What’s next for the Democratic Party?
This week, the American people gave a ringing endorsement of Donald Trump, electing him the 47th President, and giving Republicans a majority in the House and the Senate.
How do we make sense of it all?
A twice impeached, criminally convicted former President, who was held civilly liable for sexual abuse, won not only the electoral college, but the popular vote, a feat not achieved by a Republican since 2004.
Much blame will be thrown around in the wake of Trump’s victory, and some will be deserved. But only one actor should be our primary concern. I will get to this later.
In the first place, blame will fall on Kamala Harris. Though she had little time to introduce herself to voters, and distinguish herself from Joe Biden, she failed at every opportunity to do so. When asked on The View which of her policies would differ from Biden’s, she failed to come up with an answer. You can’t hide behind inexperience when you whiff on a softball like that. Respectably, she did not run a campaign based on her race or gender. But if you don’t rely on group identity, you have to define yourself as an individual. She failed to do this.
Her media strategy was also completely outdated. While trying to court young voters, she opted for legacy media instead of alternative media like podcasts, and online political commentary shows. Never again will a Presidential nominee refuse an invitation to Austin, Texas, to appear on the biggest podcast in the world. It seems that Donald Trump’s son, Barron, who told his father which podcasts to appear on, understood the modern media landscape more than the Harris campaign. This will be a lesson learned for the Left, and everyone else in politics.
President Biden will also take some of the blame. It will be said that he held on for too long. He should have campaigned as a one term President, and the party should have selected a replacement a year prior to election day. But nobody has yet been able to articulate the name of the person who would have been in a position to take the nomination and run a winning campaign. The problems of the succession should not be blamed on Biden directly.
Harris supporters will also blame the American people for their candidate’s loss. This explanation will catch fire because some Trump supporters, those who cannot articulate a criticism of the man’s character or governance, are undoubtably in a cult. But voters who cast ballots for Biden in 2020 cast ballots for Trump in 2024. That’s how the math works. These are not ideologues. They are rational voters who made their decision based on a specific issue. If that issue was primarily the economy, or immigration, the vote went to Trump.
I would like to suggest that the blame for Harris’ loss victory falls squarely on the Democratic Party, which has completely eroded the trust of the American people.
When Biden made the decision to withdraw from the race, the Democratic Party decided that there would not be a primary. They instead installed Harris in Biden’s place without the input of Party members. Take the most charitable case (which I do not agree with). The DNC, with little time to find a replacement, installed the most qualified candidate with the highest possible of winning. Even if that were correct, the process by which that decision was made is the problem, not its result.
The DNC produced a candidate that was indistinguishable from the party machine itself. This was the party’s undoing.
For three successive elections, the party has offered the American public a career politician. Does anyone seriously believe that Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, and Kamala Harris are thought leaders with ambitions for big change? Or is it more likely that they understand the intricacies of party politics, and have been able to sustain careers based on this understanding? That is not an appealing characteristic to American voters.
What voters actually want is change, and I don’t mean that they want it as a campaign slogan. When Bernie Sanders started to win a significant amount of voter share in the 2020 primary, the party mobilized to stop him. Here was a genuine grassroots effort, where party supporters were attempting to install a candidate they were enthusiastic to vote for. But that is not the function of the DNC (or any political party). The function is continued survival for those who benefit most from the Party’s existence, whether that is politicians who can make it a career, or donors who receive benefits by giving money. Its primary function is never to bend to the will of the people. The result of this year’s election is a repudiation of the party machine.
This is why swing votes went to Trump. The working class do not like the vision or goals of the DNC, because those goals are not dictated by the working class.
On the other side, Trump knows that to be successful he must also run against his own party, if only in appearance. This war on two fronts is actually how a two-party system can evolve. You must on the one hand challenge the status quo in your own party in order to make your position the new status quo, and simultaneously fight off opposition from the other party that tells you that departing from your party’s previous status quo makes you a radical.
There is enough blame to go around in the wake of the Democrat’s loss, but most of it is going to the wrong place. The Harris campaign was not the problem. It was a symptom of a deeper issue inside the Democratic Party that will not be solved until the people, and not big money donors, are in charge of the Party. Here are some places they could get started:
63% of Americans support universal healthcare. The Democratic Party has never run a Presidential candidate with this view.
63% of Americans support making public colleges and universities free for all American students, with 34% saying they “strongly support” the suggestion. 85% of Democrats support the proposal. It is still seen as a fringe issue if proposed inside the Party.
72% of Americans believe there should be limits on the amount individuals and companies can spend in political campaigns. Just 11% support unlimited campaign contributions. The move towards publicly funded elections is never a campaign issue.
For Democrats, it’s time to go back to the drawing board, or if there is any hope, back to grassroots and fair primaries. Maybe then they can run a campaign that directly addresses the American people, and restore the trust that has been justly lost.
