Who Would Have Guessed

Op-ed

Democrats lied about Biden’s cognitive health for almost two years. He was unfit for the office and certainly not fit to run a presidential campaign. It took an embarrassing debate performance for the Democratic leadership to act and choose a “winning” candidate —something they ultimately failed to do. Biden was unpopular, old, and unwell. Who would have guessed that insisting on his candidacy would not be a winning strategy?

When Biden finally dropped out, people expected an open primary, as usual. Yet Biden sabotaged that as well, immediately endorsing Harris for president. It’s not just me saying this; even Nancy Pelosi mentioned it in her latest interview for the New York Times. If there had been an open primary, perhaps a different candidate could have emerged—one able to distance themselves from Biden’s unpopularity. Or, at the very least, Harris would have arisen as the Democrats’ choice for president, not simply Biden’s. Keeping Harris’ terrible performance during the 2020 presidential primaries in mind, who would have guessed that not having an open convention for a new nominee wouldn’t be a winning strategy?

Harris ran on a completely different platform than she did in 2020. This election, she barely talked about increasing the minimum wage, just as Biden didn’t prioritize it during his presidency. As Democrats abandoned economic populism, deep-red states like Missouri, Alaska, and Nebraska approved progressive measures such as a $15-per-hour minimum wage and guaranteed paid sick leave for workers—policies the Biden-Harris administration promised but failed to implement fully. The party lost touch with its liberal principles in exchange for a few Republican votes. Harris campaigned with Liz Cheney more than she did with union leaders, embraced fracking, and embarrassingly repeated that she owns a gun. Who would have guessed that this wouldn’t be a winning strategy?

Harris’s campaign attempted to “bratwash” the genocide in Gaza for months. The young Democrats

were chanting “Momala” and “Femininomenon”, while the Biden-Harris administration was too busy sending weapons and billions of dollars to fund Netanyahu’s war on Gaza. Third-party voters were demonized, Jill Stein was vilified, and Rashida Tlaib (the only Palestinian-American member of Congress) was left isolated. Netanyahu, a war criminal, was welcomed at the Capitol, where representatives gave him a standing ovation despite his role in the murder of Palestinian children. Biden’s unconditional support for Netanyahu resulted in more than 40,000 Palestinians dead, millions displaced, Gaza reduced to ruins, and Lebanon under constant Israeli strikes. The Israeli Defense Forces bombed mosques, hospitals, schools, and shelters, killed UN officials, and even banned the UN Secretary-General from entering the country. Rafah lies in rubble, and the once beautiful Beirut is on its way to becoming the next Gaza. With all the red lines crossed and international law violated, the Biden-Harris administration made their stance loud and clear: “Netanyahu has the right to do whatever he wills.”

“In trying to scapegoat Palestine, the Democrats inadvertently admit that the movement wields a disruptive power they’re unwilling to confront,” continues Abdaljawad Omar for Mondoweiss. “Claiming that Gaza lost them an election reveals an awareness of their own moral failing.” As Republicans secured majorities in the House and Senate, with a convicted, woman-hating, racist maniac as their president, it is time for Democrats to look back and reflect on what they did wrong. Maybe, instead of looking for minorities to scapegoat, Democratic leadership can try something that they rarely do: self-criticism. After all, a flawless campaign wouldn’t lose the popular vote for the first time since 2004. Who would have guessed, though, that funding the slaughter of children in Gaza wouldn’t be a winning strategy?