...Kam-Kam was their nominee.
November 8th, and there have been a million articles written why Harris and the Dems lost, Biden's dementia, open border, inflation, Woke-craziness, political coup, antisemitism, Commie Walz, losing touch with the working class, etc., etc., true, and peripherally contributory, but even so, there were Dems like Witmer and Shapiro that could have given Trump a run for his money, especially in Blue Wall states. No, the overarching reason Dems tanked was because they went with Kamala knowing she is a stupid, noncommutative bimbo. Why would Dems do this you ask? Because Dems push identity politics, not common-sense, so they went for Kam because she checked off all their boxes, and it was finally a bimbo too far. PG 4 CGR
Victor Davis Hanson, PJ Media, Nov 8, 2024. The presidential race was not unpredictable, as the now once again discredited polls swore to us.
The Republicans had made massive gains in voter registrations since 2020, when Donald Trump had lost the Electoral College by only a few thousand strategically placed votes.
Republicans began to master the transition to non-Election Day balloting -- first engineered by the left in 2020 under the pretext of COVID-19.
They not only vastly exceeded their early/mail-in voting totals of 2020, but by Election Day, they often outpaced Democrats.
For months, it was widely reported, albeit grudgingly, that there were large defections in Hispanic and African American voters from Vice President Kamala Harris.
The betting odds over the last three weeks usually favored Trump.
Harris simply could not run on anything she had so emphatically promoted in the past -- given these left-wing, unpopular, and failed policies had no majority support.
So, the chameleon Harris renounced her prior 30 years of earlier radical advocacy that, along with her race and gender, had forced Joe Biden in 2020 to select her as vice president.
There was no way Harris could still support banning fracking, defunding police, opposing border security and the wall, or calling for mass amnesties and an end to the border patrol.
Nor could Harris still promote racial reparations, ending private health care insurance, or advocating for higher income and capital gains taxes and a wealth tax.
Much less could Harris still boast of wanting mandatory "buyback" or confiscation of some semi-automatic weapons -- including entering private homes to seize them.
So given all that, Harris simply flipped -- and serially lied about who she was, renouncing her entire political career.
Indeed, Harris began to copycat Trump's own positions. And so, she never convinced the electorate that she would not flip back to her earlier radicalism once elected or even in defeat finishing out her vice presidential term.
There were three damning realities that even if Harris had been a gifted politician and an adept speaker, she could never have changed.
One, Harris was preposterously running as a turn-the-page, new-generation candidate.
But why had she not sought to implement such a "new chapter" for the prior 45 months as an incumbent vice president, especially while in office during the campaign itself?
Voters knew the answer: The entire Biden-Harris tenure was a far left-wing utter disaster, one for which the radical Harris 1.0 had for three-plus years claimed co-ownership.
Two, why did Harris avoid all impromptu interviews and the media for most of the campaign -- only to reverse course and seek out reporters when her polls eroded?
Did it hurt Harris more to avoid the media -- or meet with them and thus confirm her inanity to millions of viewers and listeners?
Three, why did Harris serially lie to America that President Joe Biden was hale and vigorous -- until hours before his senility prompted leftist donors and party insiders to force him off the ticket?
And why could she not declare her independence from the historically unpopular Biden?
Harris instead chose to terrify voters to vote against a demonized and "fascist" Trump rather than to vote for Harris and her make-believe agendas.
But even in demonizing Trump, the maladroit Harris hit a wall.
By campaign's end, Trump's favorables were often higher than her own.
His prior four years as president polled higher than the current Biden-Harris train wreck.
Trump, the purported "racist," won more Hispanic and black voters than past "moderate" Republicans like Bob Dole, John McCain or Mitt Romney.
It was hard to damn Trump as a crazy fascist when iconic liberal figures, like Robert Kennedy or Jr., Tulsi Gabbard, were campaigning for him.
Trump had reinvented the Republican Party by substituting ecumenical, middle-class solidarity for polarizing racial tribalism. Elitist Democrats were left to cater to the interests of their well-off and very rich donors as well as the subsidized poor.
Finally, workaholic Trump campaigned nonstop for two years, won all the primaries, and was endorsed by his two chief primary rivals.
In contrast, the Harris "nomination" was the product of a coup that, in 48 hours, removed from the ticket an incumbent president, nullified the will of his 14 million primary voters, and coronated Harris, who had neither won nor ever entered a primary.
That late July forced abdication of Biden lent an air of illegitimacy to Harris's candidacy, as well as truncating the time available to campaign.
Finally, Harris's first major decision was to nominate as her vice president the buffoonish and inept Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz. His radicalism, serial lying, and herky-jerky "weirdness" proved a force multiplier of her own mediocrity.
In contrast, the calm, empathetic, and astute JD Vance eviscerated Walz in their sole debate and did the same to the media.
Add it all up -- and Harris and her star-crossed candidacy were simply and rightly doomed.
Hot Air, Nov 9, 2024. Is 107 days not enough for someone to introduce themselves to the American people? Especially if that someone is (a) the sitting Vice President, (b) ran for president five years earlier, and (c) has the kind of coverage from the Protection Racket Media that makes Taylor Swift envious?
Advertisement
Bill Maher asked that question in his HBO show Overtime last night, sparring with Sarah Isgur and John Heilemann, who argued that Harris had too many structural disadvantages to succeed. Nonsense, Maher argued, while Michael Douglas mainly (and wisely) stayed out of the fray. This picks up at the 8:55 mark:
Fox News covered the exchange:
During Friday night's online "Overtime" segment, ABC News contributor Sarah Isgur argued Harris was "set up to fail" by Democrats when she was tasked to run a "three-month campaign" as she was supposed to "introduce herself to the American people.""You're saying three months wasn't long enough?" Maher asked. "It was long enough. It's not that they didn't have time to introduce- they met someone and they didn't like 'em." ..."Bill, I don't know if you know this, but the vice president of the United States is basically shoved in a broom closet for three-and-a-half years," Heilemann said. "I know, she was more popular in there," Maher quipped. "This idea that in a mass media age that 107 days is not long enough to know somebody?"
Ahem. Ahem ahem ahem. And might I add ... AHEM?
Advertisement
In the first place, Harris had plenty of opportunities to "introduce herself." She took over the campaign essentially on July 22nd; she didn't speak to any reporters at all, not even in press conferences, until over a month later in a very uncomfortable CNN interview on August 29th. Harris didn't even do that one alone; she brought Tim Walz along to soak up some of the limited time she gave Dana Bash to "introduce herself." Her time answering questions was somewhere around 20 minutes.
To some extent, Maher misses this point as well as the wagon-circling from the Protection Racket Media that Harris mainly snubbed for 107 days -- even if he gets the larger picture correct. Harris had 107 days to introduce herself, but refused to do so. She wouldn't talk about policies, she wouldn't talk about her record, and she wouldn't talk about any specific changes she wanted to make in the next four years. Harris ran as a cipher and did so deliberately, insisting that Trump was so awful that voters owed her the office instead. And the media played along, hyperventilating to the point of hysteria over Trump being a fascistnazistinkybottom while never really pressing her to introduce herself.
Advertisement
The only interviewer who did press Harris for answers was Bret Baier, who got the interview when Harris started to see her polling numbers slide. How did his colleagues in the media treat him for asking fair questions about policies and the Biden-Harris administration record? They accused him of misogyny and racism.
The idea that 107 days isn't enough in a mass-media environment to "introduce" a sitting VP to the electorate is absurd, as Maher says. But the fact is that Harris never even tried to introduce herself, and the Protection Racket Media did its best to cover for her the entire time.
Now the media wants to make excuses for Harris' failure. To use another part of Maher's Real Time show from last night, maybe they should take this suggestion ... losers.
Σχόλια