Photo courtesy of Matt Rourke / AP Photo

In the weeks following the selection of Vice President Kamala Harris as the Democratic presidential nominee, the vice president has risen to become one of the most energizing presidential candidates in a decade. 

An unpopular vice president and lackluster Democratic candidate in 2019 (having dropped out of the race before 2020 even started), Harris has energized the party at levels not seen since 2008. Many have compared Harris to former President Barack Obama, painting the two as the most popular and moving Democrats in decades, believing his political skill is somehow embodied in her. 

Built on hope and change, Harris and Obama have similar campaign vibes; however, Harris, who has faced virtually no challenge to her candidacy, is still relatively unknown by the public and lacks the charisma or political talent of Obama. When even a moving candidate like Obama led to underwhelming presidential years, an untested candidate like Harris could result in something even worse.

The Democratic National Convention was quite a show. Even non-political viewers were wowed by moving speeches and exciting performances by politicians and celebrities alike. Enthusiasm for Harris within the Democratic camp is high. 

After three years of being led by a borderline senile man, any change is refreshing. As such, the momentum of the race has shifted spectacularly. From mid-summer, when a second term from former President Donald Trump seemed inevitable, to now, when Harris is leading almost every poll, Democrats should be excited. 

Although Harris has a far better shot at winning the White House than current President Joe Biden, we can’t lose sight of the pitfalls a Harris presidency could have – and the pitfalls caused by such high expectations. The positive energy, complimentary comparisons and excitement around an otherwise lackluster candidate set Harris up for an underwhelming presidency. 

Before her deification by the Democratic establishment and media, Harris faced criticism for high internal turnover, unclear and often-changing policy positions, and notable lack of campaign charisma, all notable features of an ineffective leader. 

But when Biden dropped out of the presidential race, Harris was handed a fully built campaign team and a war chest of hundreds of millions of dollars. She faced no competition in securing the nomination and has faced very few difficult questions from the press, participating in just one interview since becoming the nominee. At this point in a campaign, the nominee is usually fully tested through competitive primaries, tense press conferences and questions from uncertain voters. 

To earn their party’s nomination, candidates often face fundraising challenges, internal scandals and a drawn-out political process, each obstacle testing their capabilities. Harris has dealt with none of this. When she did in 2019, she failed. This isn’t bad for Harris in 2024, but it will be for Harris in 2025. 

If Harris is sworn in on Inauguration Day, much of the hardening, lessons and testing normally provided to the incoming president won’t have happened. The new president will be all on her own. 

The expectations of the Obama presidency were larger than life. The “hope,” “change” and notion of a “post-racial era,” given by Obama led to a rise in populist nihilism, an entrenched status quo and a neo-racist awakening. As Harris gives us “joy,” “brat” and “not going back,” we can’t lose sight of the patterns of the past. The eight years of Obama ended with Trump. We can’t allow the end of the Harris era to end with something worse. Grand expectations lead to grand disappointments. 

Maybe Harris will defy the patterns of the past and be a great president. Maybe she won’t. Harris, on her worst day, may be better than Trump on his best. But either way, we must be realistic and match our expectations to the confines of reality. We can’t lose sight of the lessons the Obama presidency taught us. When we build our politicians up too high, they tend to knock us down.