How Did Kamala Lose?

Maybe this isn’t the best topic to use as a first blog on my website trying to promote my photography business, potentially losing clients in an incredibly politically divisive environment - but I’ll try (and probably fail) to make it as politically neutral as possible.

So, how did Kamala Harris lose the Presidential election to Donald Trump? I, of course, have no idea. I’m just going to be speculating based on my observations, and much like how people voted in the election, this is based on vibes, not on fact.

--

I think it’s easy to point to the far left wing of the Democratic Party and blame those individuals for sitting out this election - after all, Harris got about 10 million fewer votes than Biden did in 2020 and Donald Trump got around the same number as he did four years ago. I suppose one could argue that the far left were coming off as unwilling to compromise on anything; that even though they align with Democrats on many issues, they just couldn’t get past the Palestine/Israel conflict and were willing to let reproductive rights, LGBTQ+ and BIPOC equality, climate change, healthcare, and democracy itself fall by the wayside and potentially allow Project 2025 to come to fruition (Trump has denied that he would implement what is basically a far-right fascist policy guidebook, but many of his appointees and nominations include individuals who drafted Project 2025, so…). One could also say that the pro-Palestine protests and demonstrations on college campuses turned off everyone from Progressives (who didn’t want to vote for an administration that they believed endorsed Israel’s actions) to moderate Democrats and “Never Trump” Republicans from voting for Harris because they associated the protesters with Democrats (despite Democrats doing everything they could to distance themselves from the protesters, even suggesting that the protesters were anti-Semitic). So, yeah, you can make the argument that the apathy of Leftists and Progressives toward Harris cost her the Presidency.

But I’m not so sure the blame should land squarely on the shoulders of the “far left”. Personally, I think the Democrats ran a terrible campaign, despite what Joy Reid said following the results of the election.

Let’s start with Harris and her team not allowing a Palestinian to speak at the DNC or even acknowledging that Israel’s “defensive” basically amounts to genocide. This was taken as tacit approval of Israel’s actions. So, millions of Muslims either sat out the election, or voted for Trump (who was the guy who implemented a Muslim ban during his first term). Also, despite Biden saying he wanted Israel to end their assault on Gaza, and that if they kept attacking and killing civilians he’d stop providing them weapons, the weapons kept going to Israel. And Harris represented, whether she wanted to or not, the actions of the Biden administration. It was made abundantly clear that a huge issue to Progressives was the genocide in Gaza. But instead of hearing the protesters, instead of setting up a meeting to discuss later, or even giving them lip service, she said at least once something to the affect of “everyone gets to be heard, but right now I’m talking.” She told her potential voters to shut the hell up.

Another phrase Harris repeated was that, under her leadership, the US military would be the largest and “most lethal” in the world. Most lethal? To me, that implies that she would be more willing to use the military to go somewhere and kill people than she would to use diplomacy. She was sounding like a war hawk. Trump, for all his many issues, at least tried to sound like he was anti-war. He criticized Liz Cheney for her hawkishness, saying she wouldn’t be so quick to deploy the military if it was her in the line of fire (his phrasing made it sound like he was advocating for someone to point a gun at her, and maybe he was, I don’t know). I personally don’t know a single progressive who was happy to hear “most lethal”.

Strongest? Fine.

Greatest? Okay.

Most lethal? I don’t know, it just sounds bad.

Biden and the Democratic leadership certainly didn’t help Harris’ cause. After a poor debate in which Biden’s age and mental acuity - or lack thereof - was put on display, he was pressured to step aside. Apparently, his condition for ending his re-election bid was that he got to select the nominee… doesn’t sound very democratic to me. He selected, obviously, his Vice President. Harris was put in an awkward position of pivoting from campaigning for Biden to replacing him and campaigning for herself, and only being given a few months to do so. Had Biden done what he implied and been a one-term president, then the Democrats could primary, and perhaps they would have put up a stronger nominee. I think part of the problem is that the Biden administration wasn’t very popular. Harris had an uneasy time trying to support the work they had done, while distinguishing herself as a different person and politician. She couldn’t very well say that the last four years were crap - she was part of it. And she couldn’t say that they were great and she was going to continue it - people didn't like it. If the Democratic party had a chance to primary, they probably would have nominated someone who wasn’t part of an unpopular President’s team and who could easily distance themselves from it.

While the economy, by many metrics, had greatly improved from 2020, many people were hurting from the price of groceries, gas, and healthcare and didn’t feel that the supporting data represented them - and name dropping Goldman Sachs isn’t going to win the votes of the average citizen. It also didn’t help that Democrats are terrible at talking up their own accomplishments, while Trump, on the other hand, takes credit for the good work of other people (like the recent cease-fire that Biden announced).

But for me, the biggest problem was the Democratic strategy of who they were trying to win over.

There seemed to be so much time and effort to pull in moderates, centrists and disillusioned Republicans instead of the progressive wing of the Democratic Party. They repeatedly mentioned all of the Republicans who would not vote for Trump and endorsed Harris - long lists of Republican politicians and people who were in Trump’s administration. Obviously, the message was that Trump is so dangerous to American democracy that even the people who worked with him won’t vote for him. But I think it’s important to note that these people’s decision to not vote for Trump was because of his character and his authoritarian aspirations, not his conservative ideology and policies. Had he tempered his dictatorial rhetoric, had he not made it so obvious that he was trying to dismantle democratic institutions, had he not used the language of white supremacy, had he peacefully handed over the Presidency at Joe Biden’s inauguration, they’d probably still vote for him. They still agree with the guy, they just don’t like him. So what does that say about Kamala Harris? How does it look when Dick Cheney, who largely advocated for and orchestrated the war in Iraq, endorses her? Does that help her win over moderates, much less progressives?

There was an ad with an Alabaman who voted for Trump twice, but not this time! This time, someone who agrees with the Republican platform so much (and was witness to the first Trump presidency and saw what kind of a person he was) that he voted for Trump TWICE was going to vote for Kamala Harris.

To me, the Democratic party has lost its way. The Democratic party is supposed to represent the ideology of the left. It supposedly represents individual liberties, racial equality, labor, a woman’s right to bodily autonomy, LGBTQ+ rights, diplomacy over military force, and environmental protection. It’s the party that embraced the Civil Rights Act and marriage equality, and defended vulnerable and marginalized groups from a racist, homophobic, and misogynistic Republican party. It’s supposed to take the best and most popular ideas from the Left and incorporate them into their agenda. Instead, Harris and her campaign were trying to appeal to Republicans.

Democrats abandoned progressives and leftists and left them without a party. Why would someone with a far-left ideology want to vote for someone who’s courting Republicans?

Imagine if Trump had tried to sound like a centrist and appeal to disillusioned Democrats. If he had said, “I like Joe Biden, he’s a good person. But it’s clear that his policies, while made with great intentions, aren’t working. I’m here for those who feel like Biden and the Democrats don’t represent them anymore,” do you think he’d have the rabid, cult-like support that he has? No! Of course not! He’s popular because of his extreme rhetoric, because he offers simplistic solutions to complicated issues, and constantly portrays himself as the only person who can fix America.

I saw someone at Vox, I think, speculate that if Harris lost, then the Democratic Party would shift to the right. I hope for Democrats’ sake this isn’t true. They’ve tried it and it doesn’t work. Democrats are trying to play it safe, to have broad appeal. It’s like when an artist makes something for mass appeal, nobody likes it - it’s just generic crap that has no soul and no point of view. And that’s the Democrats right now. They’re trying to stand for everything, but when you stand for everything, you stand for nothing. Harris’ campaign slogan may as well have been “Harris: I’m not Trump”.

One more thing: no one cares about celebrity endorsements. Republicans are the ones who always say “stick to basketball” or “stick to music”. Why the hell would they care about who musicians and actors and athletes endorse?

-DH