The tale of William Henry Harrison, the ninth president of the United States, is a startling reminder for would-be presidential incumbents. Born a British subject, he moved from being the last in line to becoming the first Whig Party member to enter the White House. His inaugural address, dauntingly the longest ever, was almost poetically contrasted by the brevity of his presidency – his tenure ended prematurely due to his death just 31 days into office. Interestingly, Harrison was the final politician to bounce back from losing his initial presidential race to claim victory in the subsequent one.
This feat, of losing the initial election but claiming victory later, was previous achieved by Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson. Richard Nixon, however, lost the presidential race only to secure a victory much later in his political career. Apart from Nixon, Grover Cleveland and Donald Trump are the only two politicians to have secured a win, faced a subsequent defeat, and then achieved victory again. The pattern is clear – the electorate has traditionally shown little enthusiasm for ‘losers’, those who couldn’t clinch a victory in their first attempt. This observation does not bode well for the likes of Kamala Harris.
Kamala Harris, very conspicuously, decided not to pursue the governorship of California, which made quite a few heads turn. Her decision has sparked numerous theories, with many speculating that she longs to saunter once again into the presidential race. The context for Harris, however, is bleak – with the Democratic Party grappling to keep its image intact, her political journey presents many pits and falls.
Currently, the Democratic Party is in a quite unfavorable spot. Their net favorability has hit a rock bottom – minus 30 points – almost threefold than that of their political counterparts, the GOP. Strikingly, the Party’s unpopularity is now at an unprecedented peak, not seen for the past 35 years. This dismal state isn’t just the cause of an external opposition; Democrats are warring amongst themselves too.
Harris, however, isn’t entirely to blame. Her predicament stems from the fact that she has become an uncomfortable symbol of the Democratic Party’s internal unrest. The infighting isn’t homogeneous either – the party’s progressive faction believes that the Democrats haven’t shown enough aggression, whereas the centralist elements opine that the Party’s focus and fight are misplaced, given their recent lurch towards identity politics and cultural war assaults.
Amidst all these ideological conflicts within the Democratic Party, there exists a single unifying slogan – the absolute urgency to win. Unfortunately for Harris, this isn’t likely to work in her favor. The primary reason for her potential 2024 nomination was her tag as a ‘diversity candidate’. President Biden had categorically stated his preference for a female and later, an African American running mate.
However, her challenges do not derive from her gender or ethnicity, but rather from her inability to resonate with the voters, to broaden the Democratic Party’s reach. The Party’s victory is contingent on a candidate’s ability to sway Trump’s voters, a task that seems daunting for Harris. Her defeat wasn’t a consequence of dwindling Democratic turnout; rather it resulted from her lack of appeal to a diverse and evolving electorate.
Harris’ rhetoric often left her sounding more like a college dean than a compelling political figure, which only seemed to alienate the electorate further. Her beliefs, with the exception of reproductive rights, seemed more influenced by focus groups, at a time when an authenticity-starved electorate sought genuine conviction from their politicians.
What worsened Harris’ position was her decision not to distance herself from Biden, a move which only seemed to mirror his fading popularity. Her first post-office interview on Stephen Colbert’s ‘The Late Show’ managed to titillate the show’s committed audience, but it fell short when it came to capturing the interest of the larger, more varied Democratic audience required for victory.
As things stand, if the Democrats choose to grant Harris the nomination once again, she’s likely going to be remembered as mere pub quiz fodder. Her legacy may well be reduced to a trivia night answer, and not, as she might hope, as ‘the 48th president of the United States’.
The challenges for Kamala Harris are daunting, but they also underline larger issues within the Democratic Party, namely tension between distinct factional beliefs and a struggle to define their core purpose. In a political landscape that requires swift adaptation to a changing electorate, the Democrats, Harris among them, risk further setbacks if they fail to project a decisive and unified front.
Harris, as a symbol of this internal strife, has more to do than just pivot on policies – she needs to understand and respond effectively to the evolving demographic shifts within the US, and reevaluate how her positions contribute to the Democratic Party’s greater struggle. Only time will tell whether she can rise to the challenge, and prove history and her critics wrong, or fall into the same pit as those before her.
The journey towards the White House is an arduous one, strewn with numerous pitfalls. For Kamala Harris and the Democratic Party, the challenges appear to be more complex and demanding. Only time will tell whether they can navigate through the turbulent waters of these complex times and rally to secure a victory once again
The post Kamala Harris’s Ambitions Riddled with Democratic Internal Unrest appeared first on Real News Now.
About Author
