Good morning. We're covering a lesson from the Democrats' 2024 defeat — as well as the Pelicot trial, government funding and an art world mystery.
Rose-colored analysisThe Democrats' 2024 defeat had many causes, starting with inflation and immigration. In today's newsletter, I'll examine another item on the list: candidate quality. This subject might seem backward-looking, given that neither of this year's candidates, Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, is likely to be the party's presidential nominee again. But it's relevant to the party's future. The party will probably help its chances in 2028 and beyond if it can become more forthright — and less wishful — about its own leaders. The Harris selectionThe first key moment in this story occurred in the summer of 2020, when Biden was choosing a running mate. Biden was then 77, almost as old as Ronald Reagan was when he left office. The likelihood that Biden would serve two terms was lower than with most nominees, which gave extra significance to his choice of a vice president: Biden and his aides were anointing an heir. That fact offered reason to pick a strong general-election candidate. The United States, after all, is a closely divided country where the two parties pursue starkly different agendas on abortion, climate change, immigration, taxes and more. Modern presidential elections tend to be close and to have high policy stakes. Even so, Biden and his team seemed to put little weight on the future when they chose Harris. Yes, she had big strengths. She had been a successful attorney general and shone as a senator during contentious hearings. She was also the country's most prominent Black female politician near the height of the #MeToo and Black Lives Matter movements. Harris would be a historic vice president. As a potential presidential nominee, however, she had major weaknesses. She was a Californian with little experience winning swing voters. During her brief presidential run in 2020, she struggled with basic aspects of campaigning (as I and others noted at the time). She had a hard time explaining why she wanted to be president, and she seemed to dislike giving interviews. She performed so poorly in that campaign that she dropped out before the first caucus. Some of Biden's advisers recognized these issues and argued for other candidates, such as Gretchen Whitmer, the governor of Michigan, a purple state. Yet he chose Harris. From then on, she was the Democratic heir apparent.
Age-related denialThe rest of the story revolves around Biden's age. Before his presidency was half over, polls already showed that most voters worried he was too old to serve a second term. Democrats responded by denying the problem. Biden's aides minimized his number of public appearances. Dean Phillips, an obscure Minnesota congressman who challenged Biden in primaries this year, struggled to raise money or get coverage on MSNBC. Democratic strategists optimistically — and incorrectly, as my colleague Nate Cohn's work made clear — claimed that it wouldn't matter because the country had an "anti-MAGA majority." After Biden finally dropped out, after his terrible debate performance, most Democrats fell in line behind Harris and rejected calls, from Nancy Pelosi and others, for a more open process. Harris ran a solid campaign in some respects, including an excellent debate. But her weaknesses from 2020 re-emerged. Her message could be cautious and gauzy ("Forward"). She had a hard time explaining why she had changed her position on major issues (like fracking and immigration) or how she would differ from Biden. She emphasized themes (abortion and democracy) that played better in California than in swing states. Sure enough, she lost every swing state. Sunny spinPost-election analysis always involves hindsight, and the 2024 election would have been difficult for any Democratic nominee given Biden's unpopularity. But the party made its job harder by evaluating its candidates more hopefully than honestly. Both of the candidates' major weaknesses — Biden's age and Harris's lack of swing-voter appeal — were evident long before 2024. And the party never seriously considered an alternative.
It isn't easy for any organization to be honest about the shortcomings of its own leaders. Those leaders have usually ascended to their positions for good reasons. That is the case with Biden and Harris, who are among the country's most successful politicians with a long list of accomplishments. But successful organizations find ways to constrain the natural human tendency toward wishcasting. The Democratic Party didn't always do so over the past four years. That's one reason, among many, that the party won't control any branch of the federal government starting on Jan. 20. Related: Some senior Democrats have tried to put a sunny spin on the 2024 defeats, arguing that they could have been worse, Reid Epstein wrote.
Government Funding
Trump Administration
Supreme Court
More on Politics
Pelicot Trial
Middle East
Other Big Stories
Opinions Cease-fires in the Middle East will always be temporary until Israel has a government that accepts a Jewish-Arab political partnership, Noa Landau writes. Here are columns by Pamela Paul on lessons from children's books and Charles Blow on political fatigue. Ends soon: Our best rate on unlimited access for Morning readers. Save now with our best offer on unlimited news and analysis as part of the complete Times experience: $1/week for your first year.
Consolation song: The making and remaking of "Have Yourself a Merry Little Christmas." Art world mystery: A portrait that van Gogh completed weeks before his suicide hasn't been seen in 34 years. Family fortunes: Inside a 7-Eleven heir's $50 billion fight for control of the company. Social Q's: "A woman on our girls' trip has grown snarky. Can we stop inviting her?" Letter of Recommendation: The pure liberation of a personal urination device. Lives Lived: Sir Lady Java was a transgender drag star who beguiled 1960s nightclub audiences and challenged the law. She died at around 82 (sources disagree about her age).
Women's college basketball: Iowa will retire Caitlin Clark's No. 22 jersey in February. An Athletic investigation: Lee Fitting rose to the heights of ESPN despite a long record of making lewd and misogynist comments to women who worked for him, according to interviews.
"Crunchy" was once associated with eating whole foods and having a lefty worldview. Today, it has evolved into a horseshoe alliance between far-left- and far-right-leaning homesteaders and home-schoolers, hippies and religious believers suspicious of conventional medicine. Read more about the "crunchy" evolution. More on culture
Try Marry Me Chicken, a viral recipe that's delicious no matter who it's made for. Build strength with an exercise band. Buy a modern menorah. Try these Android phone tips.
Here is today's Spelling Bee. Yesterday's pangram was offtrack. And here are today's Mini Crossword, Wordle, Sudoku, Connections and Strands. Thanks for spending part of your morning with The Times. See you tomorrow. —David P.S. Sign up here to get this newsletter in your inbox. Reach our team at themorning@nytimes.com.
|
Rama i përgjigjet Berishës: Këneta tha se s’ka hapje kapitujsh, por sot
hapet grupkapitulli i tretë i negociatave për në BE
-
Kryministri Edi Rama i është përgjigjur kreut të PD-së Sali Berisha, i cili
ka thënë se “nuk do ketë më hapjet të grupkapitujve për anëtarësimin e
vendit...
Hace 1 día
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario