William Henry Harrison, noted as the ninth US President and the final one born under British rule, made significant historical firsts. His stature as the pioneer Whig Party member to clinch the Presidential victory and his record for the longest inaugural speech are overshadowed by his tragically brief Presidential term. As the first sitting President to die in office, his reign lasted a scanty 31 days. The peculiar fact about Harrison’s political journey is that he was the last politician to lose his initial Presidential campaign, only to emerge victorious in the subsequent race. This pattern was previously followed by Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson, and later resonated with Richard Nixon.
Moving on, it would be worth mentioning that only the likes of Grover Cleveland and Donald Trump replicated the win-lose-win arc in their political careers. The remaining pattern reveals a rather bleak reputation for those who braved a second run after an initial loss, only to face defeat again. Candidates like Democrat Adlai Stevenson and Republican Thomas Dewey fell into this pitfall, losing twice back-to-back. More persistent unwavering figures like Henry Clay and William Jennings Bryan even attempted a triple repeat run, only to face the same fate on each occasion.
This recurring phenomenon signals potentially drastic implications for Kamala Harris’s political ambitions. Harris’s recent declaration refraining from the California governor race fueled speculations of her potential Presidential aspirations. However, if history repeats itself, Harris might be headed towards an uphill battle, considering the unfavorable reception of unsuccessful Presidential candidacy.
A grim situation is indeed on hand for the Democratic Party in the present day. They carry a severe net favorability defect of 30 points, triple the minus 11 points of the Republicans. The resulting low popularity of the party suggests an internal discontent which has become more rampant than ever seen in the past three-and-a-half decades.
Part of the culpability for this intra-party resentment can be attributed to their unsuccessful efforts against Trump and the lack of substantial hindrance once he took office. Floundering Democratic initiatives have given way to a wave of discontent, signifying intellectual discord within the party factions. However, the blame can’t be laid solely on Kamala Harris.
Interestingly enough, Harris’ predicament is symptomatic of the larger unease within the party. The more progressive members of the party are disheartened by the lack of aggressive opposition, while the centrist section laments their emphasis on the wrong issues, such as culture war and identity politics, instead of focusing on the real problems of the people.
Yet, both these contrasting factions share the incessant drive to experience a win. Harris’ prospect for the nomination was largely bolstered by her status as a diversity pick. Biden was forthright in his intention to choose a woman, preferably an African American, as a running mate.
However, Harris’s problems are far from being associated with her racial or gender background. The real obstacle lies in her deficient appeal, which has been unable to broaden the Democratic coalition. If the Democrats desire a victory, they need someone who can lure the Trump register to their side. Unfortunately, Harris’ lackluster performance has deterred rather than attracted this bloc.
Despite having an attractive proposition for being the first woman of color in high office, Harris’ platform suffered from a failure to engage with a shifting electorate. Her rhetoric seemingly echoed the dean of a small liberal arts college, which disillusioned many voters that were already yearning for authenticity.
In terms of policy, with the possible exception of reproductive rights, her platform echoed sterile, focus-group-driven ideology. This approach has increasingly stirred up dissatisfaction from supporters searching for convincing conviction and authentic leadership. Adding to this policy mishap, Harris adhered to Biden’s request of refraining from forming her distinct persona independently, a move which has led her further away from potential popularity.
An intriguing aspect of Harris’s strategy included her preference for Stephen Colbert’s ‘The Late Show’ as her first interview platform post-resignation. Colbert’s primarily left-leaning audience was the perfect audience for such an occasion. However, targeting this niche fan-base aligns poorly with the Democrats’ broader mission.
Frankly speaking, the Democrats need to reach out and engage with a broad, diverse audience if they wish to seize victory. With Harris’ current approach, it seems unlikely their strategies will win over the more centrist, less ideologically committed voters. If she fails to recognize and act on this, her political career could become a mere trivia question rather than a success story.
If Kamala Harris tosses her hat in the ring for a Presidential nomination again, in face of these coming odds, it may only underscore her unremarkable political stance. Following this path will hardly change the narrative or, more crucially, the future electoral successes of the Democratic Party.
Indeed, if she is to continue to adhere to her current strategies, Harris may simply become a footnote in the pages of American political history. This would be a far cry from achieving the title of the 48th US President — a trivia question with an answer that would never involve her name.
In conclusion, Kamala Harris faces an unfriendly landscape in her potential pursuit of the White House. The criticisms leveled against both her and Joe Biden are indicative of the Democratic Party’s broader failures in winning over the American public, especially those who once stood in Trump’s columns. However, it’s yet to be seen whether Kamala Harris or the Democratic Party will take this history lesson to heart.
To conclude, any future speculation will only confirm the inevitable outcome if the Democratic Party, under the leadership of Biden and potential future candidate Harris, does not adapt to authentically address the changing beliefs and aspirations of the American populace. Modern times call for modern solutions, and sticking to the past frameworks will only result in an impending downfall.
The post A Delusional Ambition? Harris’s Uphill Battle for Presidency appeared first on Real News Now.
About Author
