resigned to her candidacy rather than enthusiastic. Some quietly hoped for a last-minute replacement.
The party’s failure to fully back her—after years of sidelining her—suggests either gross incompetence or an unwillingness to see a Black woman lead.
Conclusion: Accountability and the Future of the Democratic Party
The Democrats’ handling of Biden’s decline and Harris’s sidelining reveals uncomfortable truths:
-
Political expediency often overrides principle.
-
Racial and gender biases persist, even within the “progressive” party.
-
The media’s double standard protects Democrats from scrutiny Republicans would never escape.
If Democrats want to claim the moral high ground on racial justice, they must confront these contradictions. Otherwise, their rhetoric on diversity will ring hollow—and Black voters, long a loyal base, may start looking elsewhere.
The question remains: Do Democrats really like Black people, or do they just like Black votes? The Biden-Harris saga suggests the latter.
Continue reading Racist Democrats: Intentionally Sidestepped Kamala Harris and What It Reveals …