On an overcast Wednesday, Kamala Harris begrudgingly accepted defeat in the 2024 presidential election, bowing to Donald Trump. Harris chose the esteemed Howard University in Washington D.C., her own alma mater, as the fitting backdrop for her concession speech. Despite her slot as the vice president, she wasn’t able to garner enough support and remarked, ‘While I concede this election, I do not concede to the fight that propelled this campaign.’ To placate her disappointed followers, she made the hollow proclamation, ‘I will never abandon the future where Americans can chase their dreams and ambitions.’ It seems a dimly shining beacon of hope against her stark loss.
Harris portrayed a resolve that America ‘will never surrender the fight for our democracy,’ an apparent attempt at turning her defeat into a rallying cry for the nation. Despite her struggling campaign, Harris demonstrated a semblance of professionalism when she confirmed her call to congratulate Trump on his win. She expressed the need for a peaceful transfer of power, missing the irony given the turbulent tenure she was part of. Joe Biden also echoed her sentiment and reached out to Trump, further cementing the definitive end of their reign.
Interestingly enough, Harris’ best hope for securing electoral votes lay in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. The states, previously won by Trump in 2016 and marginally captured by Biden in 2020, were crucial contenders. Regrettably for her, the tide turned elsewhere as well, with Trump’s performance impressive in North Carolina and Georgia. Trump confidently broke his 2020 records, leaving Harris far behind as she failed to attain Biden’s level of success.
Trump’s victory over Harris is historical not just for its significance but also because he has defeated a female competitor once again. Despite the initial intrigue furnished by her colorful campaign, Harris struggled to set herself apart from the generally unpopular administration she formed part of. Her struggle was further highlighted given the compact timeline, leaving a significant number of voters unconvinced of her ability to lead.
Harris seemingly attempted to charm her female constituents by focusing largely on reproductive rights. However, these attempts fell short of impact after some recent major developments. The U.S. Supreme Court’s shocking overturning of the Roe v. Wade decision and newly implemented abortion restrictions across several states contributed to the pensive atmosphere she was attempting to navigate. Alas, even her targeted approach failed to work in her favor.
Despite Harris’ targeted attempts, the majority of women failed to rally behind her while men overwhelmingly supported Trump. Trump, master of political tactics, appealed to male voters with a prevalent and boisterous approach, underpinned by grand promises. His pitch to revitalize the economy, restrict the torrent of Southern border immigration, and to ‘make America great again,’ seemed to capture the imagination of his constituents, leaving Harris scrambling to capture what was left.
In a stark display of the country’s sentiments, an alarming half of Trump’s voters claimed that inflation was the dominant factor swaying their electoral decisions. A glance at the general state of the economy could explain this shift. More than half of the voters—45% to be precise—expressed that their financial conditions worsened over the prior four years. This marked a level of economic dissatisfaction unseen in recent elections, dating back to 2008.
Interestingly, although the economy showed signs of growth, with a declining jobless rate and thriving stock markets, nearly two thirds of voters still rated the U.S. economy poorly. Caught in the midst of this tumultuous atmosphere, Harris had to navigate an arduous race against Trump. She promised collaboration even with those who opposed her, a pledge that hardly held sway amidst the more immediate need of a revitalized economy.
In contrast to Trump’s dark presentation of America, characterized by alleged exaggerations and inaccuracies, Harris chose to take the high road. She avoided engaging in petty squabbles with Trump, even when he questioned her identity by implying she was downplaying her African heritage. Harris, daughter of immigrants from India and Jamaica, seemed to attempt to rise above the fray, a strategy that unfortunately didn’t yield the desired results.
Harris was also subjected to other questionable claims by Trump. He attempted to paint her as a socialist, an image that starkly contrasted with her more balanced record. This misrepresentation didn’t do her any favors and further eroded her credibility. Prior to her venture into federal politics, Harris served as the district attorney of San Francisco and as California’s attorney general. However, even her professional credentials seemed insufficient to salvage her tarnished image.
As a part of the Biden administration, Harris appeared to wrestle with the ongoing conflict in Gaza. Her handling of the situation was far from satisfactory, leading many traditional Democratic voters to question her competence. The war alienated these voters and further strained her already tenuous support within the party.
Despite her faltering campaign and dwindling support, Harris continued to prioritize democratic norms. She pledged to tackle housing costs and other key economic concerns. Unfortunately, these promises fell on deaf ears as Trump’s visionary picture of America captivated voters. Her approach almost seemed antiquated in comparison, further amplifying her disconnect with the electorate.
Her refusal to engage in confrontations with Trump did not benefit her campaign. For instance, when she was accused of downplaying her African descent. This underscored her struggles to truly connect with the electorate and lessened her chances. However, she persevered, attempting to maintain her focus on critical issues.
In conclusion, Harris’ failed presidential campaign left a lot to be desired. From a patronizing focus on certain constituencies to her inability to convincingly articulate a compelling vision, her campaign clearly lacked substance. Despite her impeccable professional credentials, the failed campaign demonstrated that a strong résumé is not enough. There is a need for leaders, as Joe Biden and Kamala Harris found out, to actually connect with voters’ issues and ensure they feel heard.