The history of American politics is filled with notable figures, not least of which is William Henry Harrison, ninth President of the United States. Born as a British subject, Harrison has an intriguing track record as an American statesman. He distinguished himself as the first from the Whig Party to ascend to the presidency. His inaugural address, spanning close to two hours, still holds the record for the longest in U.S. history. However, his time as president is remembered for its unfortunate brevity; Harrison passed away a mere 31 days into his term, becoming the first incumbent president to die in office.
A peculiar but interesting facet about Harrison’s political career is that he experienced defeat in his first run for the presidency, only to emerge victorious the next time around. Comparatively, more recent political figures such as Richard Nixon had a longer journey back to victory after initial defeat. Furthermore, Grover Cleveland and Donald Trump are the only politicians to have experienced a win-lose-win sequence in their presidential bids. Most of those who suffered defeat in their first attempts and dared to try again in the subsequent election were met with another loss.
The list of repeat presidential election losers includes both Democrats and Republicans. Adlai Stevenson from the Democratic side and Thomas Dewey from the Republican camp both underwent the disheartening experience of running twice and losing twice. Remarkably, Henry Clay and William Jennings Bryan each have three consecutive losses to their names. It appears that once labeled as ‘losers,’ candidates struggle to change voters’ perceptions.
One would argue that the unfavorable odds faced by previously defeated candidates might not bode well for Kamala Harris. Last week’s announcement indicating her withdrawal from the California gubernatorial race has stirred speculations about her eyeing the White House once again. However, history and some of the current political landscape seem to stand in her way.
The Democratic Party, to put it bluntly, is suffering from a deep crisis of popularity. A troubling net favorability of negative 30 points illustrates just how far the trust has diminished. This figure is almost triple the GOP’s negative 11 points, painting a damning picture for the party. Such dismal approval rates haven’t been witnessed in the last 35 years.
It’s not just the opposing factions that have grievances against the Democratic Party. There is significant disenchantment brewing within the party’s own ranks. The seeming incapacity to present a tangible resistance against Trump’s administration has ruffled the feathers of many Democrats who pinned their hopes on the party.
Kamala Harris, unfortunately for her, has come to embody this internal dissatisfaction towards the party. The reasons for this discontent are as multifaceted as the party’s diverse ideological spectrum. Progressives accuse Democrats of lacking the necessary vigor in their pursuits, while the more centrist members bemoan a drastic swing towards culture wars and identity politics.
What unites the different array of objections is a deep-seated craving for victory. The primary rationale for Harris’s consideration as a potential 2024 nominee was rooted in the diversity she brought to the table. Biden had openly stated his intent to choose a female and, later, an African American running mate. However, this diversity aspect seems futile if it does not translate to a broader appeal to the electorate.
Harris’s main obstacle doesn’t lie so much in her gender or racial identity as it does in her lack of appeal to a pivotal demographic segment. To ensure a Democratic win, it’s essential to woo the Trump-supporting voters. Unfortunately, Harris’s previous campaign did not derail due to an absence of Democratic participation but couldn’t impress the evolving voter base.
Harris’s public communication, reminiscent of a dean from a liberal arts college, didn’t particularly excite the electorate. Apart from her stance on reproductive rights, the rest of her convictions seemed tailor-made by focus groups rather than stemming from genuine beliefs, in an era where the electorate yearned for authenticity.
Adding to her woes, Harris submitted to Biden’s request not to publicly distance herself from his political standing. Her decision to grant her first interview post-leaving office to Stephen Colbert’s ‘The Late Show’ was telling in this matter. Although this might have appeased Colbert’s partisan audience, it did little in reaching out to the broader electorate.
Therefore, nominating Harris again might only relegate the Democratic Party to a historical footnote rather than a glorious entry. Her chances of becoming the 48th president seem bleak, given the current climate. Instead, she may merely join the ranks of those interesting trivia titbits of American political history.
Seen in this light, the Democratic Party’s predicaments, represented by Harris, seem rather grim. While the past does not dictate the future, there is certainly a lesson or two to be learned about choosing one’s battles wisely in the ever-changing dynamic of the American political landscape.
The post Kamala Harris’s Hopeless Bid for Presidency: Failure in the Stars? appeared first on Real News Now.
About Author
