Barack Obama’s phone call to Nancy Pelosi after her swift endorsement of Kamala Harris as the Democratic nominee caught many off guard. A new book sheds light on the tension between two party titans over the timing of that pivotal move.
As reported by The Daily Mail, Obama was visibly frustrated when Pelosi endorsed Harris just a day after President Joe Biden announced his exit from the presidential race on July 21, 2024. The former president, who favored a deliberative process over an immediate coronation, reportedly confronted Pelosi with a blunt message, characterized by a confidant as, “What the f*** did you just do?”
Pelosi, unfazed, shot back with a curt, “That train has left the station,” signaling her belief that the decision was already beyond debate. This exchange, detailed in Jonathan Karl’s book Retribution, highlights a rift between Obama and Pelosi, who had previously agreed to avoid early endorsements.
The backdrop to this clash was Biden’s faltering campaign, marked by a disastrous debate against Donald Trump on June 27, 2024, and subsequent public missteps. Gaffes like calling Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky “President Putin” at a NATO summit only deepened concerns about his fitness for another term.
By mid-July, Biden’s physical frailty was evident after contracting COVID-19 during a Las Vegas trip, requiring Secret Service assistance to board a vehicle en route to his Delaware vacation home. It was there, isolated and under pressure, that he decided to abandon his reelection bid.
Obama and Pelosi, two of the most powerful figures in Democratic circles, had been in regular contact as Biden’s exit loomed, privately agreeing that Harris shouldn’t be handed the nomination without a competitive process. Yet Pelosi’s endorsement on July 22, less than 24 hours after Biden’s announcement, blindsided Obama and sparked his pointed reaction.
Some close to Obama downplayed the call as good-natured ribbing, suggesting the former president wasn’t truly upset. But a source near Pelosi countered that Obama sounded “genuinely irritated,” revealing a deeper frustration with her unilateral action.
Even Pelosi’s husband, Paul, was taken aback by her decision, asking simply, “Kamala?” to which she responded with a sharp, “Don’t start with me.” This domestic exchange, also noted in Karl’s book, underscores how unexpected her endorsement was, even to those closest to her.
Pelosi’s history with Harris adds another layer to the story, as she had previously expressed reservations about Biden selecting Harris as his running mate in 2020. Despite this, with major Democrats and potential challengers quickly rallying behind Harris, Pelosi felt compelled to act.
A senior Biden adviser who worked in the Obama White House suggested the former president’s hesitation stemmed from doubts about Harris’s ability to win, quipping, “There’s only one Black Jesus.” This biting remark hints at Obama’s skepticism about replicating his own historic success with another candidate.
Yet, with no other viable contenders stepping forward, the momentum for Harris became unstoppable. Pelosi, recognizing the landscape, decided her only option was to support Harris and focus on securing a victory.
Obama and Michelle Obama eventually came to the same conclusion, publicly endorsing Harris in a campaign video five days after Biden’s exit. Their delayed support, however, couldn’t mask the initial discord that Karl’s reporting exposed.
This episode reveals how even the most seasoned Democratic leaders can stumble over strategy when the stakes are highest. Pelosi’s rush to back Harris, while perhaps pragmatic given the lack of alternatives, ignored a shared understanding with Obama that could have preserved party cohesion.
One can’t help but wonder if this haste risks alienating voters who crave transparency over backroom decisions. A more open process, as Obama seemingly preferred, might have avoided the whiff of elitism that so often fuels distrust in political establishments.
As Karl’s Retribution hits shelves, these behind-the-scenes glimpses remind us that unity is a fragile commodity in politics, easily fractured by timing and ego. For a party facing an uphill battle, such missteps are a luxury they can ill afford.
