In the post-mortem of the 2024 US Presidential election, a striking revelation was that Joe Biden, in a desperate attempt to imbue false unity, had advised his VP, Kamala Harris, to mimic his policies and decisions. Behind the scenes, Biden endeavored to secure his own legacy, warning Harris not to let any discordance show. Despite these succinct instructions, Harris’s efforts to maintain this façade unsurprisingly led to her downfall, having been unable to distinguish herself from the increasingly unpopular Biden administration.
As the American electorate tirelessly sought a wave of alteration and transition within their leadership, they were provided an unexpected hero in Donald Trump, who deftly positioned himself as the embodiment of change. Unfortunately for Harris, she was unsuccessful in claiming this title for herself, with voters seeing her as a mere extension of the failing status quo.
Shockingly, Harris avoided any form of self-critique or responsibility for her defeat while reflecting on her campaign. Instead, she tried to deflect attention by casting a dubious light on Trump’s first 100 days in office, unwilling to admit that his actions were part of a considered right-wing strategy rather than random chaos.
It was bewildering to witness Harris’s attempt to paint herself as a champion of progressive Democrats while failing to acknowledge the steep challenge facing Trump’s opposition, indicating a possible delusion about the serious reality of the political landscape.
Elsewhere, the governor of Illinois, J.B. Pritzker, sought to assert his importance by delivering an impassioned speech at a party fundraiser in New Hampshire. The significance of New Hampshire in the grand political scheme amplifies words spoken there, making Pritzker’s critique of his colleagues all the more pointed.
In a show of theatrics, Pritzker unleashed a flurry of criticism aimed at ‘do-nothing’ political figures within the Democratic ranks and those preoccupied with penned thoughts for op-ed columns. His attack on party members who focused on debating social issues over the actual hardships of working families was a telling reflection of the discord within the party.
These individuals, Pritzker implied, were mere pretenders, all bark and no bite when it came to advocating for reforms that would truly benefit their constituents. He lamented the rampant hypocrisy and called for an end to the fear of confronting powerful interests.
In a move that seemed more about personal promotion than democratic unity, Pritzker positioned protesters against the current administration as heroes. He aroused the image of rebellion taught from childhood, advocating for civil disobedience on a broad scale.
The Governor even dared to label supporters of the current leadership as ‘would-be inhabitants of museum halls designated for tyrants and traitors.’ This hyperbolic rhetoric harmonized with his call to action, becoming the most severe protestation from a Democrat to date.
Now, with an eye towards the upcoming midterms, Democrats are struggling to refactor their party’s strategy and reassert their relevance. Intriguingly, Governor Gavin Newsom of California underscored the conundrum faced by the Democrats–the need to engage with Republican voters while maintaining critical introspection, particularly as the party seems to be losing traction.
Meanwhile, Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez are trying to rally voters around the narrative of ‘fighting oligarchy’. They point accusing fingers at billionaires’ omnipresence in Trump’s administration and the allegedly damaging impact of money and corruption on politics–an interesting strategy considering the wealth contained within their own ranks.
Democratic strategist Mary Anne Marsh has put forth the view that this approach, causing political tumult, could prove a winning formula. However, she expounds the predicament for governors like Newsom, who must maintain a semblance of moderation to appeal across political lines.
Rhetorically asking ‘if not now, when?’ is a challenge she throws to Democratic leaders. Yet, one would think it more critical to ask, ‘If not with a new strategy and vision, with what?’ The party seems trapped in a cycle of blame and outcry, needing radical transformation rather than furthering the tired legacy of Biden-Harris.