Is Kamala Harris’ Ongoing Criticism of President Biden Undermining Her Path to Becoming the Democratic Nominee for President in 2028?

Harris’s candid critique of President Biden has shaken Washington’s political establishment — and raised a difficult question: can a woman reclaim her political voice without being punished for it?

Sarah Ferguson interviews Kamala Harris on 7.30. (ABC News)

In late October, while promoting her new memoir 107 Days during a high-profile interview in London, Kamala Harris was asked if she was finished with politics. Her answer was immediate — and telling. “No,” she said, before adding that she was “possibly” considering another run for president. It was a restrained but unmistakable signal that America’s first female vice president is not retreating from the political stage.

What followed was a sharp critique of President Joe Biden, the man she once stood beside as a running mate and ally. Harris described his decision to seek reelection in 2024 as “reckless,” suggested that his inner circle had “failed to protect” her, and implied that the administration’s communication failures contributed to Donald Trump’s return to the White House.

The comments were extraordinary — not just for their bluntness, but for who delivered them. Rarely does a sitting or former vice president publicly criticize a president from their own party. For Harris, the remarks marked a deliberate break with the Biden era and signaled the beginning of a new political chapter. The question now is whether that break will help her forge a future — or close the door on one.

A Strained Partnership

When Joe Biden selected Kamala Harris as his running mate in 2020, the choice was hailed as historic. Harris embodied the generational, racial, and gender diversity that Biden’s campaign sought to represent. Together, they projected a sense of unity — a bridge between experience and progress.

But inside the White House, that partnership was more complicated than it appeared. According to aides who worked closely with both, Harris often felt boxed in by a cautious administration that limited her exposure and rarely empowered her to define her own agenda. Biden’s advisors, meanwhile, viewed her as politically risky — a vice president with sharp instincts but inconsistent messaging.

The tension simmered for years, rarely spilling into public view. Harris defended Biden through crises, from Afghanistan’s withdrawal to inflation’s economic toll. But the 2024 campaign — marred by miscommunication, low enthusiasm, and a late decision by Biden to run again despite growing doubts about his age — became the breaking point.

In her new book, 107 Days, Harris portrays those final months as chaotic and disheartening. She writes that she urged senior staff to reconsider the strategy, warning that voters were demanding generational change. Her warnings went unheeded.

Kamala Harris is holding her book, “107 Days,” a “behind-the-scenes” look at what she calls “the shortest presidential campaign in modern history.” X/Kamala Harris

When Trump ultimately reclaimed the presidency, Harris was left carrying the baggage of a campaign she says she had little power to shape.

Now, she’s choosing to tell that story in her own voice — and on her own terms.

Reclaiming the Narrative

The memoir and the international interviews serve a dual purpose for Harris. They allow her to vent long-held frustrations, but they also function as a reset — an opportunity to reintroduce herself to the public not as a vice president bound by political caution, but as a leader shaped by experience.

“People deserve honesty,” Harris said during an interview with BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg in London. “We can’t fix what we refuse to confront.”

That kind of language resonates with Democrats hungry for accountability after a bruising election cycle. Yet it also places Harris in a precarious position. Criticizing a president from your own party — especially one still respected by much of the Democratic base — can come across as disloyal.

Party strategists are split. Some see her candor as a liability, reinforcing perceptions that she’s politically impulsive and willing to burn bridges. Others argue it’s a necessary step toward independence. “Harris can’t run in 2028 as Biden’s understudy,” Democratic operative said. “She has to prove she’s her own person — even if that means ruffling feathers.”

The U.K. Interview: A Political Reset Abroad

If her remarks in 107 Days rattled Democrats in Washington, her BBC interview made waves internationally. Harris appeared poised, measured, and deliberate — far removed from the sometimes-defensive tone that characterized her early vice-presidential years. She praised Biden’s moral leadership but refused to back down from her criticism of his decision-making.

Observers in London noted her confidence, her ease with foreign journalists, and her ability to articulate lessons learned from failure. To many, the interview looked less like a book promotion and more like a soft relaunch of her political brand.

“She came across as someone who had been through the fire and come out stronger,” one political analyst said afterward. “But it’s a delicate balancing act — she has to show growth without appearing to be settling scores.”

That balance may define the next phase of Harris’s career. Abroad, she can speak freely, unburdened by the partisan noise that defines Washington. At home, however, every word is parsed for signs of betrayal or ambition.

The Loyalty Question

For Democrats still nursing wounds from 2024, Harris’s decision to critique Biden is hard to digest. Loyalty remains a prized currency in politics, and some party veterans believe she’s spending hers recklessly.

“Criticism like that might win you a headline, but it won’t win you the nomination,” a former Democratic strategist said privately. “You can’t run as the future of the party while attacking the man who led it.”

Others disagree, arguing that Harris is doing what the party has long avoided — confronting its internal failures head-on. After all, the Democratic coalition is shifting. Younger voters, women, and people of color — groups that once championed Harris — are increasingly frustrated by what they see as an aging political establishment unwilling to evolve. Harris’s honesty, they argue, could resonate with that generation if framed correctly.

Still, the danger is real. If Democrats interpret her memoir and interviews as self-serving or divisive, Harris could find herself isolated — not only from the White House but from the network of donors, operatives, and party officials who shape primary campaigns.

The Gendered Lens

There’s another layer to this story that complicates how Harris’s criticism is perceived: gender. Male politicians who break ranks are often cast as courageous truth-tellers. Female politicians who do the same are too often labeled as bitter or disloyal.

Harris has faced that double standard throughout her career. Every smile, every pause, every expression of frustration is dissected for tone and motive. Her willingness to challenge Biden is being filtered through that same lens. Critics call it opportunism. Supporters call it courage.

What’s clear is that Harris’s political future will depend not just on what she says, but on how voters interpret why she’s saying it. If they see conviction, she gains credibility. If they see ambition, she loses trust.

A Long Road to 2028

The 2028 Democratic field remains a mystery, but Harris’s moves suggest she intends to be part of it. Her task is monumental: rebuild trust within the party, reintroduce herself to voters, and prove she can unify a fractured coalition.

That will require more than memoirs and media appearances. It will mean showing up — in towns, campuses, and community centers — to reconnect with the voters who once saw her as a symbol of possibility. It will mean presenting policies that go beyond critique — tangible solutions on economic inequality, healthcare, climate, and reproductive rights.

And above all, it will mean demonstrating resilience. Americans admire leaders who admit mistakes, but they reward those who grow from them. Harris’s story of frustration inside the Biden White House could be the foundation of a powerful redemption narrative — if she frames it as a story of lessons learned, not grievances aired.

The High-Risk Strategy

There’s no denying the gamble Harris is taking. By publicly criticizing Biden, she’s effectively breaking the unspoken rule of party unity. The short-term costs are already visible — awkward silences from Democratic allies, muted responses from former staffers, and cautious statements from donors.

But Harris may be playing a longer game. By owning her truth now, she ensures she’s not tethered to the failures of the past when 2028 arrives. Voters may not remember every policy detail of the Biden years, but they will remember who spoke up and who stayed silent.

The question is whether Democrats will reward that honesty or punish it. History offers examples of both. Political comebacks often begin with contrition and courage — but they also end with miscalculations of timing and tone.

The Cost of Speaking Out

Kamala Harris’s evolution from loyal vice president to outspoken critic marks a defining moment in her political journey. She has chosen transparency over tact, accountability over silence. Whether that decision strengthens or sinks her 2028 ambitions will depend on how she continues the story.

If she can transform her criticism into a vision for renewal — one that acknowledges past mistakes while inspiring future hope — she may yet emerge as the Democrat capable of uniting a restless base. If not, her honesty could become the very thing that sidelines her.

For now, Harris stands at a crossroads:

• The truth-teller who broke with tradition,

• or the insider who spoke too soon.

The coming years will reveal which narrative prevails — and whether her voice, once constrained by loyalty, can now redefine what leadership looks like in a party searching for its next generation.