From the stark reminders of their less than satisfactory leadership, Kathy Hochul and Kamala Harris share more than their initials. Political weaknesses, along with instances of unpreparedness and questionable popularity, run deep in both. It’s important to point out the ways in which they’ve ceded to an extremist left wing ideology, a feature that should be noted by Republicans in New York as they map their strategy for the next election cycle.
Drawing on the model of President Trump’s deft exposure of Harris’ inefficiencies while she served as the Vice President, the Republicans could use this framework to challenge Hochul, whose leadership has so far proved simply unequal to the task of steering New York back on the right path. As we think back on the tumultuous tenure of Harris, we recall stumbles from catastrophe to catastrophe without any notable accomplishments.
Harris’ mismanagement of the border crisis and several awkward public appearances combined with a pervasive failure to inspire even intra-party confidence, serves as potent reminder of her premature exit from the 2020 Presidential race. Additionally, the manner in which she was selected as Biden’s running mate, singled out for non substansive reasons, emphasizes the nature of her political career.
The story of Hochul isn’t far removed from this narrative. She rose to the role of Governor through a series of events that had more to do with scandal and political manoeuvring than a reflection of her own competence. When Andrew Cuomo picked her as his running mate, it was because he was confident she wouldn’t outshine him – a telling aspect of her career – and she eventually took over the top spot in the wake of his disgraceful departure.
In her own tenure, Hochul has followed a pattern of crises-management, always lagging behind, and failing especially in addressing New York’s migrant crisis. Her lack of effective response towards spiralling crime rates and inability to assert herself against the pro-criminal stance of Albany’s bail laws, are contributing to the sense of insecurity among New Yorkers.
Much like Harris, Hochul’s leadership lacks any real mandate or leadership strength, which has led to a further decline in her popularity. Harris, as former Vice President, was notorious for being out of favour among the Democratic base, with many questioning her ability to make it through a competitive primary without behind-the-scenes political maneuvering.
Harris’ inadequate public speaking also hurt her image. Her presentations often came across as faux-hearted attempts to charm, filled with overused cliche’s and forced laughter. Hochul, furthermore, seems to be dwelling in the same unpopular territory with only 39% favorability as per recent polls, and a striking 57% of New Yorkers desiring a different leader.
A significant part of their unfavorable public perception emerges from the view that both Harris and Hochul waffle in leadership and lack the fortitude to stand against the radical left. Hochul’s leadership has been bulldozed by the extreme left on various instances, including several legislative and judicial decisions, underscoring a lack of principled stand against extreme leftist tendencies.
In the face of New York’s controversial bail reform laws, Hochul gave in to progressive pressures without any significant efforts to rectify them. Rather than combating the migrant crisis, she chose to make New York a sanctuary state, skipping over the long-term consequences. The decisions of her administration have made New York less affordable, further driving businesses and families out of the state.
Trump’s near demolition of Harris offers key insights that could be applied to Hochul’s case. Trump’s bold position against the status quo and dedication to authentic leadership struck a chord with the American people. The time has come to expose Hochul as a political figure being propped up without the backing of true faith or credibility- a leader with no substance or sustainable policies.
The desperate need for change is palpable among New Yorkers. Rising cost of living, soaring crime rates, and an unfriendly business environment are pushing businesses and residents to seek better alternatives. To revive the spirit of New York, it is imperative to send a strong message of reform and repudiation of failed leadership, much like the wake-up call delivered to Washington.
The critical evaluation of Harris and Hochul is not simply due to partisan inclinations, but a necessity to shed light on their political weaknesses and inability to lead effectively. It is clear that their lack of preparation, weak communication skills, and repeated deference to the radical left have severely impacted political stability and public comfort.
Reduced to serving the interests of a radical ideology, instead of addressing the pressing issues facing New Yorkers, Hochul needs to be replaced with a leader who will stand strong against the pervading crime and living costs conundrum. This upcoming election cycle will test the true character of New York’s political landscape and the ability of Republicans to expose the true nature of Hochul’s leadership.
In the end, it boils down to which political candidates will put the needs of the residents and the reputation of New York ahead of radical ideologies and personal ambition. Election cycles are an opportunity for voters to press the reset button and choose leaders who command genuine respect and exemplify the qualities desired in effective, responsive and responsible governance.