�鶹��Ƶ

President Joe Biden’s decision to end his reelection bid and endorse Vice President Kamala Harris for the job came just 105 days before Election Day. 

That leaves little time for Harris to mount a new campaign, seek a nomination, pick a running mate and run against former President Donald Trump—assuming she remains the Democratic Party’s choice. 

It’s another unprecedented moment in American politics. Doug Spencer is an election and constitutional law expert with Colorado Law at CU Boulder. He sat down with CU Boulder Today to talk about what comes next in this election cycle and beyond. 

What sort of precedent do we have here, if at all? 

We have a precedent of open conventions. We have a precedent of nominating major party candidates late in the season, but we really don't have a precedent of a president who wanted to run for reelection and then decided this late in the game not to run after all after one term. 

Professor Doug Spencer

What do the next 6 months look like—for both the president and vice president? 

Joe Biden is now a lame duck president. That is not unprecedented. Every president has a lame duck period. He will continue to act as president. He's been acting as president even amid all of this chatter about his ability to seek reelection. He went to the G-7 summit. He gave a forceful press conference. People respected him as the president of the United States. He still speaks for us. He still leads our foreign policy. He'll still be working with members of Congress. In fact, he'll have more time and energy to focus on governing than he would while running for reelection.

Kamala Harris' time will be quite different. She’s operating as though she is all in on being president of the United States. She's soliciting endorsements. She will go out and campaign. Her staff will grow significantly, and a new group of advisers will come in and help her build a campaign that they hope wins in November. 

Can Republicans challenge Harris’ candidacy? 

There really are no legal options for challenging Kamala Harris or any Democratic candidate from appearing on the ballot. The states have not printed their ballots yet. Every state law says they will print the name of the major party candidate who's been nominated by that party.

Joe Biden was not the nominee. He was the presumptive nominee going into the convention. Until the Democrats formally nominate a candidate, states are waiting. 

It's not an anti-democratic process to have a party follow its own bylaws to identify its nominee. The delegates will appear. They will vote, which is democratic. They'll follow the process that's set out in the bylaws of the Democratic Party, and they will select a candidate who best represents the interests of their party.

How quickly will Harris need to choose a running mate? 

This is all happening very, very quickly by American standards. As we've seen very recently in Great Britain and France, most national elections around the world operate in four to six months. We’re months out from the November election, which is a very typical time for somebody to mount a national campaign. 

I think the most important thing she needs to find in a vice presidential pick is somebody who will help her win. That could mean looking geographically. Maybe she tries to find somebody like Josh Shapiro, the governor of Pennsylvania, an important state for the Democrats to capture. Maybe she finds somebody more moderate than herself as a sign of unity to independent voters. Maybe somebody like an Adam Kinzinger, a self-described “Never Trumper.” Or somebody who used to be Republican that is now more moderate. She and her advisers will make those calculations.

She does not have to make that decision before the convention. Just as Trump didn't identify his vice presidential candidate until the Republican convention, she has a few weeks to make that call. 

It’s been 8 years since a woman ran for president. How have voter attitudes changed? 

We haven't really talked about the fact that Kamala Harris is the most likely replacement and that she's a female and a Black woman and an Indian woman. You have a mixed race, minority female candidate, and I think not identifying that or talking about that, in some ways, shows some level of progress that we think of her as a viable alternative to a white male candidate.

President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris are briefed on the assassination attempt on former President Donald Trump. (Official White House Photo by Adam Schultz)

On the other hand, I think it's naive and unrealistic to ignore the dynamics of filling a spot with a female candidate when we saw support for Hillary Clinton, perhaps one of the most qualified candidates ever to run for president of the United States, drop when she decided to run for president. Even though she had wide public support as a senator and as Secretary of State. There was something about having a female as the chief executive that turned voters off to the extent that they voted for Donald Trump, who also had negative ratings. 

One example of the way Vice President Harris is being treated differently already is the way that her name is used. I think referring to Vice President Harris as “Kamala” is very endearing and connecting and intimate in a way that makes you feel connected to a candidate as a person. But referring to the men by their last name, Trump or Biden, gives them a level of seniority and power and leadership because you're referring to them more as an entity than as a person.

So, yes, we will treat Donald Trump or talk about Donald Trump differently than we will Vice President Kamala Harris. Media figures may ask them different questions. It's unlikely we'll really comment on the appearance of Donald Trump. It’s almost a guarantee we’ll talk about the dresses or the skirts or the pantsuits or the color of the clothing that Harris wears. We’ll see those discussions and then we'll see discussions about us having those discussions. And the question is, will that distract us from really evaluating these candidates against themselves? 

How does this decision play into Biden’s overall legacy? 

His decision not to run for reelection could be seen as perhaps the most momentous and challenging thing for him, and perhaps the most lasting legacy that he gave us. I think there's an asterisk on that because the decision came after so much public wrangling, after a debate performance that gave people pause about his age and about his cognition. I think he may feel forced out, but even if he personally felt like he could keep going, stepping aside is an incredibly selfless act that we don't often see from leaders who run for office; leaders who often think they have all the answers and want to have that power.

When the final word is written about Joe Biden, it will begin by saying he stepped aside to let a new generation of leaders take the reins. That’s not a small thing. And it speaks deeply about his character. 

Title image: President Joe Biden greets Vice President Kamala Harris as he arrives to deliver his State of the Union address, Tuesday, February 7, 2023, on the House floor of the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C. (Official White House Photo by Adam Schultz)