It's human nature to seek reasons for our failures. It's also human nature to do everything possible to avoid taking responsibility for that failure.
The narrative that's coalescing in the far left is that it's all your fault, you misogynistic, mouth-breathing yahoos.
The reason Harris lost was "Misogyny and Sexism – that’s what that was,” said "The View" host Sunny Hostin.
“It’s misogyny from Hispanic men, it’s misogyny from black men — things we’ve all been talking about — who do not want a woman leading them,” said Joe Scarborough.
Teen Vogue Features Director Brittney McNamara thinks that women haters have taken over the United States.
That people hate women is no surprise. It’s evident at every level of our society, from the prevalence of sexual violence, to the wage gap, to the dismissal of women’s pain, to the lack of women in C-suite jobs, to the fact that we’ve never had a woman in the Oval Office. Misogynoir is particularly prevalent: Black women face higher rates of violence, make less money on average than their white counterparts, hold fewer positions of power, face higher maternal mortality rates, and much more. And, that these Trump supporters hold particular vitriol for women also comes as no surprise, given the prevalence of misogyny both from Trump’s own campaign and from his supporters during it.
That settles it. The reason Kamala Harris lost to Donald Trump was misogyny. It was sexism. Kamala Harris is a woman, and that was the kiss of death.
Men who might have supported Harris may have even told their wives and girlfriends they were going to vote for her pulled the lever for Trump. Why?
It wasn't because Harris is a woman. Men pulled the lever for Trump because they don't agree with EV mandates. They don't agree with open borders. They don't agree Harris's economically illiterate idea for price controls.
And they hate flip-floppers almost as much as women do.
Kamala Harris lost on Tuesday because she's a flaming, left-wing nutcase who was unsuccessful in trying to fool people into believing she was something else.
Throughout her brief campaign, Harris strenuously avoided laying out detailed plans or positions, outside of protecting abortion access. She had an especially hard time articulating how her administration would be different from the not-terribly-popular Joe Biden presidency or how she would turn things like inflation around.
This struggle to differentiate herself from Biden makes sense in light of her career history. She's probably best understood as an ambitious vessel for whatever drives Democratic voters in a given era. She represents the Democratic Party establishment through and through.
As they did in 2016, Democrfats believed they could put up an inferior candidate and expect voters to choose her because of her gender and because she wasn't Donald Trump. It didn't work the first time, and it failed even bigger the second.
Instead of looking to her gender for an explanation of her defeat, maybe we should look at the ideas she proposed — or lack of them — to understand why gender and race had very little to do with her crushing defeat.
Though Harris' campaign largely avoided detailed policy proposals, we did get some glimpses of what a President Harris hoped to have in store for us. It included an incoherent "Medicare at Home benefit," national rent-control policies, tax hikes on businesses, giving $25,000 to first-time homebuyers, giving "1 million loans that are fully forgivable" to "Black entrepreneurs and others" who want to start businesses, and some form of federal price controls for groceries—or, at least, a federal clampdown on price gouging, whatever that turns out to mean. And a continuation of Biden-era foreign policy, hostility toward mergers, intrusion into health care policies (including forcing insurance companies to cover over-the-counter contraception, and perhaps all sorts of over-the-counter products, with no cost-sharing), and a weird fixation on so-called junk fees.
There's more. The Tax Foundation estimates that Harris's tax changes would increase taxes by $4.1 trillion by 2035 and would increase the national debt by $3.1 trillion by that year.
I don't care where you are on the ideological spectrum, those are radical plans and a radical amount of tax increases and add-ons to the national debt.
Kamala Harris was roundly rejected by the people because she had very little credibility and a majority of Americans turned up their nose to her radical economic plan.
It really as that simple. So stop trying to evade the real issue by throwing shade on Trump voters by calling them "misogynistic."
