How did Kamala Harris become so good at this?

How does a sub-par vice president get transformed nearly instantaneously into a joyful performer who can do no wrong?

It’s easy.

As the 20th century writer and strategist James Burnham put it, “Where there is no alternative, there is no problem.” Since there was no alternative to pumping up Harris to star status — or the only alternative would be to sub out Joe Biden for a barely replacement-level politician — she’s now inspirational, hip and beguilingly moderate.

In other words, Kamala has reversed the usual dynamic for getting considered a JFK- or Obama-level political talent: She is great because she’s the Democratic nominee; she’s not the Democratic nominee because she’s great.

If Joe Biden had done the responsible thing and stepped aside last year, there presumably would have been a contested nomination battle. Kamala would have been the favorite and perhaps would have won the nomination. But she would have had to fight for it — doing town halls and interviews, participating in debates, defending her record, dealing with media scrutiny and winning the support of real voters.

Securing a nomination is a major accomplishment, and there’s usually a moment when even the weakest nominee looks like he might have something going on. Back in 1988, it was, Wow — Michael Dukakis is leading George H.W. Bush by 17 points. In 1996: Maybe this Jack Kemp pick has injected the sense of energy into the ticket that Bob Dole needs. Etc.

Kamala didn’t have to prove her chops this way. To the contrary, that she did nothing to win the Democratic nomination has perversely smoothed her way to stardom.

A real nomination process would likely have exposed Kamala or at least would have made the current cocoon impossible. (She hasn’t done a formal TV interview since June 24, and Harris has generously suggested that she will schedule one by the end of the month.)

All her positions would have been litigated, and any change in policy would have been seized on and denounced by fellow Democrats. In the context of a primary, the media would have been happy to cover all the contention and ask the tough questions — for all we know, they might even have become vested in some candidate other than Kamala.

By fast-forwarding past the primaries and caucuses, Kamala went directly into a race with the hated Donald Trump, where the media is inevitably deeply committed to her.

Meanwhile, she hasn’t had to interact with voters in settings where she’s going to get challenged; hasn’t had to do dozens of interviews fighting for attention with other Democrats; and hasn’t seen, as nominees often do, key lines of attack against her developed by intramural party competitors.

Because trying to have a competitive process after Biden stepped aside would have been too difficult, she was simply selected. Yet, she is being treated like she swept through the primaries and caucuses like an unstoppable political phenomenon, when she still has never run in a national Democratic primary; she got out too early in 2019 and got in too late in 2024.

The sheer fact of her ascension created the incentive for Democrats and the media to declare her great. In reality, she’s a cardboard cutout of a politician whose main political talent is to be able to, just barely, simulate determination, passion and mirth while reading from a teleprompter.

Insulated from personal interactions with voters and from media scrutiny, running against an unpopular former president, and boosted by a party and press that have no alternative but to invest all their hopes in her, she is suddenly more than the sum of her parts.

Coach Walz, as Kamala dubbed her running mate Tim Walz, may have told his football players at some point that “there’s no substitute for going out and earning it.” Kamala 2024 is a testament to the fact that, actually, there is.

© 2024 by King Features Syndicate