The ninth US president, William Henry Harrison, still holds the record for the longest inaugural address and the shortest presidential term. Having been born a British subject, he was the last US president to claim this distinction. His political journey is notable, as he’s the last politician to have failed in a first presidential bid only to triumph in the subsequent one, a feat last achieved by Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson. Long after Harrison, Richard Nixon tasted defeat before eventually attaining victory, a path not commonly repeated.
Since the time of Harrison, the trend has been less forgiving for those who’ve suffered initial defeat and sought redemption in the successive election. Both Adlai Stevenson from the Democratic Party and Thomas Dewey from the Republicans are epitomes of this trend, having faced double defeat. Equally unsuccessful were Henry Clay and William Jennings Bryan, who made three consecutive attempts each but continually fell short. It seems voter sentiment leans toward favoring fresh faces over recrudescent figures.
The implications of this pattern cast a long shadow over Kamala Harris, whose decision not to vie for the governor’s position in California has fired up conjecture about a potential second date with a presidential campaign. Simultaneously, the Democratic Party battles its growing unpopularity, which, with a net favorability of minus 30 points, is staggeringly thrice the negative rating of the Republican Party at minus 11 points.
In the light of the Democratic Party’s continued slide in favorability ratings, a retrospection into their performance over the past 35 years reveals the current period as their most unpopular. A profound dissatisfaction festers within the party base. Much of the blame is directed at the party’s inability to offer significant resistance to Trump’s Republicans, right from the election defeat to the lax opposition in Congress.
However, the problems plaguing the Democratic Party aren’t all on Harris’ shoulders. She merely embodies the deep-seated turmoil disrupting the unity of the party, a discontent that isn’t uniform throughout. The progressive wing criticizes the Democrats for their lackluster resistance, while the centrists bemoan the party’s misguided energy, being directed towards culture wars and identity politics rather than issues of universal concern.
This dichotomy within the Democratic Party, caused by divergent perspectives of progressives and centrists, is unified by a burning desire to secure electoral victories. It is in the backdrop of these conditions that Harris found herself in a favorable position for a potential presidential nomination in 2024. Her selection as the vice-presidential pick was nothing more than a nod to diversity by Biden.
The issue with Harris isn’t related to her gender or racial identity. Instead, it’s her lack of appeal to a broad range of voters, which would have otherwise enabled the Democrats to extend their base. Successful electoral strategy demands new converts, and ideally, those who once stood on the other side of the divide. Harris’ inability to woo Trump’s supporters unveils the real reason for her failure.
Her loss doesn’t stem from poor Democratic turnout but rather from her inability to resonate with a rapidly diversifying electorate. Her rhetoric, redolent of a liberal arts college dean, did little to endear her to the politically conscious voting populace. Strikingly, apart from reproductive rights, her political convictions appeared divorced from reality, contrived in focus groups, while the electorate thirsted for authenticity.
Her political downfall can also be attributed to her compliance with Biden’s mandate that she not dissociate herself from his positions. She symbolized a lack of flexibility and independent thought necessary in a leader. Harris’ choice to present herself to the public via a ‘Late Show with Stephen Colbert’ interview underscored this failure.
Colbert’s show caters to a particular ideologically homogeneous audience, a demographic that the Democrats have already won over. What they need is a strategy to engage with audiences beyond their traditional base. If Harris becomes the Democratic nominee again, her downfall may be imminent.
In a nutshell, in the highly unlikely scenario of Harris receiving another nomination, she might just end up being a forgettable trivia question. But it won’t be, ‘Was she the 48th president of the United States?’, for the political future of Harris and the Democratic party appears bleak with their current strategies and ideological leaning.
It’s apparent that the traditional ways won’t cut it for the Democratic Party. With the likes of Harris up for contention, they will need a thorough reevaluation of strategies and candidates that can captivate a broader base, including those once enticed by the likes of Trump. Only then can they hope for a reversal in their depreciating approval ratings and prospective electoral prospects.
Until such a review is done, history’s compelling lesson of ‘once bitten, twice shy’, is likely to continue to underline voter behavior. And in this light, the prospects of Kamala Harris, or anyone basing their approach on the current Democratic tactics, gaining favor in the next presidential election, are thin at best.
The post Harris, Once More the Unwanted Candidate in 2024? appeared first on Real News Now.
About Author
