Unlike 2016, when his victory over Hillary Clinton came as a shock to many Americans, Trump was no surprise in 2024. The Democratic Party had the benefit of four years to ensure that this would not happen again. Yet as in 2016, Democrats appear to have failed to win over the electorate in a race against a uniquely unpopular candidate — this time one with multiple impeachments, indictments, and criminal convictions.
The short-lived Biden campaign and subsequent Harris campaign opted to try to beat Republicans at their own game, by tacking rightward on issues such as immigration, criminal justice, and climate. After President Joe Biden dropped out, the Democratic Party rejected calls to stop providing arms to Israel’s war on Gaza. Instead, Harris touted the endorsements of conservatives such as Liz Cheney. The strategy was a ploy to woo moderates and conservatives wary of a second Trump term, but it may have alienated key voting blocs.
Harris didn’t do anything any good pol wouldn’t do. The popular will was not there, as the results displayed.
Huh? Look at her campaign’s treatment of the Uncommitted movement, among others, and say that again. Harris was openly antagonizing her voters, relying completely on not being Trump ala Hillary Clinton and courting right wing voters at the cost of her base. And if you don’t believe it, well, take it up with Bernie.
Fringe groups always think they have more political power than they do, and always feel picked on.
Liberals will do any amount of mental gymnastics to point the finger at anyone but themselves.
Harris lost Michigan by less people than voted Uncommitted during the primaries. They might be a “fringe group,” but Harris sure could’ve used some of their votes, don’t you think?
If Harris would have won all the votes cast for Democratic Senators in each state, she would have won with 270 electoral votes.
Fringe groups will do all sorts of mental gymnastics to make everything about them.
Harris tried to run on protecting abortion rights, and saving democracy from Trump and Project 2025. Under other circumstances, that probably would have worked.
Unfortunately, she was the nominee for the incumbent party at a time when the vast majority of voters were unhappy with the economy. That’s a hard position to be in, and requires a compelling answer. She had a few token items for the agenda, but nothing that would address the larger issue of people feeling squeezed by inflation. Saying things are better now or going to be better soon doesn’t appease the voters who don’t feel better.
The horrible truth is, a large portion of the electorate would vote for the literal devil if he was running against an incumbent during a bad economy.
I’ve seen this put a different way. That she didn’t separate herself adequately fromas Biden, in this case the economy. But, that’s the problem for a politician as the minute any c she separates on one issue, others will be asked about. Then the story is about perceived failures, rightly or wrongly. Most young voters have never been through an inflation cycle. They don’t realize that that they are pretty natural, and also this one was controlled well. You just ride them out. But, I doubt you could point to this issue as a sole cause.