Kamala Harris’s Michael Dukakis moment

This is why Kamala Harris will wind up like Michael Dukakis:

“She was supposed to be in charge of the southern border but has done nothing for four years as millions of migrants flowed into the United States from just about every country in the world. She favored the Black Lives Matter campaign a few years ago (before it was revealed to be a fraud), raised money to bail out rioters and looters in Minnesota, and refused to condemn proponents of “defunding the police.” She was once a prosecutor, but very much of the kind favored by George Soros—that is, a pro-crime prosecutor. She supports the Green New Deal, with its array of taxes and subsidies designed to eliminate fossil fuels, gas-powered cars, and much else besides, including air conditioning and gas stoves. She favors cancellation of student debts, ruled unconstitutional by the federal courts. She is equivocal in support of Israel: she has supported a ceasefire in the current war, an approach favored by critics of Israel, and has criticized the Jewish state for not doing enough to ease the “humanitarian crisis” in Gaza. 

On Wednesday she met with Netanyahu.  She then went public blaming Israel and him for the problems—not the Hamas.  To paraphrase Joe Biden, ”If you are Jewish (or Christian) and do not vote for Trump, then you are not Jewish or (Christian).

Kamala Harris’s Michael Dukakis moment

by

James Piereson, New Criterion,  7/26/24  https://newcriterion.com/2024/07/kamala-harriss-michael-dukakis-moment/

Americans over the age of fifty may remember the 1988 presidential election campaign, when Governor Michael Dukakis surged to a seventeen-point lead over Vice President George H. W. Bush following the Democratic National Convention in mid-July. That was a successful convention for Democrats. They were united and eager to take back the White House after suffering for eight years under the Reagan–Bush administration. Dukakis selected Senator Lloyd Bentsen of Texas as his running mate, mimicking JFK’s Massachusetts–Texas alliance from the 1960 campaign. Dukakis delivered an effective speech at the convention that emphasized competence over ideology, thereby suggesting—wrongly—that Bush was in the thrall of right-wing ideology.

That was a high point for Dukakis. His lead began to melt away as soon as Bush portrayed him as an out-of-touch liberal, a card-carrying member of the American Civil Liberties Union, and a soft-on-crime governor who planned to raise taxes and had no foreign-policy experience. By early August, his advantage over Bush had dropped to seven points, according to a Gallup poll. By mid-September, Bush had surged into the lead by seven points (from 49% to 42%), and he proceeded to win the election by eight points. Bush carried forty states and won 426 electoral votes, compared to just 111 electoral votes for Dukakis. No national candidate has won by a larger electoral margin since.

Kamala Harris is now enjoying this kind of moment as she racks up endorsements in anticipation of the Democratic National Convention in August. Democrats and media allies are busy portraying her as a fresh face (she is not) and a youthful candidate (also doubtful) who will electrify the nation, galvanize women and minority voters, and trounce Donald Trump in the fall campaign. Some polls show her running more or less even with Trump, though, in truth, Biden was not doing all that badly in the same polls when he decided to drop out. Harris’s honeymoon will continue until and through the Democratic convention, at which time delegates will put on a show of unity and strength, thereby covering up the large cracks in their coalition that Trump will soon exploit. She and her running mate may come out of the convention even with, or perhaps even slightly ahead of, the Trump-Vance ticket.

The honeymoon will not last very long. Trump will succeed in painting Harris as an out-of-touch San Francisco leftist, much as Bush portrayed Dukakis as a Massachusetts liberal. Trump will find plenty of running room with that campaign, as there is hardly a left-wing cause that she has not embraced.

She was supposed to be in charge of the southern border but has done nothing for four years as millions of migrants flowed into the United States from just about every country in the world. She favored the Black Lives Matter campaign a few years ago (before it was revealed to be a fraud), raised money to bail out rioters and looters in Minnesota, and refused to condemn proponents of “defunding the police.” She was once a prosecutor, but very much of the kind favored by George Soros—that is, a pro-crime prosecutor. She supports the Green New Deal, with its array of taxes and subsidies designed to eliminate fossil fuels, gas-powered cars, and much else besides, including air conditioning and gas stoves. She favors cancellation of student debts, ruled unconstitutional by the federal courts. She is equivocal in support of Israel: she has supported a ceasefire in the current war, an approach favored by critics of Israel, and has criticized the Jewish state for not doing enough to ease the “humanitarian crisis” in Gaza. 

In general, she views the United States and the world much as “the Squad” in Congress does—that is, from a left-wing point of view. She and her fervent supporters are out of touch with the views of most voters. As a result, middle-of-the-road voters, independents, and many Hispanics will desert Harris’s campaign. In addition, based upon her record, she is not even an especially effective campaigner or a speaker who conveys much substance on the stump.

Once her views are made known to the public, Harris’s support will begin to melt away, though perhaps not as thoroughly as Dukakis’s support did in 1988. After all, there are enough Trump-haters and loyal Democrats to prevent her campaign from collapsing altogether. But by mid-September, Trump will have opened up a six-point lead in the polls that will remain intact for the balance of the campaign. In October, Democrat operatives, aware that Harris’s ticket is going to lose, will begin to shore up downticket races for Congress in the hope of saving some degree of influence in the House and Senate, thereby preventing a total electoral debacle.

Notwithstanding the euphoria today, Trump will win the election by six points—forty-nine to forty-three percent—winning 339 electoral votes, including all of the so-called swing states, plus the Democratic-leaning states of Virginia, Minnesota, and New Hampshire.  Republicans will pick up three or four seats in the Senate and perhaps twenty seats in the House, giving them safe majorities in both chambers. This will give Trump the margins he needs to implement a good piece of his agenda in 2025 and 2026. 

There is not much that can be done now to change this outcome. Democrats have no one to blame but themselves for their present troubles. Biden and Harris came into office with some cards to play but decided to govern from the far left instead of from the center.  Biden’s support has predictably collapsed: his approval ratings in the polls are below forty percent. Harris’s approval ratings are not any better. By moving leftward—by opening the southern border, causing chaos in cities around the country, embarking on a spending spree that ran up the federal debt and caused inflation, signaling weakness to foreign adversaries, and waging a campaign of lawfare against Donald Trump—Biden and Harris have created a large opening that Trump and Vance will happily exploit between now and November.