Democrats Are Making a Huge Mistake - The Atlantic
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Yesterday, Joe Biden did the honorable thing, after weeks of denying that anything had to be done at all. His announcement took his party by surprise—and now, in haste, the Democrats are making a colossal error and ensuring that they will reap as little advantage from Biden's decision as possible. The error is not the choice of Kamala Harris. It is the sudden rallying behind her, the torrent of endorsements, right after Biden's self-removal. Biden's senescence was only part of the party's crisis. The other part was the impression that Democratic politics felt like a game rigged by insiders to favor a candidate of their choice, and to isolate that candidate from the risk associated with campaigning. For 27 minutes, between the time Biden announced his withdrawal and the time he broke the seal on Harris endorsements by bestowing his, the contest felt thrillingly, bracingly wide-open. The Democrats should have kept it open all the way into the convention next month, in Chicago.
"The Democratic National Convention is not the time to litigate [Harris's] ability to take over for Biden," Tressie McMillan Cottom wrote yesterday, in a column headlined "Kamala or Bust." "The time to do that was in 2020." She is right about the second part. The urgency of defeating Donald Trump in 2020 convinced many Democrats that feisty internal debates about the direction of the party needed to be postponed, in favor of party unity. In those circumstances, neither Biden nor his running mate was granted the scrutiny they deserved; they were personifications of the desire for a third Obama term, and on that basis they received the party's heartiest and most casual approval. Four years later, the pair were running on their record (a strong if unpopular economy, a somewhat muddled foreign policy) but still had not articulated a distinctive vision. The party should have demanded that vision in 2020, or indeed in 2016.
Candidates who do not develop articulated principles and coherent views end up campaigning on nothing at all, such as Harris's now-famous babble about "faith in what can be, unburdened by what has been." Most politicians lean on inane rhetoric of this sort early in their campaign: "Yes we can," "A thousand points of light," "MAGA" in all its forms. But at some point, it naturally gives way to the nitty-gritty of politics—unless the politician uttering it remains in a largely ceremonial role, such as the vice presidency, and never faces the stress of an election campaign. I would like to know whether Harris's unburdened faith means that as president, she would equip Ukraine with long-range strike capabilities against targets in Russia, and whether she plans to knock down tariffs or build them up.
Read: Trump versus the coconut-pilled
If a campaign launch is a candidate's chance to show off his pearly smile, the primary is the candidate's chance to show off that smile after he's been slugged in the face a few times. And as in boxing, it's better to take one's practice hits from a sparring partner rather than from the defending champ who awaits you on fight night. Harris is now in danger of bypassing that jaw-hardening process, which the Democrats could have extended over a period of weeks, as other candidates sought to displace her—and, if they failed, showed that they might be vice-presidential material. The process would also, like a normal primary, have long-term salutary effects on the party, by showing which young talent looks likely to ripen into Democratic leadership.
A prolonged process would also confer strategic advantages. Normally a party commits to a platform and a ticket several months (or in the case of incumbents, years) before the election. My colleague Tim Alberta has described the Trump campaign's meticulous planning for a Biden campaign. "Even the selection of Ohio's Senator J. D. Vance as Trump's running mate," Alberta writes, was "meant to run up margins with the base in a blowout rather than persuade swing voters in a nail-biter." Now that Trump is committed to his path, the Democrats have an unusual chance to revise their strategy to neutralize Trump's choices. "The Republican Party just spent tens of millions of dollars running against Joe Biden," Trump's former adviser Stephen Miller said on Fox News yesterday, with a whiny and wounded sense that the Democrats had violated the bounds of fair play. And in some ways they have—but now that they are redrawing those boundaries mid-campaign, they may as well take full advantage of their opportunity. That means not providing Trump with a fixed target, and calibrating their selection process for maximum lethality for his campaign's locked-in choices.
Jerusalem Demsas: The problem with coronating Kamala Harris
The other strategic advantage is attention. To get airtime yesterday, after Biden's withdrawal, Trump would have had to get shot in his other ear. His whole political career has depended on the fascination, sometimes morbid, of the public, as he says unexpected and strange things. No individual American politician can match his ability, but collectively, with genuine competition compressed over the next few weeks, they can create a circus more able to transfix voters than a series of Trump rallies.
Harris herself seemed ready to avoid the error of premature anointment. She promised to "earn and win" her party's nomination, without any apparent expectation that it would be locked up in a matter of hours. Barack Obama, the last strategically gifted politician in his party, also seemed ready to take advantage of competition. He said he expected the party "to create a process from which an outstanding nominee emerges." But now that option is slipping away. Biden had to go, and to replace him with almost any candidate born after the Korean War would have improved the Democrats' chances. But the manner of that replacement presents (or presented—by the time I finished writing this, even Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia had fallen in line behind Harris) opportunities. The Democrats, as they say, never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.
The error is not the choice of Kamala Harris. It is the sudden rallying behind her.
By Graeme WoodIllustration by The Atlantic. Source: allanswart / Getty.July 22, 2024, 12 PM ETShareSave Listen00:0006:50
Produced by ElevenLabs and News Over Audio (NOA) using AI narration.
Tags
Who is online
424 visitors
The polling prior to the democrat convention may cause another disaster for the party.
who's the too old to be POTUS candidate in the race now?
Nobody.
[deleted][✘]
Maybe Biden/Harris will get a few more chances to wreck it in the next 100+ days...
the newest reuters/ipsos poll has harris ahead of trump by 2 points, which is still within the margin of error, but a 4 point gain over a similar poll recently done prior to biden dropping out.
Strikes me as more of a move of clutching at straws desperation on the part of the Democrats.
Donald Trump is crushing Kamala Harris among younger voters, according to a new poll.
The poll, conducted by Quinnipiac University between July 19 and 21, found that among the 18-34 age group, Trump fared better than Harris, with 58 percent of those surveyed supporting the former president compared to Harris' 39 percent.
Donald Trump Is Crushing Kamala Harris Among Younger Voters - Newsweek
She literally started her campaign yesterday... Calm down.
Since when are leftists ever calm?
Seems to me the rightists are freaking out now that Harrris is running for POTUS. Even Trump is running scared. You can call BS all ya want but as trumpy would say, "it is what it is". LOL
Right.
Trump is scared of Harris. Talk about your leftist projection.
Harris first has to prove she can do the job of being VP; before she can even think about being President. Time is running for that. Name one thing she has done well as VP?
Her biggest assignment was being border Czar- and outside of setting record levels of illegal immigrants entering the country she has done zip to fix the problem.
Harris is a prosecutor, trump is a convicted felon. Sure, you keep telling yourself that.
I wonder why?
Amazingly, Joe just couldn't see that and had to be pushed out. Probably another example of his cognitive decline.
[✘]
Ah there we have the responsible, objective Trump supporter 'argument' that was almost certain to show up.
What was Kamala's role or contribution to drafting that legislation, beyond backing the work of others?
Incompetence comes to mind.
The facts have a way of destroying your propaganda.
You just claimed:
And you accuse me of propaganda?
Read the fucking article.
Oh give it a rest.
I read the article. Still doesn't change my comment.
[deleted]
So, she wants to reclassify his convictions? Ya'll will quit that prosecutor/felon shit faster than Biden out the window when you see her pussification of crime.
No need to, he was already found guilty. Also, sentence time is coming up. Should be interesting.
So, Ivana and Marla were tossed aside "whores" ... maybe it's Donald who is the whore.
And what if he should win his appeal? What would you say then?
It's not a what if, it's a when.
If he wins his appeal and the case is dismissed then he would no longer be a legal convicted felon.
We have no control over the justice system. All we can do is use the labels that properly correlate with the judgment.
We both know there will still be people that will say he still will be, just like there are people currently saying he is rapist without his ever having g been convicted of such.
To be fair, the judge said he DID rape E. Jean Carol ...
One can bet that for any possible claim that there will be people making it.
And labeling Trump a rapist is fair game given there is strong evidence of same. But one cannot label him a convicted rapist because he has never been convicted of the crime.
He won't win an appeal, that only happens a very small percentage of the time Ed. I think I read 11% of the time? Pretty unlikely. And Merchan delayed sentencing so after the sentence, there will be no time to appeal it to the SCOTUS.
"He won't win an appeal..."
As the old saying goes, nothing is written in stone. That is especially true of politics. I prefer to wait and see.
There’s a massive gap between what democrats want Harris to be, and what reality has shown her to be. I assume they’ll run the hidin Biden campaign for her to try and minimize her exposure and trust the media to canonize her for them, but she’s going to have to stand up on her own two feet at some point.
Lol, yep, here we go again. They'll try to fix her up the same way they did with Biden.
I assume they’ll run the hidin Biden campaign for her to try and minimize her exposure and trust the media to canonize her for them, but she’s going to have to stand up on her own two feet at some point.
You bet and as was pointed out, the last time she tried that Tulsi Gabbard beat her brains in.
Wish he had taken her as VP. She would mop the floor with anyone chosen for the opposition. Harris included.
As a Russian she would have fit right in with Trump.
Ooooohh good comeback........../S
Statement of fact. Sorry!
Prove she is a Russian or even a Russian sympathizer.
She had an opinion on our involvement. That proves zip.
The guy who wrote that article was fired from CNN for being incompetent, Maybe the DNC can nominate him?
Hillary told them so!
That is all the proof they need.
Then back it up.
Who are you quoting? I said no such thing...
They said it wouldn't be long before the cheap memes started.
I need some popcorn.
Tulsi is self-basting?
That is all you have as proof?
I am not posting more links, if you have proof to the contrary then post it. Proof was requested and I posted it, not my problem you don't like the source.
Trump told them so, that's all the proof they need!
they rarely do. "link" and "prove it" is just another hoop to jump thru so they can refute the evidence.
Tulsi Gabbard’s ties to secretive cult may explain her perplexing political journey | The Independent
www.independent.co.uk /news/world/americas/us-politics/tulsi-gabbard-cult-putin-democrat-science-of-identity-b2556594.html
Tulsi Gabbard’s ties to secretive cult may explain her perplexing political journey
Bevan Hurley 12-16 minutes 6/4/2024
Sign up for the daily Inside Washington email for exclusive US coverage and analysis sent to your inbox
Get our free Inside Washington email
Editor’s Note: This article was originally published on October 16, 2022. Caroline Sinavaiana-Gabbard, 78, was killed in Samoa on May 25, 2024 Tulsi Gabbard has staked out extreme positions on LGBT+ rights , spread disinformation about Ukrainian biolabs , and claimed she was being shadowbanned by Big Tech while using her vast social media footprint to label Joe Biden a “warmonger”.
In one breath Gabbard expresses a desire to bring love and aloha from her native Hawaii to the world, in the next she is fanning conspiracy theories on Tucker Carlson’s Fox News show.
Last week, Gabbard announced she was leaving the Democratic Party , claiming it had become “an elitist cabal of warmongers driven by cowardly wokeness”.
The decision came as little surprise to anyone who has followed her political trajectory from 2020 Democratic presidential candidate to darling of Russian propagandists and the American far-right.
To understand her ambitions, her aunt Dr Caroline Sinavaiana Gabbard tells The Independent in an interview that it is necessary to look to her upbringing in a secretive cult called the Science of Identity Foundation (SIF) whose members show absolute loyalty to a reclusive guru, Chris Butler.
A former member told The Independent the group’s teachings are virulently homophobic, often anti-Islamic and misogynist, and how they were forced to worship Butler, who is considered to be akin to a God.
Sinavaiana Gabbard says her niece’s career is all about the pursuit of power, and her bid for the presidency in 2020 was the culmination of four decades of Butler’s efforts to seek political influence.
Dr Caroline Sinavaiana Gabbard says her niece Tulsi Gabbard is heavily influenced by reclusive Hawaiian guru Chris Butler (Supplied)“Once again I find my niece’s apparent penchant for parroting extremist toadies such as Tucker Carlson and vile ‘strongmen’ such as Vladimir Putin, to be problematic and deeply troubling,” Sinavaiana Gabbard, a retired professor of English at the University of Hawaii, told The Independent.
“It gives me no pleasure to note that Tulsi’s single governing principle seems to be expedience, which is in effect no principle at all.”
[ Please ] [ ✘ ] use [ ✘ ] the [ links provided ] [ ✘ ] in [ ✘ ] the [ beginning ] [ ✘ ] of [ ✘ ] the [ ✘ ] article.[ ✘ ]
Thanks John!
Via Hillary Clinton.
[deleted][✘]
If you listen to Democrats, their media sycophants, and lemming followers talk- Harris is a lock to win the Presidency.
The attacks on Trump have restarted- forget the hate rhetoric that potentially led to an assassination attempt. That is in the past.
It isn't like Kamala is more moderate than Joe; she is far further to the left than he is.
All Democrats have to run on is "anyone but Trump". They are going to pound that home until they finally manage to imprison him (they only have really 1 bullet left in the chamber; and Merchan has delayed sentencing until at least Sept 18th) before the general election; or get him killed. Given the reaction of the left to the attempt on Trump's life I really don't think they care which it is.
I wouldn't go that far, but she has a far better chance than Joe had. Trump is simply to old to run for president.
Do the math, trump is already backing out of the planned debates because he knows Harris will kick his ass.
That alone is a substantial positive.
Until it comes to running the country- which the last 3 years have shown.
Harris just gave another very good speech at her first rally as the presumptive nominee. It is a breath of fresh air compared to what we have seen so far in this campaign.
That conflates age and senility - a very undemocrat, unPC move.
Well, the right did campaign on it for how long? "Joe Biden is too old!!!!!", but now that trump is the old guy...it's not ok? Wow. LOL
Nope, Dementia not age,
Lol. suddenly, we are learning Biden's speech weren't very good. Amazing how that differs from what was said when he was the nominee.
You have a terrible memory, Sean. The Ds were not claiming Biden's speeches were good, they were countering the hyperbolic rhetoric from Trump supporters. For example, they pointed out that his mistakes were a small portion of his speech and that he was okay on the balance.
But it does not matter. Harris is almost certainly going to be the nominee and comparing her with Trump, Trump will be the old guy slurring words, losing train of thought and wandering aimlessly in rhetoric ("Gettysburg, wow").
Sure. We were always at war with east asia.
Just last week someone here was bragging about his SOTU and how powerful it was. And the responses on social media to his last press conference made it seem like he was Churchill reborn.
But then he was kicked out, so now history can be rewritten.
Then explain why trump thinks Obama is president and he can't tell the difference between Pelosi and Nikki Haley?
He doesn't need to worry, I am sure his wife will show up.....someday, to support her beloved Donny.
And Nikki Haley refused 10,000 guards on Jan 6th. "Don't fight uphill me boys ..." "The late, great Hannibal Lector ..." “All I know about magnets is this, give me a glass of water, let me drop it on the magnets, that’s the end of the magnets.”
It is nice that there is only one old man left in the race.
Don't forget Trump claims the US had the best H2O numbers during his Administration, but my fav is batteries and sharks...
don't forget energy independence, no crime, no wars, no illegal immigrants, and the cleanest water... /s
the oldest presidential candidate in american history...
Trump is the oldest official convention certified nominee in US history.
Reuters (I think) took a national snap poll yesterday and it showed Harris with a two point lead over Trump.
She is bound to get a bump if for no other reason than the relief so many democrats now feel and the obvious attempt by the media to make her look good at every opportunity.
Weren't you saying this morning trump was leading her in the polls?
He is.
Remember this one:
The absolute best thing the Ds could do was to rally behind a single candidate. Harris is the obvious choice given the circumstances.
Not rallying at this late date would end up with a split party that would, almost without question, fail to get the votes needed for Harris to win.
The fact that Trump supporters are whining about the Ds historical and quite atypical solidarity illustrates that they do indeed understand the significance of a focused, energized D party.
One of the tactics will be to try and sow discord within the Democratic Party to possibly peel off a hundredth of a point in some district somewhere when a person sits home instead of votes.
The premise of this article is very weak.
The 100 million dollars raised in two days from small donors belies the idea that Harris is not the right choice. She has been vice president of the United States for 3 1/2 years, it is not necessary for her to be "tested" to the specifications of political pundits.
This election is all about taking it to trump and demonstrating to undecided voters that he is not fit, in a million years, to get back in office. That is the whole ball game. How Harris became the nominee is WAY down on that list.
The right wing is claiming that Pelosi committed a coup. ROFL. Trump's month long attempt to overturn the 2020 election was a "coup", this is simple intraparty politics.
[deleted][✘]
The published analysis makes several assumptions and some rather glaring mistakes. (Not too surprising for the Atlantic.)
Kamala Harris must be a surrogate for Joe Biden. Otherwise Harris can only run on promises not backed up by any sort of record. And Harris doesn't have the luxury of many, many months of primary campaigning to allow bargaining for her own specific political agenda. Harris has inherited Joe Biden's political priorities, promises, and agenda; she can't really overturn those for her own agenda without alienating a lot of Democrats..
Democrats are not really supporting Kamala Harris for her own political agenda. Harris is receiving support because it is assumed she can carry forward what Joe Biden started. Harris rocking the boat will undermine the support from Democrats and then she'd be running against Trump on her own record. And Harris doesn't have a record because Joe Biden didn't want to be upstaged. The fundamentals of the election have not changed. Harris is going to be required to deliver that assurance at the DNC convention. Trump is still running against Biden's record and political agenda.
Trump doesn't need to be shot in the other ear, either. Democrats have been planning for over 3 years to make 2024 a referendum on Trump. Democrats are going to try to focus all the attention on Trump anyway. Trump doesn't have to do anything to get attention. Trump only need make minor adjustments to his campaign strategy. The arguments are still about the competence of the Democrat candidate to put America first. Trump's record counterbalances Harris' lack of a record and Trump will like pound Harris' lack of a record. That's an obvious weakness that invites political attacks. That means Democrats must run Biden's agenda even if he ain't on the ticket any longer. Democrats can't allow Harris to be Harris.
The pundits have been knocked off balance and are grasping to capitalize on the situation. There's a heck of a lot money at stake. (At least $80 million to celebrate Joe being gone.) Joe Biden simply created another crisis that boxed in Democrats. So, naturally the unbiased liberal press will try to spin Democrats out of the box. But the primaries are over, the election now has its own inertia, and whoever rocks the boat now will have the disadvantage.