A weekly window on the American political scene hosted by the Monitor's politics editors.

Harris's lack of 'authenticity' hurt. But what makes a politician genuine?

Michael Holahan/The Augusta Chronicle/AP
California Sen. Kamala Harris speaks during a rally at Aiken High School in Aiken, S.C. Saturday, Oct. 19, 2019. Senator Harris suspended her presidential campaign this week.

Dear reader:

“The thing about shifting messages is it creates issues about authenticity. And authenticity is the coin of the realm in presidential races.”

That was former Obama strategist David Axelrod, speaking to The Daily Beast about Kamala Harris’s presidential campaign, which abruptly ended yesterday. Like many political commentators, Mr. Axelrod highlighted a lack of clarity as to what the California senator stood for and why she wanted to be president. Ms. Harris frequently came across as waffling – taking a stand on an issue like health care, and then reversing herself or seeming to hedge her bets.

Why We Wrote This

Successful candidates are often skilled at coming across as ‘real’ to voters. It’s about conveying an unscripted quality – and a lack of fear.

As Mr. Axelrod noted, the problem wasn’t policy – most Democratic voters are not as interested in policy minutiae as the various televised debates would lead you to believe. It was that Ms. Harris too often seemed as though she was just trying to be whatever audiences wanted her to be.

Authenticity has stymied many a candidate, of course. During the 2000 campaign, Al Gore was seen by many as less comfortable in his own skin than George W. Bush. John Kerry, Mitt Romney, and Hillary Clinton all faced similar “authenticity deficits.”

In a piece in The Atlantic last spring, Gilad Edelman posited that authenticity in politics “is not about being honest; it’s about seeming unscripted.” Candidates “seem authentic to the extent that they seem to be saying what they’re really thinking, rather than what they’re ‘supposed’ to say.”

President Barack Obama was skilled at conveying a thoughtfulness that seemed natural, even when he was reading off a teleprompter. President Donald Trump’s willingness to break taboos – to say things most other politicians wouldn’t – makes him seem more “real” to many of his supporters.

In some ways, authenticity is related to fearlessness. Candidates that seem afraid of saying the wrong thing or uncertain of themselves on the big stage often get pegged as inauthentic.

“The caution and fence-straddling that Harris displayed earlier in her career, as the lead local and then state prosecutor, perhaps provided clues to her problems as a presidential candidate,” writes Christopher Cadelago in Politico. “This time, the moment — and the stage — proved too large.”

Let us know what you’re thinking at csmpolitics@csmonitor.com.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Harris's lack of 'authenticity' hurt. But what makes a politician genuine?
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today