William Henry Harrison, the ninth U.S. President, left a notable legacy as he was born a British subject and later became the first representative of the Whig Party in the presidential office. His claim to fame further extends to delivering the longest and most drawn-out inaugural address in history which lasted close to two hours. However, his presidency was ironically brief, lasting only 31 days and marking him as the first incumbent to perish in office.
Harrison also carries the unique distinction of being the last political figure to lose his first presidential race and then succeed in the subsequent one. Figures such as Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson had accomplished this feat prior to him. Comparably distant in history, Richard Nixon sustained an initial defeat but eventually claimed triumph. Grover Cleveland and Donald Trump were the only two to taste both victory and defeat, before rising once again to power.
Since the era of Harrison, any presidential contender who lost in their first attempt and dared to run again in the immediate following election suffered defeats consistently. Adlai Stevenson representing the Democrats and Thomas Dewey from the Republican end, both labored through two campaigns but were bested each time. Both Henry Clay and William Jennings Bryan shared a similar fate, persisting through three consecutive elections without success.
The repeated disappointments of these figures might signal a warning for Kamala Harris who has recently broadcast her decision not to run for the governorship of California, which has sparked conjectures about her second shot at the presidency. It’s worrying given the dwindling popularity of the Democratic Party, as reflected by a staggering negative net favorability of 30 points which drasticaly eclipses the GOP’s negative score of 11 points.
The disfavor towards the Democrats is currently peaking, defining the worst point in the last 35 years. The typical Democratic allies are harboring feelings of exasperation towards the party, due to the bitter loss to Trump and the consequent inability to effectively stall his proceedings in the office.
Harris, with her aspirations for the White House, personifies this very discontent within the Democratic ranks. However, the dissatisfactions within party lines aren’t uniform. Many progressives believe their representatives aren’t showing sufficient combativeness, while centrists in the party are alarmed by the excessive attention given to socio-cultural wars and identity politics.
All factions, however disparate their concerns, are united by the sheer yearning for victory. It was this common goal that elevated Harris to a potential nomination for the 2024 presidential run, primarily owing to her status as a representation of diversity. Biden’s proclamation to select a female and subsequently, an African American running mate led to her rising up the ranks.
Yet, problems for Harris do not stem from her gender or ethnicity. Rather, it’s her incapacity to extend the Democratic reach and attract a more diverse voter base that proves to be her main predicament. In order to sway election results, Democrats need a representative who can charm the Trump-loyalists.
Harris did not crash out due to lukewarm Democratic turnout, but because she failed to resonate with an evolving electorate. Her rhetoric gave the impression of an academic at an obscure liberal arts institute, rather than a dynamic leader connecting with the general population. Most alarmingly, aside from acknowledging reproductive rights, her beliefs felt contrived, devised by focus groups in an era craving authenticity.
Adding to her blunders, Harris’s agreement to Joe Biden’s insistence of not creating any ideological distance between them further weakened her appeal. Moreover, Harris made a questionable choice for her first interview post-office, appearing on Stephen Colbert’s ‘The Late Show’. Unfortunately, Colbert’s audience, with its pre-decided ideological leanings, doesn’t necessarily represent the electorate Democrats need to win over.
For the Democrat Party to emerge victorious, it must resonate with a wider, more diverse portion of the electorate, something that is currently missing from Harris’s playbook. Her adherence to Biden’s every whim and failure to appeal to a broader demographic paints a picture of a candidate who is not well-suited for the majoritarian support needed for a presidential win.
Should Democrats still choose to nominate Harris knowing her deficiencies, history might remember her merely as a trivia answer rather than a substantive political figure. It’s interesting to ponder whether she will ever be recognized as the 48th U.S. President. From what we can deduce now, the odds aren’t in her favor.
The post Kamala Harris: Doomed to Repeat History’s Presidential Failures? appeared first on Real News Now.
About Author
