Many Reasons Why Kamala Harris Lost US Presidential Race, But 3 Factors Stand Out Loud And Clear

US Election Results 2024: Kamala Harris’s 2024 presidential campaign was historic, as she was the first female vice president to run for the highest office. But despite initial excitement and a strong early showing, Harris’s bid fell short in a decisive loss to Donald Trump. Her defeat has triggered introspection within the Democratic Party, as officials and supporters look to understand what went wrong. While there will be post-mortems, and reams of text written about the first woman vice-president's loss in the unprecedented US elections, since there were numerous factors that played a role in it, three clear reasons stand out in explaining why Kamala Harris couldn't get better of Donald Trump.1. An Unpopular Incumbent And Economic AnxietyOne of the biggest challenges Harris faced was her close association with an unpopular president. Joe Biden’s approval ratings had remained consistently low, hovering around 40%, with two-thirds of voters believing the country was on the wrong track. As the sitting V-P, Harris was deeply connected to the Biden administration, unable to convincingly distance herself from policies that had contributed to voter frustration.Economic issues compounded this challenge. In a period of inflation and financial unease, many Americans felt their standard of living slipping. According to AP VoteCast, around 3 in 10 voters believed their family’s financial situation was deteriorating, while 90% expressed concerns over the cost of essential goods like groceries. Harris did try to connect with voters on economic issues, but her message was overshadowed by growing dissatisfaction with the state of the economy, which she was unable to convincingly address or differentiate from Biden’s approach.2. Failure To Forge A Clear Identity Separate From BidenHarris’s campaign often struggled to articulate her vision for America in a way that resonated with voters. Initially, she leaned into her role as Biden’s successor, offering a “new generation of leadership” while remaining loyal to the administration’s record. However, this created a dilemma: if she embraced Biden’s policies, she risked alienating voters frustrated with the status quo, but if she distanced herself, she faced criticism for disloyalty. This “trap”, as former communications director Jamal Simmons called it, left her message muddled. "You can't really run away from the president who chooses you," he had been quoted as saying in media reports.Harris frequently avoided directly addressing some of the administration’s perceived missteps or outlining her own policies to address economic and immigration challenges. For example, while Harris promised a focus on issues like housing affordability and rising costs, she didn't say how she would achieve these goals. Voters needed more to hear from her as they sought a clear vision for change.3. Harris Made It More About TrumpThroughout her campaign, Harris sought to rally voters around her historic candidacy and focus on personal freedoms, aiming to build a coalition of women, young voters, and people of colour. However, her message of “joy” and unity started to shift as election day approached. It was almost an echo of the 2016 loss of Hillary Clinton, who had wasted most of her campaign arguing why Trump was unfit.In the final stretch, Harris pivoted to stronger rhetoric against Trump, labelling him a “fascist” and warning of the dangers of a second Trump term. While these attacks resonated with some Democrats, others believe this move ultimately hurt her campaign as she failed to convince the voters why she would be a better choice. "Voters already know everything there is about Trump – but they still wanted to know more about Harris’ plans for the first hour, first day, first month and first year of her administration...It was a colossal failure for her campaign to shine the spotlight on Trump more than on Harris’s own ideas,” BBC quoted Republican pollster Frank Luntz as saying.Harris was able to overpower Trump in their only debate, and raised an unprecedented over $1 billion sum in donations, but often stumbled when it came to outlining her policies on critical issues. Missteps, such as her changing stance on fracking without explaining that technology had improved its environmental impact, only fuelled criticism. Wall Street Journal commentator Peggy Noonan even labelled her an “artless dodger”.