The margin between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump has narrowed to the point where the difference between them is about 1.5 percentage points and three million votes, 239,000 of which in key swing states would have elected Harris President had they gone the other way. Trump is now going to be a minority President, with less than 50 percent of the vote, despite getting the most votes. In this environment, some folks are already talking about the possibility of Harris trying again for the Presidency in 2028. A poll already shows her as the favorite for the 2028 Democratic presidential nomination.
The most obvious reason is the reason I've been bringing up on this blog over and over and over - Democrats don't give losing nominees, whether at the presidential level or down the ballot, second chances. Harris will be no exception. Excuses will inevitably be made as to why she shouldn't run again. Democrats will say that she had trouble connecting to crucial working-class voters in Pennsylvania and Michigan. They'll say that she carried reliably Democratic states like New Jersey by margins that were too narrow. They'll point out her ties to President Biden and that the country will demand a clean break from the past in 2028.
Also, Democrats know that there are too many people in These States who can't accept a woman of color - or any woman - as President. That remains the clearest reason for Harris's loss. The Democrats don't want to have to go through that again. This is why you won't see a woman as a leading candidate for the 2028 Democratic presidential nomination, assuming that the Democrats are still around in 2028 and opposition presidential candidates are allowed. Sorry, Gretchen Whitmer.
A white male Democratic presidential nominee with Harris's qualifications would have been sent to ride off into the sunset as well. How long have Democrats shunned unsuccessful presidential candidates and denied them a second bite at the apple? How far back do you want to go? If you look at the electoral history of Thomas Jefferson's Democratic-Republican Party and its successor, the modern Democratic Party, from 1800 to 1856, you'll see that they won thirteen out of fifteen presidential elections, and the only nominee who never served as President, 1848 nominee Lewis Cass, was never considered again after his loss to Whig nominee Zachary Taylor. After President Martin Van Buren lost his bid for re-election in 1840, he made two tries to win the party's presidential nomination thereafter; he failed both times.
Aside from Grover Cleveland (who was elected to his second nonconsecutive presidential term in 1892 in a rematch with Republican President Benjamin Harrison after having won the popular vote against Harrison four years earlier while losing in the Electoral College), Democrats have given additional chances to only two failed presidential nominees - 1896 nominee William Jennings Bryan (nominated two more times, in 1900 and 1908) and 1952 nominee Adlai E. Stevenson II (nominated again in 1956). Needless to say, neither of them became President. Democrats simply don't like losers and will move heaven and earth to ensure that losing nominees - presidential or otherwise - don't get another chance. They'll sow doubts on TV talk shows, discourage donations to losing nominees looking for another shot, and say that want to "look forward."
Oh yeah, there are rumors that Harris will run for governor of California in 2026 when the term-limited Gavin Newsom steps down. Good luck with that. But then again, even a former Vice President from California who loses a gubernatorial election there can make a national comeback.
There's a precedent, and it's been set by a lesser public figure.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment