OPINION: Explaining Kamala Harris' Loss Objectively And Simply
Kamala Harris' loss should not be surprising to anyone involved with labor relations...from either side.
By Peter List, Editor | November 7, 2024
Since Tuesday’s election results became known in the wee hours of Wednesday morning, and Donald Trump was declared the winner—not just by the electoral college, but also the popular vote—there has been a collective meltdown across social media of disappointed people, people having mental breakdowns, as well as a lot of finger pointing among Democrats, and a mainstream media that still seems in shock.
As this is a site dedicated to union-related issues, let’s try to simplify the outcome more objectively from a labor-relations perspective.
Having been involved in a few hundred union-election campaigns over the last 30 years—and those who have been involved in union-election campaigns on both sides know this well—there is an old adage that goes something like this:
People do not vote for a union, per se; they vote against their employer.
Or, more precisely:
People do not vote for a union, per se; they vote against their boss.
And, that is where it went wrong for Harris.
In this election, with more than 60 percent of the country consistently saying that the nation is headed in the wrong direction, there are simply a lot of people who voted for change and against the status quo.
Other than those who fully ascribe to MAGA, very few of the people who voted for Donald Trump did so because they actually like him. Instead, they voted against Kamala Harris…for change against the “wrong direction” of the last several years.
Here’s why:
Think of this like a union campaign: Knowing that a majority of the workers think the “company” is headed in the wrong direction, the Board of Directors (Democrats, in this case) fired “The Big Guy”—the "Boss”—who was seen as a problem.
The Board of Directors then brought in a “fresh face”—the Boss’ “Number Two” person—to mend the fences and win back the support of the workers.
However, for whatever reason, “Number Two” did not do a mea culpa and say “we really screwed up and I’m different.” Instead, “Number Two” stood in front of the workers and, quite literally, said she would not have changed a thing that The Boss did.
To workers, who already believed the company was headed in the wrong direction, all that was seen and heard was: I may be a different face, but it’s going to be ‘SSDD’ (the ‘same sh*t, different day).
In the case of Kamala Harris, she was repeatedly asked softball questions about what she would do differently if elected, and each time she was asked, she failed to differentiate herself.
On The View (among the friendliest of cheerleaders possible), Harris even doubled down on SSDD:
Host Sunny Hostin asked Harris: "Would you have done anything differently than President Biden during the past four years?"
"There is not a thing that comes to mind," Harris responded. "I've been a part of most of the decisions that have had an impact."
If the Board of Directors—the Democrats—really wanted to win the campaign, they needed to pick a new person to put in front of the voters.
Instead, to a population where a majority already thinks the “company” is headed in the wrong direction, instead of getting a fresh face with better ideas on how to fix things, they heard someone who said, by being “part of most of the decisions that have had an impact,” she was part of the problem.
As a result, many people who do not like Trump’s personality—even high-profile former Democrats—were willing to overlook the things about him they dislike and vote to fire the incumbent Harris.
Like in a union campaign, many did not vote for Trump specifically; they voted against Harris in the hopes that Trump will fix the issues that Harris and her boss created.
Though people may be disappointed (or happy for that matter), that Harris lost the election should not have come as a shock. After her boss was fired, she had a chance to differentiate herself from her fired boss and either couldn’t or wouldn’t do so.
Unfortunately, it’s not as simple as “the people voted against Kamala because of Biden”. Anyone heavily involved in labor (especially the Southern state regions of the U.S.A.) can pinpoint the problem(s) that clearly exist. 1. She’s a woman. 2. She’s a black woman. 3. She’s an educated black woman. 4. She’s an outspoken, educated black woman. Until, and unless this Country can learn to deal with and accept racial equality, I’m fearful that a woman of any color will never be bestowed the honor of being elected President of the United States. I refuse to comment on Mr. Trump. Enough has been said about the man. I refuse to waste my time and effort on that subject.
The bosses, the fascists and the bible-belters won.
They have elected a grotesque, angry, dumb as a dodo huckster to preside over the ruination of our nation. There are many motifs and side issues at play -- appeal to women, appeal to men, Kamala's alleged elitism etc etc etc.
All of this deflects our attention from one oustanding, salient factor:
Trump is a exceptionally selfish little bastard who would sell America out just for an advantage on one of his petty, damn investments.
https://davidgottfried.substack.com/p/the-trump-sucking-dumb-fucks-of-america