Did “moral licensing” scuttle Harris’s chances?
In July 2017, I wrote a blog post titled “Kamala Harris Will Be a Weak Candidate in 2020.” In it, I argued that Harris, being a Black woman, might not become president because the U.S. had recently elected a Black president (Barack Obama) for two terms. I referenced the theory of “moral licensing,” which suggests that taking a progressive action (such as electing a Black president) may grant individuals subconscious permission to act less progressively later. I also noted the challenges women face, drawing from Hillary Clinton’s 2016 loss to Trump.
Looking back, I felt deeply conflicted and guilty about my earlier assessment of Harris, as I came to appreciate her as an articulate, competent, knowledgeable, and effective campaigner. When Biden withdrew on July 21, 2024, and endorsed Harris as his successor, she rose to the occasion impressively. Although her loss in 2024 reinforces aspects of the “moral licensing” theory, I genuinely wanted her to win this time. I have never been a supporter of Donald Trump—neither his personality nor his character or competence. While no political party is flawless, I have generally aligned more with the Democratic Party’s policies. Consequently, I dedicated significant effort to campaigning for Kamala Harris on social media platforms like Facebook and X (formerly Twitter).
38 years of Indian American stories depend on what you do next. Stand with us today.
Time Constraints
One of Harris’s most significant disadvantages was the lack of time to prepare her campaign. With Biden’s late withdrawal on July 21, 2024, following a disastrous debate performance on June 27, Harris was left with just 107 days to organize a national campaign, select a running mate, fundraise, and establish a cohesive message. In contrast, Trump never truly stopped campaigning after his 2020 defeat. He spent years building his campaign infrastructure, energizing his base, and honing his narrative. This glaring disparity made it nearly impossible for Harris to compete on equal footing.
A Desire for Change
American voters like change. We have rarely allowed one party to control the presidency for three consecutive terms. By November 2024, Biden’s popularity had taken a nosedive because of his poor debate performance, advancing age, and a majority perception that the country was headed in the wrong direction. Biden’s sinking popularity affected Harris’ chances, as more people assumed that as his VP, her presidency would be more of the same. Trump, on the other hand, despite his controversial first presidency, presented himself as a disruptive force of change.
The Short Memory of the Electorate
Trump’s first term concluded amid the devastating COVID-19 pandemic, with over 400,000 deaths, widespread economic recession, and high unemployment. Yet, by 2024, many voters were more focused on inflation and immigration under Biden’s leadership. This allowed Trump to re-frame himself as a leader capable of restoring prosperity and stability.
The Missing Primaries
Biden’s decision to withdraw so late in the race deprived Democrats of the opportunity to conduct primaries. This process could have allowed a battle-tested candidate to emerge with sufficient preparation and momentum. Harris might still have been the nominee, but going through the primary process would have strengthened her campaign and refined her messaging. Without this advantage, Harris entered the race at a disadvantage, unprepared for the national stage.
Gender Dynamics and Sexism
Harris’s candidacy as a Black woman was historic, yet it also exposed her to unique challenges. Many Democrats hoped her campaign would mobilize women voters to elect the first female president. However, a significant portion of male voters felt marginalized by societal changes and gravitated toward Trump, who positioned himself as a defender of traditional values. The Trump campaign amplified this narrative, portraying Harris as part of an elite establishment disconnected from ordinary Americans.
Trump’s Outreach to Young Male Voters
Trump’s youngest son, Barron, played a significant role in shaping the campaign’s outreach to young male voters. Recognizing that this demographic had been drifting away from the Democratic Party, Trump’s team prioritized appearances on male-dominated podcasts and social media platforms. These included shows like Bussin’ with the Boys, Joe Rogan’s podcast, and even platforms featuring figures like Andrew Schulz and The Undertaker. This strategic move helped Trump connect with young men who felt disillusioned by current political narratives.
A Rightward Shift in the Electorate
Post-pandemic frustrations, including inflation, economic uncertainty, and concerns about immigration, pushed voters to the right. Harris struggled to distance herself from the Biden administration’s handling of these issues. Meanwhile, Trump capitalized on this shift, presenting himself as a champion of economic recovery and border security.
Trump’s Multiracial Working-Class Appeal
One of the most surprising aspects of Trump’s victory was his ability to connect with working-class voters across races. He secured 45% of the Latino vote and an unprecedented 55% of Latino men, setting records for a Republican candidate. His messaging, centered on economic grievances and cultural conservatism, resonated with voters who felt overlooked by the Democratic Party.
Harris’s Campaign Strategy
Harris’s campaign was often criticized for being overly cautious and defensive. Her reluctance to address controversial past positions, such as her support for transgender inmate rights, allowed Trump’s team to exploit these stances in attack ads. Critics argued that her strategy lacked the boldness needed to counter Trump’s aggressive approach.
Perception of Trump’s Legal Troubles
While Democrats assumed Trump’s legal issues—including felony convictions—would weaken him, many independent voters viewed these prosecutions as politically motivated. Harris’s campaign hesitated to emphasize these issues, fearing they might alienate key voter groups, such as Black men, many of whom have personal or familial connections to the justice system. This cautious approach allowed Trump to deflect attention from his legal troubles and maintain his support base.
Global Anti-Incumbent Trends
Harris’s loss aligns with a broader global trend of incumbents and their parties struggling in post-pandemic elections. Economic instability, inflation, and widespread voter dissatisfaction have created an environment where governing parties face significant challenges in retaining power. Harris’s association with the Biden administration made her particularly vulnerable to this trend, as voters sought change regardless of the consequences.
Challenges of the Biden Legacy
The Biden administration’s record on inflation and immigration created significant vulnerabilities for Harris. While global factors drove inflation, Biden’s policies, including the American Rescue Plan, contributed to rising prices. Similarly, the administration’s unsuccessful response to border issues allowed Republicans to frame immigration as a crisis under Democratic leadership. Harris’s loyalty to Biden prevented her from effectively distancing herself from these challenges.
Israel’s War in Gaza
The Biden administration’s support for Israel during the Gaza conflict created deep divisions within the Democratic base. While this issue was not a top concern for swing voters, it likely dampened enthusiasm among progressives, particularly in battleground states like Michigan. Harris’s alignment with Biden’s policies on this issue may have alienated key segments of the Democratic coalition.
Trump’s Cultural and Economic Messaging
Trump’s campaign successfully leveraged cultural grievances and economic frustrations to galvanize support. Ads portraying Harris as non-serious or out of touch resonated with voters who felt alienated by progressive cultural narratives. Meanwhile, Trump’s emphasis on his economic record from 2017 to 2019 helped him appeal to voters nostalgic for the pre-pandemic economy.
Assassination Attempts and Their Impact
Two assassination attempts – or likely even a third – against Trump during the campaign made him a symbol of resilience and defiance. For many voters, these incidents reinforced his image as a fighter who perseveres against the odds. This perception likely garnered him additional support, particularly among voters who viewed him as a victim of political persecution.
Harris’s Missed Media Opportunities
Harris’s reluctance to engage with high-profile media platforms and a missed opportunity to be on Joe Rogan’s podcast, limited her ability to connect with key demographics. Her cautious approach stemmed from previous high-profile interview missteps, but it ultimately limited her ability to define her narrative and connect with undecided voters.
Harris’s Inexperience
Harris’s political ascent in the strongly Democratic environment of San Francisco, and later across California, was built on fostering relationships with influential Democratic leaders. She had not faced the challenge of campaigning in a battleground state and, as a result, had not honed a political approach aimed at resonating with swing-state voters.
Lack of Marketing of Achievements
Democrats failed to aggressively market the legislative and economic achievements of the Biden-Harris administration. Their legislative accomplishments and economic growth were not emphasized sufficiently. This allowed Trump to dominate the economic narrative, focusing relentlessly on inflation.
Lessons from a pivotal election
The 2024 election revealed the complexities of American politics, where historical trends, global challenges, and cultural shifts intersect to shape outcomes. Kamala Harris’s loss was not merely a reflection of her campaign but the result of systemic challenges, strategic missteps, and broader electoral dynamics. As the nation reflects on this pivotal election, it is clear that the lessons learned in 2024 will shape the strategies of future campaigns. By addressing voters’ concerns and building a broader coalition, Democrats can chart a course for a more inclusive and successful political future.