No, Harris Would Not Have Won If She'd Just Done the Opposite Of Everything She Did

There's an episode of The Simpsons where Homer attempts to coach Bart in miniature golf.

Homer: Keep your head down, follow through.

[Bart putts and misses]

Homer: Okay, that didn't work.  This time, move your head and don't follow through.


Democrats are experiencing something like that in the aftermath of the election. That is, the misbegotten belief that we would have won if we'd simply done the opposite of everything we did or did not do. This belief is wrong but has taken hold in the party to the point of mass delusion.

Kamala Harris ran a virtually flawless campaign. Before she became the nominee, her approval rating stood at 38%. By October, it had risen to 45%, exceeding that of Donald Trump. Her biggest accomplishment was pulling virtually even with Trump on the question of whom voters trust more on the economy; Trump had led Biden by 15% on that metric. Harris handily defeated Trump in their lone debate. She also raised a staggering $1.5 billion from donors, putting Republicans at a considerable resource deficit. On the issues on which she campaigned, she had overwhelming bipartisan support. And she did it all in just over 100 days.

The truth is, it was always extremely unlikely Democrats could win in 2024. Two reasons:
1. No party in power has ever won another term given such dismal voter sentiment. Specifically:
* 52% of voters say they are worse off than they were four years ago.
* Nearly half of voters say the economy was the most important issue of the election. But 75% rate the economy as fair or poor, only 25% as excellent are good. And 62% say the economy is getting worse.

2. The pandemic. From Cooper Burton of ABC News: "Among democracies that held elections this year, over 80 percent saw the incumbent party lose seats or vote share from the last election. That includes democracies of all kinds and in all corners of the globe."

And yes, I predicted Harris would win, despite an environment that I'm now describing as extremely unfavorable to her. I still think my call for Harris was reasonable under the circumstances. The polls underestimated Trump's support for the third consecutive election.

But as soon as the vote came in, the second guessing of Democratic strategy started. And Democrats, progressive thinkers and other pundits all seem to have the same reaction: Harris would have won if only she'd taken the opposite tack on one important issue or another. And of course no one offering this sage advice can agree with anyone else.

1. According to Pete Buttigieg, the campaign was too online, and did not make enough in-person connections.
The Daily Show's Jon Stewart says the opposite, mocking the Harris campaign for too much direct contact with swing-state voters.

2. Senator Bernie Sanders says the problem is that Harris abandoned the working class by not running to the left and talking more about social justice.
Senator John Fetterman says Harris should have run harder to the right, talking more about border security.

3. Some say Harris needed to embrace the Palestinian movement.
On the contrary others say Harris needed to distance herself from the Palestinian movement.

4. Or, you name it:
Harris was sunk by "woke" issues. (Never mind that Harris did not run on woke issues at all).
Harris needed to talk less about abortion.
Harris should not have asked billionaires to campaign with her.
Harris should not have tried to win over Republicans by campaigning with Liz Cheney.
Harris spent too much on celebrity appearances.


I thought this noise would die down after a few days, but it hasn't. I just read an article from Lucian K. Truscott IV on nationalmemo.com explaining that the problem was that Kamala Harris and Tim Walz were too cheerful. Yes, you read that right. "Kamala Harris’ smile, on display everywhere she went, was genuine. So was Tim Walz’s jolly demeanor. But voters didn’t want someone nice to take command of an economy and a country they saw as failing them." So Harris should have stopped smiling and being positive. Anything else?

Yes. According to Democratic pundit James Carville this weekend, if Joe Biden had dropped out sooner, Democrats would have won the election, "And it wouldn’t have been that close because we would have had so many frickin’ talented people that were running." So apparently the problem was that the nominee was not someone other than Harris herself. For the record, polls taken around the time Biden dropped out did not show any potential Democratic nominees other than Harris polling any better than she did against Trump.

Exactly twenty years ago, I was devastated by John Kerry's loss and did not know how to move forward. But Democrats found a way. And Donald Trump's second term is shaping up to be a complete complete train wreck as he appoints a cabinet made up entirely of insane criminals, conspiracy theorists and sexual predators, while at the same time embracing tariffs and deportations that will wreck the economy. If Trump does enough damage, the Democratic party will start performing better even if it can't find another Barrack Obama.

Tweet