Tariq Shehadeh 

Two weeks ago, on Nov. 5, Donald Trump secured victory in the 2024 U.S. Presidential Election, becoming the first Republican since 2004 to win the popular vote. He won all seven battleground states and saw every state in the country shift in favor of the Republican Party. As a result of such a decisive defeat, Kamala Harris’s supporters have been in turmoil, with reactions ranging from crying to protesting. 

Despite these emotional responses, there has been no clear self-reflection from Democrats, with some saying “America failed her” or more egregiously, “the voters failed her,” as if she were entitled to their votes. The truth is that voters cannot fail a candidate—Kamala failed herself. She ran a poor campaign that delivered the weakest Democrat performance in 36 years, and she fully deserves the outcome. Kamala alienated the left of her party with flip-flopping on Gaza, alienated the working class by pandering to big-money interests, and led a poorly run campaign. 

First, as has been evident for over a year, Palestinians and their sympathizers have been angered by the Biden-Harris Administration. From day one, the administration sent mixed signals regarding Gaza—through threatening an arms embargo, calling for a ‘humanitarian pause,’ or mocking the loss of Palestinian lives, every supporter of Palestine felt angered by the administration in some way. Kamala, when she entered the race, had two choices: either support the left’s demand for a ceasefire and arms embargo, or strongly back Israel and be firm in her support. She did neither. Throughout the campaign, Kamala’s messaging was inconsistent. For example, in Pennsylvania, she aired pro-Israel ads, stating, “I will always stand up for Israel’s right to defend itself, and I will always ensure Israel has the ability to defend itself,” while in Michigan, she broadcasted a different ad saying, “What has happened in Gaza over the past nine months is devastating. We cannot allow ourselves to become numb to the suffering. And I will not be silent.” Additionally, she refused to meet with many Muslim legislators and community leaders in Michigan. By trying to sit on the fence, Kamala lost both states. In contrast, Donald Trump, despite his firm support for Israel, met with Muslim leaders in Michigan and built coalitions with both Muslim and Jewish Americans, receiving endorsements from Dearborn Mayor Amir Ghalib and community imam Bilal Alzuhairi, among many others. 

In addition to her unclear stance on Gaza, Kamala failed to address the economy, the most decisive issue to everyday Americans. People feel, now more than ever, that life is unaffordable. They see the effects of hidden taxation (inflation), groceries becoming more expensive, stagnating wages, and the rising cost of living, all of which occurring since the 2008 Financial Crisis. Most people also know that big banks caused the financial crisis, and therefore, deeply distrust them. This sentiment gave rise to populism in the 2010s and 2020s. Despite this, Kamala flaunted endorsements from Wall Street executives, as seen in her debate with Donald Trump, where she mentioned Goldman Sachs executives supporting her economic plan. This messaging may have resonated with Wall Street, but it alienated Main Street—the very working class who have felt the economic burdens of the past four years under the Biden-Harris administration. Many of them felt nostalgia for the Trump economy, which had lower inflation, lower unemployment, and higher purchasing power. Trump also maintained a populist message throughout the campaign, supporting the end of taxes on tips and overtime. 

Moreover, Kamala did not talk about the economy enough on the campaign trail. She failed to address the real issues most Americans face. Instead of promoting herself and her policies, her campaign largely focused on being the anti-Trump candidate. The main issues in the Harris campaign were not the economy, foreign policy, or immigration, but Project 2025 and abortion. Kamala and her campaign on X (formerly Twitter) made extensive efforts to connect Trump with Project 2025, which he condemned at every opportunity. Trump completely rejected it and instead presented his own Agenda 47, which was far more appealing to the American public. Kamala also attempted to link Trump to a proposed national abortion ban, which he opposed, while accusing him of seeking to end IVF treatment—contradicting his plan to mandate that insurance providers include IVF coverage. By focusing on abortion and false attacks, Kamala distracted herself from more pressing issues. She ran a campaign not based on her own merits but on fearmongering, attempting to convince women that Trump was in favor of abortion bans. This strategy didn’t help her much with married women or moderate women, who prioritized the economy or immigration over what is now a state issue. Kamala also attempted to present herself as a celebrity, inviting performers like Megan Thee Stallion to her rallies, but the American people clearly didn’t want a celebrity—they wanted a president. 

Ultimately, Kamala failed to define herself in this campaign. Many people felt she was a different person depending on who she was speaking to, and her policy proposals were too vague to analyze thoroughly. She presented herself differently to different groups, and as a result, she was not favored by many Americans who felt passionately about issues that mattered to them. Kamala ran a campaign based on lesser-evilism rather than promoting herself as a strong, viable option for the presidency. She fully deserved this loss, and the Democratic Party should learn from it in the future, rather than deflecting blame onto the voters. We live in a republic, and it is the job of politicians to please the electorate, not the other way around.