261·
2 days agoYou’re literally doing exactly what this post complains about. The overwhelming sentiment of Harris replacing Biden was change - her campaign ran on that - yet she had basically all the same stances/policies a Biden, especially where it mattered to the voterbase (I.e. Gaza). She had an opportunity to diverge from Biden’s less popular platform, but chose not to, and it cost her the election. That’s the rub.
As for 2016 - people did turn out for Hilary. She won the popular vote by a significantly higher margin than Harris.
And as for 2020, Biden only won so easily because Trump’s woefully incompetent response to Covid19 was still in recent memory - and even that still resulted in a smaller margin than Obama’s first term.
Firstly, I should clarify that I’m looking at % margin, not absolute, as it better accounts for voter turnout.
Secondly, if you want to go by absolute votes, then it’s worth noting that more people voted for Harris than voted for Hillary or Obama (who both won the popular vote).
She had the 3rd highest vote count in history, but that means nothing when she lost to Trump with the 2nd highest vote count in history.
She was battling Trump at the height of his popularity and needed the same turnout as 2020 Biden, but that simply wasn’t going to happen. As I said previously 2020 Biden had Covid19 on his side, and didn’t have the baggage of this election (I.e. Gaza).
Biden abdicating his candidacy to Harris was a brilliant opportunity for her to lift off the baggage Biden was carrying into the 2024 election (which he was predicted to lose), but she didn’t - and as such she lost as predicted.
Her loss had nothing to do with her being a woman, and much more to do with Democrats being out of touch and relying on Republican fearmongering to get people to turn out.