The Harris campaign, the Republican response, whether her elevation to the top of the ticket was “undemocratic,” and some predictions for November.Since my last newsletter, Kamala Harris has been elevated to the status of presumptive nominee, running without any serious opposition as the Democratic party falls in line behind her to present a united front. The Democrats look rejuvenated since President Biden was convinced to finally step aside, and against the reported wishes of former president Barack Obama, who preferred the idea of a contested convention, current VP Kamala Harris has been left without challenge to be anointed as candidate at the DNC in mid-August. This has resulted in accusations from the Republicans of the Democrats acting “undemocratically”, an accusation we will examine more closely shortly to establish if this is partisan politics or if there is merit to this argument. We will analyse the effectiveness of the Republican response to the new political reality and finally end with some predictions for November. Vice President Kamala Harris will be the Presidential candidate for the Democrats this November, as all credible potential opponents quickly ruled themselves out of the contest in the days after Biden signalled his intention to step aside. This decision instantly unlocked millions of dollars of existing campaign donations that could still be utilised as Harris was already present on the original ticket as Biden’s VP. The money has continued to roll in as donors coalesce behind Harris and her running mate, Tim Walz. Many commentators expected Harris to select a figure from a critical battleground state, like Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona or Governor Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania. The Republican reaction to Waltz shows this was a wise decision, mainly because Walz is everything JD Vance pertains to be: an authentic, relatable, average Joe. Waltz entered teaching in 1989 and continued as an educator until 2006. He has also served his country in the National Guard for 24 years and served six terms in the US Congress as the US Representative for the 1st Congressional District of Minnesota before becoming governor in 2019. During his short time as Governor of Minnesota, he introduced universal free school meals, legalised marijuana, introduced 12 weeks of paid family leave and 12 weeks of sick leave, introduced steps to achieve carbon-free electricity by 2040, banned conversion therapy, tightened gun control with red flag laws and universal background checks, and provided more than $2 billion extra to school funding. He is also responsible for the “weird” label that has now been used repeatedly and significantly to reference Vance, Trump, and the current direction of the Republican party. This label has struck a nerve, with both Trump and Vance at pains to explain that the Democrats are the weird ones…not them. This is further evidence that Trump and the Republicans have struggled to create and adhere to a coherent attack strategy for the post-Biden reality. It started with petulance and playing the victim as they railed against the change and the money they had spent attacking Biden over the past 12 months. It then progressed to Trump repeatedly questioning Harris’ racial identity, inferring that she is only claiming to be black for political reasons. The primary issue for the Republicans is that the entire campaign is centered on a cult of personality focused purely on the supposed appeal of one man—Donald J. Trump. Trump reinforces this at every turn, most recently dismissing the notion that the Vice President is of interest to voters. He repeatedly stressed in the past that he and he alone could save America from various malignant forces. Questions of policy and detail are intentionally diluted or avoided, as only a minority of Americans would agree with the numerous extreme measures laid out in the Project 2025 blueprint. Trump has even realised this and has tried unsuccessfully to distance himself from the plans, although this stretched credulity as the project was authored by and remains mainly led by ex Trump staffers. For an excellent examination of the various aspects of Project 2025, I recommend you check out Bob Gatty’s Lean to the Left blog site, where a separate piece has been posted on each element of the plans. This short podcast serves to introduce the series. Trump and the Republicans have decided that offence is the only form of defence, trying numerous different labels to denigrate Harris and Waltz. Amongst the most colourful (and counterproductive) of these have included JD Vance labelling Harris a “deranged cat lady” due to her not having children and Republicans labelling Waltz “Tampon Tim” because of a sensible, humane, and popular policy to provide free tampons in public school bathrooms in the state of Minnesota. The most frequent label used is also one that is destined to fail as it does not stand up to any scrutiny, that Harris and Walz are Communists looking to install communism in America. This is a ludicrous accusation and one that may play well to Trump’s base but will not convince many of the independent or undecided voters who will decide this election. Addressing the elephant in the room - Is the elevation of Harris “undemocratic”?Republicans have quickly labelled the decision to elevate Harris as undemocratic, mirroring a similar warning I made in January whilst chatting with Bob Gatty on the Lean to the Left podcast back in February. I warned then that any attempt to anoint a successor to Biden at the DNC and deny a proper primary process would further diminish the democratic process and faith in the integrity of the US political system. There was one important caveat, however, in my argument. I stated then that the decision to elevate a candidate other than Harris would damage democracy. The decision to elevate the sitting Vice President does not provide such a clear example of being ”anti-democratic’, as Harris has already been elected as one half of the successful ticket in 2020. It is also not fully without precedent, as the VP role is often seen as a President in waiting, with many VPs passing through primaries as clear front runners. Notable examples are George Bush Snr in 1988 and Al Gore in 2000. One could also argue that the Republican primary this year was a similar non-event, with Trump assuming the position of the presumptive nominee from the beginning and the remaining candidates simply battling amongst themselves to burn money and credibility. It should also be remembered that the primary process is a relatively modern concept, only starting in 1912 to limit the power of party elites and empower voters. Before this time, candidates were chosen entirely by the party membership, and contested conventions were commonplace, with delegates thrashing it out behind closed doors in smoke-filled rooms. We can deduce that this attempt must be renewed, as it has failed in light of Harris’ elevation. Worse still, this is not an isolated incident as in the 2016 Democratic primaries; Senator Bernie Sanders was actively opposed by the DNC, with leaked emails showing collusion from officials to ensure the elevation of their chosen candidate, Hilary Clinton. The accusation of anti-democratic is, therefore, credible. Although not as damaging as it may have been with an alternative appointment at the top of the ticket, it remains detrimental to the trust held in US democracy. It is frustrating that this could have all been avoided had President Biden stood by his promise to serve only a single term, and this must be remembered amidst the gushing praise of his actions as “selfless” and only for the “good of the nation”. He waited until the last moment, responding only to intense pressure to bow out and make this “grand gesture”. Whether these blows to the integrity of American democracy represent a temporary aberration or the death by a thousand cuts is difficult to predict. Still, work is needed to restore faith in the integrity of the primary process. After all, if you deliberately disregard the principle of a neutral democratic process when selecting your candidate not once but twice, can you be shocked when the integrity of the election itself is then called into question? For disgruntled voters, feeling powerless and ignored, the two are intrinsically linked. What will happen In November? There is a lot of road to run between now and November, and making predictions is often a dangerous game, but I will offer my insight regardless. In the concluding chapter of my book, I outlined possible scenarios for this election. The one which I believed was the most likely outcome before Biden withdrew was a Trump victory, leading to four years of sustained efforts to denigrate and enfeeble the institutions of American Democracy and further divide American society. Another, which I now believe to be the more likely, is that the Democrat ticket of Harris and Waltz will win narrowly, and Trump will respond by clinging to the idea of a stolen election, perpetuating a “bigger lie” than in 2020, that only serves to denigrate American democracy further. Trump does not enjoy the power of incumbency and the machinery of the White House to perpetuate this narrative this time, but how much this will hinder his efforts to overturn the result in the event of a loss is difficult to say. Intense efforts have been underway over the past four years to prepare for this scenario. If this reality does occur, Republican officials and Congress members will be at a crossroads. They can finally take the chance to end this marriage of inconvenience, distancing themselves from Trump, who would be 82 and no longer a viable candidate by the time the election in 2028 arrives, or they can double down and hitch themselves to the Trump wagon toward an even more uncertain future. Image source: https://margininsiders.com/
|
