Kama Kichwa Cha Habari kinavyoeleza Kuna Nini nyuma ya pazia? Marekani as kiranja wa Dunia anafahamika kama kinara wa kupiga chapuo wanawake kupewa nafasi something which is not bad.
Ila Wao Huyu Rais wa 47 hawako tayari kuchagua Rais mwanamke. Ila Africa na uchanga wetu wanaoona it's fare kuweka wanawake kama Marais na kuwa-empower.
Mimi sio mbaguzi lakin Tangu Bi Hilary Clinton na sasa Kamala ni Men wanachukua. Kumbe hata wangemweka Trump na Mama maria angeshinda Trump.😜
Soma Pia: Donald Trump ashinda Urais wa Marekani kwa 51.05% dhidi ya Harris Kamala aliyepata 47.46%
Unaweza kuona pia Biden alishinda pamoja na umri mkubwa kamshinda Trump lkn ilipokuja Kwa Kamala wakaona Shida.🥲 Hii tunaiitaje wadau wa wa Jukwaa na watu Excellence wa JF?
Kama Kichwa Cha Habari kinavyoeleza Kuna Nini nyuma ya pazia? Marekani as kiranja wa Dunia anafahamika kama kinara wa kupiga chapuo wanawake kupewa nafasi something which is not bad.
Ila Wao Huyu Rais wa 47 hawako tayari kuchagua Rais mwanamke. Ila Africa na uchanga wetu wanaoona it's fare kuweka wanawake kama Marais na kuwa-empower.
Mimi sio mbaguzi lakin Tangu Bi Hilary Clinton na sasa Kamala ni Men wanachukua. Kumbe hata wangemweka Trump na Mama maria angeshinda Trump.😜
Soma Pia: Donald Trump ashinda Urais wa Marekani kwa 51.05% dhidi ya Harris Kamala aliyepata 47.46%
Unaweza kuona pia Biden alishinda pamoja na umri mkubwa kamshinda Trump lkn ilipokuja Kwa Kamala wakaona Shida.🥲 Hii tunaiitaje wadau wa wa Jukwaa na watu Excellence wa JF?
Harris’ defeat
The Harris campaign was always running uphill. She served as vice president to a president whose
approval rating plunged in the middle of his first year in office and never recovered. The public’s judgment of his performance on two core issues—inflation and immigration—was harshly negative, and Harris inherited this disapproval when Joe Biden abandoned his quest for a second term.
The fact that Biden waited so long to leave the race also worked against Harris. The president’s tardy decision deprived her of the opportunity to sharpen her arguments in a primary fight and shortened the time she had to introduce herself to the voters. She did the best she could in the circumstances by quickly unifying the party and building on Biden’s campaign apparatus rather than starting from scratch, but she never entirely overcame the difficulties stemming from Biden’s timetable.
Harris’ theory of the case was flawed. Looking at examples from the 2022 elections, she assumed that putting reproductive rights at the center of her agenda would mobilize an army of angry women and move them to the polls in record numbers. This did not happen. Women’s share of the total vote rose only marginally from its level in 2020, and Harris’ share of the women who voted did not increase from Biden’s 2020 levels. It is hard to judge how much this emphasis on abortion contributed to Harris’ poor showing among men—just 43%, down from Biden’s 48% in 2020—but it did nothing to convince them that a Harris administration would be sensitive to their concerns.
Her closing argument—that Donald Trump posed a clear and present danger to democracy—fared little better. This happened in part because many Republicans and Independents saw Harris and the Democrats as the real threats to democracy, and also because the charge offered no new information that would sway voters whose minds weren’t made up. Donald Trump may be the best-known candidate in modern American history, making it difficult to change anyone’s view of him.
Harris’ tactical choices made her problems worse. First, she spurned opportunities to create a clearer political profile. Although Biden’s unpopularity burdened her campaign, she refused to separate herself from him in any way that broke through to persuadable voters. Similarly, by refusing to explain why she had abandoned the progressive positions on crime, immigration, health care, and climate change, she blurred the public’s perception of her and opened the door to the Trump campaign’s charge that she was a closet radical. Thinking back to the successful campaign of Bill Clinton in 1992, some Democrats were hoping Harris would have a “Sister Souljah” moment in which she broke with some party orthodoxy in order to show her independence, but this did not happen.
Second, Harris’ decision to avoid media interviews during the first half of her campaign created the impression that she was dependent on scripted remarks and afraid to think on her feet. Answering tough questions can enhance a candidate’s reputation for competence and character, a potential upside to which Harris and her campaign seemed oblivious for much too long.
Conclusion
Democrats knew that the election would be close, but the scope of their defeat will likely trigger recriminations first and then an extended period of soul-searching. As was the case after Michael Dukakis’ defeat in 1988, the party will be forced to engage in a debate about the causes of its defeat, and what is sure to be a long and lively primary campaign will determine the path forward.