How did Kamala Harris arrive at this moment?

In early 2019, Harris, then a U.S. senator, joined a crowded field to compete for the Democratic nomination to take on President Donald Trump. She drew praise for her performance on the debate stage, particularly for a memorable attack against Biden himself regarding his 1970s- and 1980s-era opposition to busing programs intended to foster school integration.

But Harris gave back some of that ground in the second debate. “Voters who watched Biden stumbling under her relentless barrage saw her as a fighter who could take the battle to President Trump and win. The expectations for Harris were high going into the second round on Wednesday night — and yet the feisty former prosecutor quickly found herself on the ropes and never really managed to fight her way off them. Harris may throw a good sucker punch, but she also seems to have a glass jaw,” columnist Megan McArdle wrote of Harris’s performance.

Harris dropped out of the race in December 2019, two months before the first primary. In a column the day Harris exited, Karen Tumulty wrote of the seemingly dashed expectations surrounding her: “By knowing when to make an exit, she has preserved the possibility that, at some point down the line, she might still turn them into a reality.”

When Biden chose Harris as his running mate in 2020, she made history as the first Black woman on a major party’s presidential ticket. On the day that the choice was announced, The Post’s Editorial Board wrote that Harris met the requirement that “has loomed as most important for [Biden’s] running mate: that she … be prepared to serve as president.”

When sexist and racist attacks against her spread online, Harris wrote an op-ed in The Post to mark Women’s Equality Day. Arguing for stronger protections against voter suppression, Harris said: “When the 19th Amendment was ratified 100 years ago, it would have been unimaginable for a Black woman to be a serious contender for the vice presidency of the United States. ... The best way to honor the generations of women who paved the way for me — for all of us — is to vote, and to continue their fight for all Americans to be able to do the same, no matter their gender, race, age, ability or Zip code.”

During Harris’s vice presidency, Post Opinions columnists interviewed her about topics ranging from race to gender equity to the Supreme Court.

Harris took a leading role on the issue of race, telling columnist Jonathan Capehart in May 2021 that “we just have to speak truth no matter how painful it is to speak or hear. And the truth remains that racism is real in America.”

Speaking with columnist James Hohmann for a podcast in June 2021, Harris reflected on her relationship with Biden. “We have such a great working relationship, and I think there is a part of that that comes from the fact that he’s been where I am. ... He made a conscious decision and asked of me that I would always give him feedback based on my lived experiences.”

After a conversation with Harris in June, columnist Jennifer Rubin wrote that the vice president was “a formidable candidate,” remarking that she served the administration by artfully bridging policy and personal experiences after the Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision overturning the constitutional right to abortion.

Harris’s vice presidency has also been sharply criticized, with some advocating for her replacement as Biden’s second-in-command.

In 2023, columnist Matt Bai argued that Biden’s age would draw voters’ attention to his vice president — which could prove risky for his campaign. “President Biden’s main vulnerability in a reelection campaign may not be his age,” Bai wrote. “It’s the uncomfortable question of whether voters can get their heads around Biden’s vice president as a potential president.” The solution, Bai suggested, was for Biden to “steer into the storm rather than away from it, and run with Harris almost as if he expected her to take over.”

Columnist George F. Will drew parallels to president Franklin D. Roosevelt in his argument for Biden to consider replacing Harris, referring to selecting Harris as “potentially the most consequential mistake of Joe Biden’s irresponsibly prolonged public life.” Kathleen Parker, meanwhile, argued that it was Harris’s duty to her country to step away from the vice-presidential role after her term.

After Biden’s subpar performance in his June 27 debate with Trump, conversation turned to his potentially stepping down. Harris quickly emerged as the likely replacement. Many Post columnists — including Perry Bacon Jr. — had made a case for considering this shift long before the debate.

“I’m not going to spend the next 13 months pretending I’m confident that an 86-year-old (Joe Biden’s age in November 2028) would be up to being president of the United States,” Bacon wrote. “You shouldn’t either. The answer to questions about Biden’s age is simple: ‘Yes, there’s a chance Vice President Harris becomes president — and that would be fine.’”

Bacon later joined others in proposing alternatives, including Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker or Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo, a former governor of Rhode Island. Columnist Jim Geraghty argued that, if Democrats are looking to replace Biden on the ticket, Harris presents their “least bad option.”

Since Biden’s withdrawal, Harris has received an array of endorsements from Democratic leaders, cementing her as the front-runner for the nomination. Reactions to this switch-up were varied. Bacon jumped in to myth-bust concerns about Harris’s electability. Bai argued that it would be wise for Democrats not to rush Harris’s nomination, opting instead for a process that allowed delegates to explore alternative options.

Columnist Eugene Robinson disagreed, writing that, “The idea of an ‘open process’ or a ‘contested convention,’ in which Harris competes against other contenders to win the nomination, sounds like something Hollywood might script, but I don’t see how that happens in the real world.” Columnist Michele L. Norris concurred, adding that skipping over Harris would be an affront to some of the party’s most important supporters.