Harris: A Symbol for Democratic Misfortune
William Henry Harrison has earned his spot in the annals of American history for a few reasons – he was the last U.S. president born as a British subject, the first of the Whig Party to secure the presidency, and the one known for the longest inauguration speech. His tenure in office though was infamously short, as death claimed him just a month into his presidential term. Moreover, Harrison also holds the distinct record as being the last politician to bounce back from a presidential election loss and win in the subsequent run, a feat previously accomplished by Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson. Unfortunately for contemporary political aspirants, the likes of Richard Nixon could taste victory only years after initial defeat.
While some politicians like Grover Cleveland and Donald Trump have had an electoral roller-coaster ride of winning, losing, and then winning again, several others like Democrat Adlai Stevenson and Republican Thomas Dewey, had to taste defeat twice in succession. Henry Clay and William Jennings Bryan have even fared worse, losing three times back-to-back, each contest under a different party banner. Clearly, the electorate doesn’t favor the ‘losers’. A fact that doesn’t ideally sit well with VP Kamala Harris, who announced recently she won’t be gunning for the California governorship, sparking conjectures about another White House bid.
However, Kamala Harris has larger worries beyond the simple historical trend. The current political reality points to a bleak picture for the Democratic party which is facing an extreme lack of popularity. Its net unfavorability stands at minus 30 points, almost three times that of their Republican counterparts (-11 points). This denotes an historic low in terms of popularity for the party in the last three and a half decades.
When you’d assume Donald Trump’s unpopularity should naturally boost the Democratic image, a staggering 63% of Americans are found to have an unfavorable view of the party. Why such a contradiction? The Democrats are upset with their own party for failing to counter Trump effectively, or present a barrier to the policies he put forward.
Although Kamala Harris can’t shoulder all the blame for the Democrats’ misfortunes, she has inarguably become the symbol of their discontent. This dissatisfaction within the party isn’t homogeneous though. The progressive faction believes that the Democrats aren’t pushing back hard enough, whereas the more centrist elements fear the party’s lurch too far to the left on culture war and identity politics.
Underneath these diverging viewpoints, the shared yearning for victory remains. But this collective aspiration could spell trouble for Harris who is often recognized for her electoral loss. In fact, the only reason she is in the potential candidates’ list for 2024 is because she ticks the diversity checkbox. This was clearly reflected in Biden’s preference for a female, specifically an African American running mate, which led to her selection.
Interestingly, many Democrats do not view her race and gender as impediments. By itself, these factors should not be a hurdle. After all, every vice-presidential candidate represents a certain faction of the electorate, even the white males. The real problem with Harris is not her demographic traits, but her lack of appeal to voters, which is essential to broaden the Democratic coalition.
Winning a presidential election requires flipping opponents’ voters. It was not a lack of Democratic turnout that caused her failure, but her inability to resonate with the evolving electorates. Her rhetoric often appears hazy and inflated, resembling the discourse of a dean at a liberal arts college. Moreover, her convictions seem tailored to survey outputs rather than authentic stances.
In a regrettably misjudged move, Harris conformed to Biden’s request not to distance herself from him, demonstrating excessive concern for establishment norms. This, coupled with her penchant for appealing to traditional liberal interests, seems misplaced and does little to inspire confidence.
To kick-start her fresh political journey, Harris chose to appear on Stephen Colbert’s The Late Show for her first interview post-holding office. CBS’s decision to shortly thereafter terminate the show, ostensibly for business reasons, illuminated a broader issue. Colbert’s program mainly catered to a small anti-Trump demographic. Yet those are not the kind of audiences Democrats need to win.
In her conversation with Colbert, Harris voiced discontentment over the ‘broken’ system, criticizing its ‘naïve’ and ‘feckless’ leadership and the failure of system’s purported guardians. These remarks might have endeared her to the faithful followers of Colbert’s late show, but they do little to endear her to the broader voting populace.
If the Democrats continue to back Harris, she’s most likely slated to join the ranks of trivia question answers for political enthusiasts. What that question won’t be though, is ‘Who was the 48th president of the United States?’.