Democratic Congressman Slams Kamala Harris for ‘Weird’ Language Choices

In a post-election climate ripe for self-reflection, Democratic Senator Brian Schatz of Hawaii has openly criticized Vice President Kamala Harris and other party members for using language he deems “egregiously weird.” Schatz’s remarks, shared during a recent Politico interview, are the latest in a growing series of intra-party debates about how Democrats communicate with voters.

The senator’s criticism zeroed in on Harris’s tendency to use phrases rooted in academic and activist circles. One example he highlighted was her use of “center” as a verb. Schatz recalled, “I remember her saying, ‘I’m going to center the needs of the working class.’ And I thought to myself, I don’t know anyone in the world who says ‘center.’” He continued, “I know people in politics who say ‘center,’ I know people in academia, but regular folks? Not so much.”

Schatz’s critique is part of a broader discussion within the Democratic Party about language and its impact on electoral success. Following Harris’s defeat by Donald Trump in the 2024 presidential race, many Democrats are questioning whether their messaging alienates more voters than it engages. Schatz argued that Democrats often adopt terminology that resonates with advocacy groups but feels disconnected from everyday Americans.

“We have a whole language that’s maybe not offensive or irritating, but definitely unfamiliar to regular people,” Schatz said. He pointed to terms like “lived experience,” “safe spaces,” and “Latinx” as examples. “The point is, we’re not speaking in a way that’s relatable. We’re creating unnecessary barriers.”

Striking a Balance

Schatz admitted he’s not immune to these linguistic pitfalls. “I remember saying I was for a ‘cessation of hostilities’ in Israel and Palestine,” he recounted. “And people asked, ‘Why don’t you just say ‘ceasefire’?’ It’s the same thing, but it’s simpler and clearer.”

The senator also criticized what he called “purity tests” imposed by ultra-progressive advocacy groups, suggesting that Democrats risk being seen as performative rather than pragmatic. “We’re judged not just by what we do, but by whether we use the ‘correct’ magic words,” Schatz argued. “That’s not a winning strategy.”

A Broader Issue

This internal critique comes amid wider discussions about the Democratic Party’s identity. Philippe Reines, a former aide to Hillary Clinton, recently told New York Magazine, “We can’t be the party of pronouns and land acknowledgments. We’re bleeding voters, and it’s largely a branding issue.” Journalist Mike Pesca echoed this sentiment in an Atlantic article, likening the party to a “human resources department” bogged down by procedural language and overemphasis on diversity initiatives.

Public opinion polls reflect this disconnect. A recent YouGov survey found that terms like “implicit bias,” “cisgender,” and “microaggressions” are seldom used by most Americans. While Democrats are more likely than Republicans to use such terms, their overall familiarity and acceptance remain low.

Language and the 2024 Election

The “language gap” became a focal point during the 2024 presidential election. Harris and her running mate, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, faced criticism for their communication style. At one point, Walz labeled Donald Trump and Senator J.D. Vance “weird,” prompting Trump to retort, “Weird? That’s rich coming from the party of safe spaces and pronoun policing.”

Schatz’s comments add another layer to the post-election analysis. While some Democrats push for policy-driven messaging, others call for a cultural shift. Schatz’s prescription is clear: ditch the jargon. “If we want to win, we have to meet people where they are,” he said. “That starts with speaking their language.”