A new book reveals just how obsessed Kamala Harris was with her chair height during her failed presidential run. She was so obsessed with the minor details about her chair, but not about the country…
At a glance:
• A new book exposes Kamala Harris’s campaign team’s unusual demands for specific chair measurements during interviews
• Chair requirements included leg height no less than 15 inches and seat height no less than 18.9 inches
• Harris appeared smaller next to running mate Tim Walz during a CNN interview, triggering the chair specifications
• Critics note Harris focused more on optics than substantive policy discussions or solutions
• The report suggests Americans were fortunate Harris lost, given her apparent prioritization of appearance over substance
Harris’s Chair Obsession Revealed
Former Vice President Kamala Harris’s ill-fated presidential campaign was plagued by numerous issues, but one of the strangest has just come to light – and you would never have guessed what it was. A new book reveals her team had extraordinarily specific requirements for chairs she would sit in during interviews and appearances.
According to the excerpt of “FIGHT: Inside the Wildest Battle for the White House,” by Jonathan Allen and Amie Parnes, Harris’ team “required that she be provided a chair that met certain specifications: ‘Leg height no less than 15 inches; floor to top of seat height no less than 18.9 inches; arms on chairs may not be very high, arms must fall at a natural height; chairs must be firm.”
Image Over Substance
The chair requirements apparently stemmed from an unflattering CNN interview with Dana Bash where Harris appeared physically smaller next to her running mate Tim Walz. Instead of focusing on message clarity or policy substance, the Harris team zeroed in on furniture specifications.
“Sitting next to Walz in a chair that seemed to place her below him and heaping praise on Biden’s record, Harris did not look like a candidate seeking the highest office in the land. The whole scene reinforced the criticism that the Vice President was either incapable, or afraid, of answering tough questions on her own,” the book notes.
Throughout her campaign, Harris consistently avoided substantive interviews and policy discussions. When she did speak, her remarks often became incoherent word salads like her climate comment: “The climate crisis is real that it is an urgent matter to which we should apply metrics that include holding ourselves to deadlines around time.”
The chair obsession perfectly encapsulates what went wrong with Harris’s campaign. While Donald Trump was addressing real issues facing Americans, Harris was micromanaging furniture specifications and avoiding tough questions.
Harris’s campaign strategy relied heavily on criticizing Trump rather than offering clear solutions or vision. Her team’s fixation on chairs rather than chairs of policy committees illustrates why American voters ultimately rejected her candidacy.
