Kamala Harris’ decisive defeat to Trump highlights gaps in Democratic strategy and appeal

UNITED STATES: The decisive defeat of Vice President Kamala Harris in the 2024 presidential election marks a turning point for the Democratic Party, revealing critical gaps in the campaign’s approach and voter appeal.

Despite early polling momentum following President Joe Biden’s exit, Harris saw her lead evaporate in key swing states, which became apparent as Trump secured a majority of electoral votes by Wednesday morning.

While Harris initially captured attention with promises of “new leadership” and endorsements from prominent figures, she could not maintain the momentum.

As of Wednesday at 9:10 ET, over 2,800 of nearly 3,200 counties had reported more than 90% of their votes, and the results showed America had swung decisively back to the Republicans.

Although Democrats expanded their voter base in 2020, the 2024 election saw a reversal, with 90% of counties swinging Republican.

Losses in Key Swing States

The Democrats’ “Blue Wall” strategy, which depended on winning Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin, crumbled as Trump managed to win Pennsylvania by a comfortable margin.

The state, considered pivotal with 19 electoral votes, was an essential part of Harris’ path to victory.

Ultimately, the race in Pennsylvania wasn’t close, with Trump achieving a five-point shift from 2020 in both urban areas like Philadelphia, where he gained 20% of the vote, and rural counties like Pike, where he secured 62%.

In Georgia, where Biden narrowly won in 2020 by less than 12,000 votes, Harris lost by a striking margin of over 100,000 votes.

This significant swing illustrates Trump’s improved outreach in Sun Belt states, a region that was once considered ripe for Democratic gains. Harris also suffered losses in Wisconsin, which, combined with losses in Pennsylvania and Georgia, effectively blocked her electoral path.

Declining Support from Core Democratic Voters

Harris’ failure to resonate with traditional Democratic bases became clear as she lost ground with Black, Latino, and young voters.

According to exit polls, her support among Latino voters fell by 13 points from Biden’s 2020 performance, while Black voter support dropped by two points. Furthermore, Harris lost six points with voters under 30, reflecting a significant detachment from younger demographics.

This drop, according to Democratic Senator Bernie Sanders, is indicative of “working-class voters abandoning the party in frustration.”

Democratic losses in Michigan further highlighted these trends. The only areas where Harris saw gains were among majority-white communities, while Trump successfully eroded Democratic support among Black and Latino voters.

This national trend suggests that the party’s traditional strongholds can no longer be taken for granted, especially when key issues like the economy and immigration remain top concerns for diverse voter groups.

Campaign Strategy: Focus on Trump, Not Policies

One of Harris’ most widely criticised campaign strategies was her focus on attacking Trump rather than promoting her own vision.

Harris frequently characterised Trump as a “fascist” and “unhinged,” but Republican pollster Frank Luntz argued this approach was counterproductive.

“Voters already know everything there is to know about Trump,” Luntz stated. “They wanted to hear how Harris planned to address their immediate economic concerns, and she didn’t deliver.”

With three in ten Americans reporting worsening personal finances, according to exit polls, Harris’ emphasis on attacking Trump did little to reassure voters looking for economic reform.

Her campaign avoided direct criticism of Biden’s policies and instead aligned itself with the administration’s record, a stance that may have alienated working-class voters who were already feeling the strain of rising costs and stagnant wages.

By focusing on continuity rather than change, Harris struggled to appeal to those looking for a distinct direction from the Biden administration’s tenure.

Failed Outreach to Moderates and Swing Voters

In addition to attempting to retain traditional Democratic bases, Harris’ campaign sought to attract moderate Republicans and independents, courting endorsements from figures like Liz Cheney.

However, this strategy fell short, as many moderate Republicans and swing voters remained loyal to Trump, particularly in areas like Arizona and Nevada, where final counts showed strong Republican support. Early exit polls indicated that Harris secured only around 5% of self-identified Republican voters, fewer than Biden’s support among Republicans in 2020.

Her approach to immigration also failed to resonate with voters in key states. Although Harris attempted to differentiate herself from Biden’s policies, her stance on border issues remained vague.

Trump, meanwhile, maintained a consistent message on border security and job protection, attracting working-class Latino men and others who felt the Biden administration’s policies had compromised their economic stability.

Polarising Stances on International Issues

The Israel-Gaza conflict, which intensified in the months leading up to the election, added another layer of complexity to Harris’ campaign.

Her unwavering support for Israel alienated some Democratic voters, particularly in communities with strong pro-Palestinian leanings. This position may have cost Harris significant support in regions with large Arab and Muslim populations, such as Dearborn, Michigan, where Trump’s vote share surged by 12 points over his 2020 performance.

Even among Jewish voters, Harris’ stance on Gaza was divisive. Some pro-Israel Democrats worried her empathy for Palestinian suffering suggested she might adopt a harder line with Israel than Biden, while pro-Palestinian groups felt her approach fell short of addressing their concerns.

This mixed message failed to attract sufficient support from either side, highlighting a broader challenge in Harris’ attempt to balance varied interests within the Democratic coalition.

A Path Forward for Democrats

As Democrats reckon with Harris’ loss, the results highlight an urgent need for introspection within the party. Her defeat reveals that voters are increasingly discontent with the Democratic approach, particularly on economic and social issues affecting the middle and working classes.

The erosion of support across key demographic groups and the party’s inability to hold crucial swing states demonstrate the necessity of a recalibrated message that addresses voter concerns directly.

In her concession, campaign manager Jen O’Malley Dillon acknowledged the need for Democratic leaders to refocus on the issues that matter most to voters.

She indicated that, for the party to be competitive in future elections, it must prioritise economic stability, transparent policies on immigration, and a coherent vision that appeals to diverse communities across the country.

In the wake of a Republican victory marked by strong showings in both urban and rural counties, the Democratic Party faces a clear mandate to reconnect with working-class Americans and present a compelling vision of change.

As the dust settles, Harris’ loss serves as a critical lesson: American voters are demanding not just opposition, but substantive, actionable policies that resonate across party lines.