Shapiro Critiques Harris’ Memoir
In an interview with The Atlantic, Democratic Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro expressed frustration over former Vice President Kamala Harris’ depiction of the 2024 presidential campaign in her memoir. This conversation came to light on Wednesday.
Shapiro’s ire was particularly directed at Harris’s endorsement of Democratic Minnesota Governor Tim Walz over him as a running mate. During the exchange with Tim Alberta, Shapiro’s annoyance was evident when an excerpt regarding his meeting with Harris surfaced. “Did she write that in a book? That’s complete nonsense,” he reacted. “I can assure you her explanation is entirely inaccurate.”
After the election, Donald Trump won against Harris, earning the necessary 270 electoral votes early on November 6, 2024.
Harris, under pressure from some progressive Democrats—including Congressman Jamal Bowman from New York—decided against choosing Shapiro due to his previous support for pro-Israel policies and school choice. This choice painted Shapiro as someone who might cause complications, leading Harris to wonder about her ability to trust him in such a role. She also claimed he had questioned the Naval Observatory housing manager extensively about the acquisition of art from a Pennsylvania artist.
“I did ask a lot of questions,” Shapiro conceded during the interview. “If there’s talk about partnership, wouldn’t you want to ask some questions?”
In the same discussion, Shapiro took the opportunity to critique President Obama and 2016 Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton. He specifically pointed out comments that seemed disrespectful to Americans outside the coastal regions. “His grasp of issues faced in these communities seemed genuine. But instead of suggesting solutions, he appeared to insult those who were struggling,” Shapiro noted about Obama. He referenced certain comments made by Obama at a San Francisco fundraiser, which were perceived negatively during another New York event.
Shapiro concluded with a thought on the nature of elections, highlighting that at times they boil down to a binary choice: “We can delve into theoretical debates about Trump, but fundamentally, it’s about him versus someone else.”
