Hindsight, as the saying goes, is always 20-20. Now that Kamala Harris has lost, the honourable members of the US left-liberal commentariat, who were pushing almost delusionally for her victory till late Tuesday night, are now suddenly tripping over themselves to explain why.
Besides having a meltdown, that is. It’s baffling, if not infuriating, some who are blaming convicted felon and now president-elect, Donald Trump, for standing in the way of the first woman, in addition to a person of colour, becoming president.
And he did it earlier too, by blocking another woman, Hillary Clinton. As if that is the only necessary qualification or desideratum for demanding the vote of citizens. No forgiveness, no reconciliation with ‘Make America Great Again’, some of them pledge, taking their cue from Harris’ own acceptance speech. The fight must go on!
If the same experts and pollsters had felt the pulse of the people, they would have known all along that though she had an early advantage which, ironically, was because of her late start, she never really managed to connect with the people or relate to their problems. Her feel-good, inclusive rhetoric, frequent flip-flops over key issues, notoriously nonsensical word-salads, preachy and pompous repetitions, and incessant virtue signalling did not go down well with the people.
Though self-identified as black and working class, she came across as anything but that. With two privileged parents, both PhDs, the father a professor of economics at the prestigious University of California at Berkeley to boot, it was hard to pass off as anything but privileged. Her rich Jewish husband, former celebrity lawyer Douglas Emhoff, and Harris are anything but working class.
The couple have declared assets of over $8 million, $850,000 in cash, and a $4 million home. Harris’ own income, just from book royalties, is upwards of $400,000. Trying to pass off as a working class woman of colour only made her seem hypocritical.
Donald Trump, on the other hand, did not pretend to be anything other than what he was—a self-believing, hard-working, incredibly tough, billionaire capitalist. Although always narcissistic and frequently obnoxious, he came across as much more human and authentic, despite his disparaging and misogynist jibes at his opponent.
Love him or hate him, he was real, even though larger than life. Not fake or phoney. What is more, Americans prefer strong and decisive leaders over ideologically self-righteous and politically correct ones.
That is why the “post-mortem” justifications of analysts now seem equally hollow and self-serving. Why don’t they admit they were wrong, the pollsters were wrong, and the Democratic party’s own surveys were wrong? Everyone was guilty of collective and self-indulgent misprision. They believed their own mythmaking, all the while ignoring what the ordinary voting public thought, believed, or wanted.
The truth is that Trump led an almost miraculous comeback, unprecedented in recent history, rising from the vindictive politics of vendetta lawfare and assassination attempts to lead the broadest and most diverse coalition seen in American politics. His appeal to African Americans, Asian Americans, Hispanics, and working men of all ages and races cut swathes through traditional Democratic party strongholds. He spearheaded, as he himself boasted in his victory speech, one of the greatest political movements America has known.
His clean sweep of the ‘democratic wall’ states of Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and other crucial battleground states including Georgia, Nevada, Arizona, and North Carolina meant Harris had no chance at all. In the end, Trump not only won the electoral college decisively, but also the popular vote convincingly. What is more, both the Senate and most likely the House will now be Republican controlled, not to mention the Supreme Court. No American president has been reelected, after losing an election, with such a mandate.
Going back to Harris’s loss, it can be attributed to a confluence of factors including economic dissatisfaction, campaign strategy, voter demographics, and broader political dynamics. One of the most significant factors was the prevailing economic climate. Despite the US not being in a recession, many Americans felt the pinch of economic policies that seemed disconnected from their everyday struggles.
Inflation had been a persistent issue following global recovery efforts post-pandemic, affecting the cost of living significantly. The Biden administration, of which Harris was a part, was often blamed for these economic woes, even if not entirely responsible. Voters tend to vote with their wallets, and the perception that the economy was not working for the average American was pivotal. In that sense, the vote came not so much out of the wallet but the grocery bag.
As everyone says, “It is economics, stupid.” But this time around, Harris lost even though the US economy has been pretty strong.
Harris's historic candidacy as a woman of colour brought identity politics to the forefront. While this was a source of inspiration for many, it also became a point of contention. Moreover, the Democratic party's focus on ‘woke’ social issues did not resonate with the demographics they targeted. On the contrary, blue-collar voters and minority groups who felt their concerns were sidelined reached against this strategy.
But if there was one issue where Harris was wrong from the very start, it was illegal immigration. Both first-generation naturalised citizens, who are hardworking and law-abiding, as well as established voters, resented millions of unverified and unchecked hordes gatecrashing into their country and using up hard-earned taxpayer dollars. ‘Border czar’ Harris couldn’t shake off her association with and support for open borders—and, should we say, boarders?
Instead of fading away after losing to Joe Biden, Trump is back with a bang. It remains to be seen how he will change America and the world. Is MAGA just an empty slogan or does it have real content, backed up by major policy shifts and power plays?
On a more personal note, I can bask, even if momentarily, in the satisfaction of calling this one right: I had predicted that it would not be a photo finish as the pollsters and pundits had predicted. Trump would win with a convincing margin. He did. With a landslide.
(Views are personal)
(Tweets @MakrandParanspe)
Makarand R Paranjape | Author and commentator