Staff Reports
Kamala Harris’s latest attempt to excuse her 2024 electoral defeat is a laughable rerun of the blame game she’s been playing since she first set foot in the political arena. She’s on her farewell book tour, shedding crocodile tears about how she was playing some cerebral “three-dimensional chess” against President Trump. What a stretch! In reality, she wasn’t even in the same league when Trump, a master of four-dimensional political chess, checked her every move.
She claims she sidestepped Trump’s antics, refusing to get distracted from talking about the economy. Yes, she did talk about it, all right—when food prices were soaring higher than a kite during the Biden-Harris administration. Her pledge to tackle these price hikes felt more like a last-ditch effort to salvage her tarnished reputation. Talk about too little, too late!
Kamala Harris says she was playing “three dimensional chess” against Trump in the 2024 election… LOL!!
Kamala Harris is dumb as a box of rocks. pic.twitter.com/HUnQHGjBoq
— Gunther Eagleman™ (@GuntherEagleman) November 11, 2025
Her so-called economic plan was a mix of enormous handouts and pointless bans on grocery store price “gouging.” Experts labeled it outright economically reckless, a recipe for disaster. If anything, it threatened to rerun the chaotic scenes of 1971 when government interference left supermarket shelves barren. That old fiasco should have served as a cautionary tale, but Kamala was too busy plotting her next big move to notice.
Kamala’s vision for America seemed like a copy-paste job from the Biden administration’s playbook. When asked if she would have done anything differently from Biden, her answer was no. That seven-letter word is what cost her the election. Who wants a leader with no vision, no backbone, and no willingness to course-correct?
Harris was not playing three-dimensional chess against Trump. She was trying to manipulate her appalling track record—one marked by mismanagement and policy blunders—to seem worthy of the presidency. It didn’t work. As she steps away from politics (or so she says), one question lingers: How many moves ahead can you claim to be when you’ve already lost the game?
