Harris Bound to Repeat Democratic Presidential Loss?

William Henry Harrison, recognized as the ninth American president, was glimpsed as the final leader bearing British origins to serve in the White House. He also emerged as the Whig Party’s first victorious candidate in the presidential race. The inauguration of Harrison will be remembered for his lengthy speech which persevered for approximately two hours, setting a unique record. Unfortunately, his leadership was indeed short-lived as he succumbed to death within his initial 31 days in the office.

Harrison gains historical importance for being the last politician to experience a defeat in his maiden attempt at presidency and successfully clinch it in the following election. Before him, only two leaders, Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson, had achieved this feat. Richard Nixon also experienced a loss before winning the presidential election, albeit after a lengthy delay. Exclusive to Grover Cleveland and Donald Trump are the unique happenstance of winning, experiencing defeat, and then emerging victorious again.

Since Harrison’s era, the fate of presidential candidates who suffered a loss in their initial attempt and challenged in consequent elections wasn’t kind; they faced defeat yet again. Democratic contender Adlai Stevenson and the Republican candidate Thomas Dewey both contested the elections twice and endured a loss on each occasion. In a more unfortunate occurrence, Henry Clay and William Jennings Bryan lost three consecutive elections in which they participated. The recurring defeats indicate a noticeable reluctance among the voters to support those who’ve been unsuccessful previously. The pattern spells potential trouble for Kamala Harris, especially after her recent announcement that she has retreated from the gubernatorial race in California. This unexpected move has ignited speculations about her plans to make a second bid for the White House soon.

The Democratic Party currently finds itself in an unfavorable position, with its popularity at a record low. A glaring net dislike that sits at minus 30 points, almost triple of that of the GOP, underpins its dwindling popularity. This could be the least popular the Democratic Party has been in the last 35 years, which surely doesn’t bode well for its future endeavors or for Harris.

This unpopularity of the Democrats can be attributed to the discontent brewing within their own ranks. Members hold the party responsible for not just the defeat against Trump, but also the inadequate resistance offered to the former president’s strategies when he was in power. While Harris may not be the sole person to blame, her robbing image stands as a symbol of this growing dissatisfaction within the Democratic Party.

However, this displeasure isn’t united. It segments into two broad factions within the party. The progressives suspect that their party isn’t putting up a strong enough fight. In stark contrast, the centrists in the party argue that the core issue lies in the Democratic party taking up wrong battles by straying too far left into the realm of cultural war and identity politics. The only commonality between the two factions seems to be their deep-rooted desire for victory.

Remarkably, the only reason Harris seemed to be in a position for a potential 2024 nomination was that she was a selected candidate ahead on account of diversity considerations. It was an open declaration by Biden that he would choose a female and, subsequently, an African American associate. Harris’s shortcomings however, lie not in her gender or race, but in her inability to expand the range of the Democratic coalition.

For any Democratic victory, winning over previous Trump supporters is vital. Unfortunately for Harris, it was not a lack of Democratic voter turnout that caused her loss, but the fact that her appeal failed to persuade a changing demographic. She could not present herself as a compelling option in the ever-changing political scenario.

Her rhetoric, reminiscent of a dean at a small liberal arts college, failed to strike the right chords with voters. Worse yet, apart from her stance on reproductive rights, her convictions seemed manufactured by focus groups in a period where voter sentiment thirsted for authenticity. Much to her detriment, Harris also made the mistake of aligning too closely with Biden rather than carving out her own distinct identity.

An unusual incident that highlighted this issue was her decision to grant her first post-tenure interview to Stephen Colbert’s ‘The Late Show.’ While this might have appealed to Colbert’s committed audience, it did not capture the attention of the broader demographic that the Democrats needed to win over.

These shortcomings and missteps indicate why, if Democrats chose Harris again as their presidential nominee, she may only be remembered as an trivia answer. And the question would not be ‘Who was the 48th president of the United States?’.