William Henry Harrison, distinguished as the last US president to bear the imprint of British lineage, was a pioneer for the Whig party, securing their maiden presidential victory. His tenure, however, was a combination of extremes: the record-breaking inaugural address endured for nearly two hours, while his presidential term was tragically cut short after just one-seventh of a year, marking him the first incumbent to perish while in office. Harrison’s path to presidency saw a marked loss in his initial run, but this ignominious defeat was transformed into a triumph within the next electoral cycle. This narrative contrasts sharply with the current political landscape, highlighting a crucial political reality – voters disdain the taste of electoral defeat. These insights from history are indeed a cold comfort for Kamala Harris, whose political ambitions could very well head towards a similar trajectory.
Embodied in these historical examples, Harris’ decision to forego the race for California’s governorship has triggered speculation that she is eyeing a bigger prize. Yet her political ambitions fly in stark contrast to the declining popularity of her core support base – the Democratic party. The decline is highlighted by a negative net favorability almost threefold higher than the GOP’s, a statistic that plumbs depths unseen in over three decades. The root of this irreparable decline stems from internal discontent with the Democratic party, a party unable to muster an effective resistance to the juggernaut that was Trump and also unsuccessful at capturing the White House.
However, it would not be fair or entirely accurate to burden Kamala Harris with the full weight of the Democrats’ declining popularity. But a case can be made linking her to the bubbling disaffection rising within Democratic ranks. As the poster child of this disillusionment, Harris embodies the dissatisfaction that simmers both within the party’s progressive and centrist factions. Progressive elements clamor for more substantial resistance from the party, while the centrists yearn for battles on issues less entrenched in the culture war and identity politics.
Ironically, what unites these disparate factions is their shared desperation for a victory. But victory seems even more elusive given the Democrats’ focus on diversity rather than electoral appeal. Harris’ anointment as the Democratic nominee in 2024 was influenced primarily by her identity as an African-American woman, a deliberate choice by Joe Biden, who had explicitly stated his preference for such demographic traits while making his selection. Harris’ consequent failure is not a commentary on her race or gender but rather an indictment of her inability to expand the party’s appeal to a broader electorate.
For the Democrats to find success, they need a candidate capable of winning over Trump supporters. That certain milestone seems even more elusive as Harris’ bid for presidency was marred by her failure to resonate with the evolving political landscape. Her appeal, or lack thereof, did not stem from inadequate voter turnout on the Democrats’ part. Instead, her rhetoric made her sound out of touch, akin to a well-learned dean at a small liberal arts college rather than a future president.
While advocating for ‘reproductive rights’ struck a chord with her base, the rest of her convictions echoed scripted talking points and operated on electoral buzzwords. These came at a time when the electorate was longing for authenticity, moving further away from stage-managed politics. The deeper failing perhaps emerged from her decision to toe the line so closely to Joe Biden, a choice that only worsened her appeal.
Harris’ calculated move to make the Stephen Colbert’s ‘The Late Show’ her first port of call post-retirement was symbolic in its own way. Being an infotainment show with leanings towards a specific political ideology, such shows cater to a differentiated audience rather than an all-encompassing one. However, the electorate that the Democrats need to woo exists outside these echo chambers, making Harris’ selection even more perplexing.
If the Democratic party chooses to ignore these signals and insists on placing their bets on Harris, they risk consigning her to a historical trivia question rather than a distinguished presidential legacy. And it is certain the question won’t be ‘Who was the 48th president of the United States?”
The post Harris’ Presidency Bid Risks Historical Obscurity appeared first on Real News Now.
About Author
