The ascension of Donald Trump to the presidency is a narrative that demonstrates the shortcomings of the Democratic party. Notably, President Joe Biden’s dismal debate performance and subsequent pressure from his party led to his withdrawal from the race. Despite Kamala Harris stepping in as the Democratic nominee, partnered with Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, she was unable to maintain the energy of their cause, even following the apparently successful Democratic National Convention in Chicago.
This prompts an introspective assessment of the political landscape, particularly regarding the future trajectories of both major parties. Biden’s legacy, in particular, is worth scrutinizing. Furthermore, an analysis of the factors that drove traditional Democratic supporters to instead cast their vote for Trump is critical.
JD Vance, the GOP vice presidential nominee, had some credence in his assertion that our nation is constructed from not just ideals, but also from people united by a ‘shared history and a common future.’ Despite Biden’s numerous missteps, it’s hard to deny his impact on shaping this shared history, yet the tide turned against him decisively.
While Biden’s tenure as president was influential, it was painted by controversy and dubious achievements. Amidst claims of a successful economic recovery and the creation of approximately 15 million jobs, the underlying issue of inflation remained largely unaddressed. Moreover, despite the claimed bipartisan legislative victories during his reign, the exceedingly slim margin the Democrats held in Congress remained a point of contention.
On the international front, although Biden’s battle against alleged Chinese trade malpractices and strengthening of alliances in the Pacific were touted as victories, the outcomes often fell short of expectations. His heavily managed response to the 2022 invasion of Ukraine by Russia left many questioning his ability to navigate the treacherous waters of international diplomacy despite his extensive experience in this field.
As NATO allies rallied to Ukraine’s cause, Biden’s hand was seen in this unprecedented unity. Yet, his notion of a resurgent NATO mission was viewed by many as overly optimistic, even though Finland and Sweden became new members under his watch. Such attempts to project American leadership and reputability often met with skepticism and incredulity.
His endeavors in the Middle East also sparked much debate. Biden’s incessant push for a deal to not only terminate the war in Gaza but also pave the way for regional peace and a two-state solution was deemed by many as too ambitious, if not totally detached from reality.
Kamala Harris, in her bid for presidency, sought to appeal to a base that demanded a conservative message. However, her personal alignment with progressive policies coupled with nearly four years serving along Joe Biden showcased her inability to balance these demands.
Harris’ understanding of policymaking was fundamentally flawed. She believed that success depends on centrism, overlooking the transformative potential that demographically diverse, agriculturally rich, and socially varied American populations bring to the table. However, this strategy only highlighted the Democratic party’s disregard for longstanding societal changes and overemphasis on misguided issues.
Progressive politics, as championed by Harris, encountered severe resistance from the American electorate due to her out-of-touch approach. This scenario underpinned the Democrats’ inability to craft policies that resonated with the concerns and issues faced by everyday Americans.
In what can only be called a desperate bid to evoke trust and support, Harris asserted during her concession speech that she had built strong alliances. Regrettably, however, her actions belied her words. The claims of consolidated coalitions bared no fruit, as groups that were historically Democratic voters like the Black, Latino, Asian, Jewish communities, union voters, and women, failed to rally behind her.
Kamala’s supposedly ‘broad’ support was thin, as demographic polls revealed. The lack of effective outreach and connection with African Americans, Latinos, Asians, Jews, union members, and women was evident in the eventual outcome of the elections.
Harris’ tone-deaf approach towards her president run left the Democratic party scrambling for voter confidence. Despite the signs, she turned a blind eye to the data, pushing ahead with her ill-suited campaign strategy. She neglected to acknowledge and address critical voter needs, leading to an unfortunate yet predictable outcome.
In final analysis, the downfall of the Democratic party in this presidential race is largely due to their leaders’ inability to truly connect and communicate with the people. Both Joe Biden, with his controversial presidency, and Kamala Harris, with her poorly executed candidate campaign, exemplify how vague ideals and detached political stances can lose even a historically loyal electorate.
The political story encapsulated in this presidential race serves as a stark reminder of the power of the electorate in choosing their leaders. It underscores the need for political figures to remain deeply attuned to their constituents’ concerns and desires. The failures of Biden and Harris provides valuable lessons for any political party or figure seeking public office: Personal ambition and agenda cannot and should not override public sentiment.