As the ninth US president, William Henry Harrison holds the peculiar distinction of being the final person to hold the position who was originally a British subject, and the pioneer from the Whig Party to secure victory to the White House. His claim to fame includes the dubious record of having given the lengthiest inaugural discourse ever, continuing for almost two hours. He also holds another odd record – the briefest tenure ever for a sitting president, lasting only 31 days into his term before he tragically passed on. Interestingly, he serving as the most recent political figure who was defeated in his initial presidential contest but won in the subsequent election. Prior to him, only Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson had achieved this feat.
This statistic doesn’t bode well for Richard Nixon who was able to achieve a comeback win only after a significantly long time. An extremely unusual case presents itself in the form of Grover Cleveland and Donald Trump; these politicians first bagged a win, subsequently faced defeat and then emerged victorious once again. However, for every other individual since Harrison’s epoch, if they were unsuccessful on their inaugural attempt and chose to compete again in the immediate next election, the outcome was another loss.
Evidently, the public does not seem to harbor an affinity for losers; this is illustrated through the political journeys of Democrat Adlai Stevenson and Republican Thomas Dewey who both ran for office twice and were defeated both times. Both Henry Clay and William Jennings Bryan saw the same fate when they endeavored to secure the presidency three consecutive times and lost each time. Kamala Harris’ recent decision to abstain from the California governor’s race has sparked discussions hinting at her potential renewed endeavor towards the White House.
Sadly, it looks like she has hitched her wagon to the sinking ship that is the Democratic Party, whose popularity is plummeting at an alarming pace. They are now at -30 points in net favorability, which is almost three times worse than the GOP at -11 points. The party is at its lowest popularity in the last three and a half decades.
The source of such an abysmal standing is not a mystery; the Democrats themselves are finding it hard to swallow the fact that they actually lost to Trump, combined with their apparent inability to offer substantial opposition to him while he’s in office. While it’s not entirely Harris’ mess, she unwittingly personifies the simmering dissatisfaction within the Democratic faction.
The dissatisfaction is varied, with progressives decrying the Democrats for their perceived lack of tenacity in their fights, while the more moderate section feels the party has veered too far left, embroiled in cultural conflicts and issues of identity politics. These diverging paths meet at a dire longing to find the taste of victory once more. Yet, the only apparent reason behind Harris potentially becoming the nominee in the upcoming elections is her near-symbolic role as a ‘diversity pick’ under Biden’s regime.
Biden had openly expressed his intent to select a female, and subsequently, an African American running mate. However, Harris’ struggles don’t stem from her race or gender. Instead, they originate from her failure to resonate with the electorate and enhance the Democratic coalition.
To taste victory, the Democrats need a representative who can win over Trump supporters. Harris’ defeat didn’t result from poor Democratic turnout but due to her lack of appeal to an evolving voter base. Her rhetorics didn’t help either, making her sound more like the head of a small liberal arts school rather than a potential president.
Excluding the issue of reproductive rights, her beliefs seemed artificially constructed, tailor-made by focus groups at a time when the voters’ desire was for someone authentic. The situation worsened when she chose not to distance herself from Biden, as per the latter’s insistence. A glaring example of this was her decision to appear on Stephen Colbert’s ‘The Late Show’ for her debut interview since stepping down from her office.
While Colbert’s ideological audiences might find it entertaining, it does not cater to the larger demographic needed for a Democratic win. This is why if the Democrats choose to back her once more, her place in history is more likely to be a footnote than a chapter.
It seems she’s poised to be remembered as the answer to a trivia question, rather than for any notable achievement. And, importantly, that trivia question won’t be, ‘Who was the 48th president of the United States?’
These scenarios reinforce the idea that once you’ve lost an election, it’s challenging to come back and win it the next time, lending a stern reminder for Harris should she consider running for president again.
Beyond this, it highlights the deep-seated issues within the Democratic Party–one where both the progressive and the centrist factions are unhappy with the current state of affairs, as presented by icons such as Harris.
In an era where authenticity and relatability are paramount, Harris has evidently failed to engage voters on either of these fronts, instead resorting to stances that feel manufactured and disingenuous.
Indeed, this juncture in American political history serves as a stark reminder of the perils of losing touch with the electorate, the repercussions of which are all too evident in the Democrats’ dwindling popularity.
As we look towards the future of the political landscape in the United States, politicians from all sides must heed the lessons from the past: to engage, resonate, and authentically connect with voters if they are to stand a chance of earning their trust and support.
The post Joe Biden’s Symbolic ‘Diversity Pick’ Harris Fails to Resonate appeared first on Real News Now.
About Author
