Why Kamala Harris lost, and what’s next for us
Vice President Kamala Harris failed to win the Presidency in a shocking fashion. Where do we go from here?
Americans all across the United States descended upon voting locations to make their voice heard on Tuesday night. It was the culmination of a surreal campaign trail that featured multiple assassination attempts, a last-minute change of candidate, and unbelievable sound bytes from all across the political spectrum.
Confidence was high on both sides that their candidate of choice would take the White House. Kamala Harris voters, such as myself for full disclosure, believed she would become the first female president in the nation’s history. Likewise, MAGA supporters were anticipating a second Trump presidency.
What many pollsters believed would be a close race turned into a shocking result. Not necessarily the winner — Donald Trump had a realistic chance of winning before polls opened. It was his manner of victory that surprised many. Trump broke through the Blue Wall and claimed the White House emphatically. Beyond that, he is the first Republican candidate to win the popular vote since George Bush in 2004. He will also be the first President since Grover Cleveland to serve two non-consecutive terms.
This is quite a fascinating result given how the campaigns went down. Harris ran a better campaign than Joe Biden and Hilary Clinton before her. Trump, meanwhile, became the old decrepit political figure he often accused Biden of being before the current US President dropped out of the race. Harris promoted hope for a better future, while Trump ran mostly on hate, fear, and promises of hardship.
As a Harris supporter, I am obviously disappointed with the result. While my politics are more progressive than hers, I believe she did more than enough to win. Especially when compared to what Trump offered. But something went wrong, or rather, some things went wrong. And I believe there are a few quite obvious reasons in hindsight that paint a brutal picture for the Democratic Party in the wake of this historic loss.
Weird tonal shift
When Vice President Harris entered the race, her first major decision was picking a running mate. There were a few interesting candidates, such as Josh Shapiro and Andy Beshear. However, she landed on Minnesota Governor Tim Walz.
Overall, this was a home run pick. Walz represented the potential for a more progressive Democratic ticket. And he provided an immediate jolt of energy into the campaign. Unfortunately, the energy was drained as quickly as it was generated.
Walz went viral for calling Donald Trump and Vice President-Elect JD Vance “weird.” It was a comment in passing, but it took off. It quickly became a meme, and the messaging was used by many liberal and left-leaning people online. Eventually, though, Harris and Walz stopped using that sort of messaging. They focused more on the danger of Trump as opposed to attacking the views he espoused.
Ironically, it was a weird move for the Democratic ticket to drop this line. Because it worked. Calling Republicans weird actually worked as a political strategy. For a few weeks, the right-wing freaked out about being called weird. And in turn, it made them seem even more weird.
However, reports soon emerged about DNC advisors asking the campaign to drop the “weird” label. In the end, the campaign listened and essentially rehashed Biden’s warnings against Trump in 2020. Moving away from something that clearly worked crashed a lot of energy the campaign generated. And, as a result, it helped lead to their defeat.
Lack of an online media ecosystem
Oftentimes, we tell ourselves that the internet is not real. And to some extent, this is true. Only a fraction of the world’s population uses social media occasionally. Even fewer use social on a daily basis.
However, the extent to which the internet is not real has completely shattered. The online political space is dominated by the right and far right. And this space is completely funded by the GOP while being propped up by mainstream GOP politics. The Republican Party leans into the fringes of its constituency while the Democratic Party wholeheartedly rejects it.
As of this writing, three of the top five podcasts on Spotify are right-leaning: The Joe Rogan Experience, The Tucker Carlson Show, and The Charlie Kirk Show. Furthermore, of the 10 most watched live streams of election coverage online, only one — Hasan Piker — is even charitable to the Democratic Party. The right-wing has cultivated a propaganda network online, and people have taken to it.
Social media is still a bubble. It remains only a fraction of the world that uses these platforms. However, everything adds up. If you look for political coverage, and all you see is right-wing content, it’s going to have an effect. And the Democratic Party has to find a way to break the online stranglehold the Republicans have had on internet politics over the last decade.
A pure fundamental rejection
Looking back, it’s wild to see the differences between the Kamala Harris and Donald Trump campaigns. Harris often espoused a message of hope, while Trump has stoked hate and anger. Why did a campaign where the candidate talked about just forcibly removing millions of workers emerge not only victorious but also with gains across nearly the entire board?
Looking at some preliminary exit poll data, it’s hard to say. Voters did not find Kamala Harris to be the more extreme candidate, according to NBC. 54% of respondents said they found Donald Trump to be the more extreme candidate. 45% of respondents said they only viewed Trump as the extremist option in this election. Additionally, 44% of voters said they had a favorable opinion of only Harris, compared to 43% for Trump.
And yet, while the enthusiasm on the ground swung in favor of the Dems, it did not result in enthusiasm in the voting booth. NBC found that 73% of voters cast their vote mainly in favor of their candidate as opposed to 24% who mainly voted against their opponent. Of those who voted mainly in favor of their candidate, 55% were Republican. In contrast, 60% of Democrats cast their vote mainly to oppose their opponent.
Voters were aligned with Harris in so far as she was the moderate candidate. However, they were willing to sacrifice having a moderate President in favor of the potential for change. This is also spelled out in the data. 28% of voters said the ability to bring change was one of the more important qualities they looked for in a President. 74% of these voters ended up voting for Trump.
Why did voters who trusted Harris to be more moderate not show out for her? I think what we saw on Tuesday night is a fundamental rejection of the rhetoric of the Democratic Party. At this time, the American electorate is not interested in a moderate candidate. If they were, they would have voted for Harris. What they want is change, no matter how potentially ruinous that change may be.
Voters are not interested in this story of the spirit and light of America. That story does not reflect how people feel about their situation. It does not matter if the economy is in a good place, which can be argued. And it does not matter if inflation is down, which it is. Voters feel as if they are worse off these days, as 75% of voters say inflation caused them moderate or severe financial hardship, according to NBC.
You can’t appeal to these if you don’t offer them a narrative that fits within their worldview. It is not about the policies. Trump’s tariffs are likely to cause more inflation, and mass deportations could cause a labor shortage. It’s the rhetoric the Democratic Party needs to work on. They need to move away from the civility talk that clearly does not work and lean more into populist rhetoric if they want a shot at winning any elections moving forward.
The toughest pill to swallow
I have talked a lot about the hate that was evident in the Trump campaign before Election Night. I don’t believe I’m narrativizing anything when discussing that. The Trump campaign wasn’t exactly hiding the contempt they hold for people of color and women. And I think there is an uncomfortable truth that many in the Democratic Party need to come to terms before the 2026 Midterms.
Obviously, not every single person who voted for Trump is a racist, sexist, etc. But I don’t necessarily think that matters. Because every single one of them is willing to accept the inherent bigotry of a second Trump presidency in so long as it personally benefits them. Moreover, there is a decent amount of his voter base that likes what he stands for.
It’s comforting to tell ourselves that people are inherently good. That when faced with obvious and clear evils, they will stand up for what’s right. But this election cycle has proven that a lot of people are more than okay with the bigotry. In fact, it’s what they want from the Trump campaign.
How the Democrats approach this reality, if they do at all, is tough to predict. But it is something we need to accept about our society. No center-left or left-leaning party will have a shot at electoral wins if they do not understand how some sections of the American electorate think in this day and age.
What comes next
I am well aware that it is easy for me as a straight white man to discourage doomerism in the next few weeks. In saying this, I believe that panicking and doom-scrolling will do no one good. It’s important to remain calm during these times. At the end of the day, the GOP wants to see women and marginalized groups suffer. To combat this, you have to live, and do your best to thrive.
Again, it’s easy for me to say that. So I want to acknowledge that any feeling of despair, anger, frustration, and/or concern is completely valid. You will hear a lot of Republicans try to tell you otherwise, but they are wrong. You are valid to feel that way and you do not owe anyone the time of day, especially if they are trying to discredit how you feel.
As for the future, it’s hard to tell. There is a chance we avoid the worst of Trump’s vices during his second term. We survive these next four years and we get out and vote against whoever tries to retain Republican control of the White House in 2028. However, even in this scenario, things are more than likely going to get bad.
A lot of people are tired, and that’s understandable. But we have to remain vigilant and keep fighting. This fight does not start in 2028, though. A lot of people are focusing too much on the presidency. But the GOP also has control of both chambers of Congress and the Supreme Court. The Democratic Party has its work cut out for them, but they can make ground during the 2026 Midterms.
Politics are exhausting, no argument there. But politics are also the most important thing in our lives. So remain engaged over these next two years. Keep up to date with news at the local and state level. Remain aware of the world around you. And when the Midterms come around in 2026, you have to get out and vote. The fight to reclaim the country from extremism is not over. In fact, it is only just beginning.
