Mistake Were Made.

If former President Trump wins this November, people will look back and clearly see the political mistakes and misjudgments that made his election possible.

The biggest one was President Biden’s decision to seek re-election. It was an enormous mistake, for one simple reason: No one wanted him to do so. This from an AP/NORC poll conducted in late January of 2023:

The public continues to be largely opposed to President Biden seeking reelection, including most Democrats. Few adults have a great deal of confidence in Biden’s ability to handle various aspects of his job, including managing government spending, accomplishing policy goals, or working effectively with either Congressional Republicans or Democrats.

In January 2022, 48% of Democrats wanted the president to run for a second term, and in October, 52% of them said Biden should run for reelection. But in the latest poll, support for his reelection among Democrats dropped to 37%.

Overall, just one in five adults want to see him run for president in 2024, a slight decrease from the AP-NORC surveys in October and January 2022. Younger adults are less likely than older ones to favor Biden seeking a second term.

Seven months later, in late August of 2023, the numbers were exactly the same (statistically):

In the poll, fully 77% said Biden is too old to be effective for four more years. Not only do 89% of Republicans say that, so do 69% of Democrats. That view is held across age groups, not just by young people, though older Democrats specifically are more supportive of his 2024 bid.

Unbelievably, the White House’s interpretation of these data was: President Biden is the only Democrat capable of defeating Donald Trump in the general election. Anyone who thought otherwise was a “bed-wetter” who didn’t understand the electorate’s deepest concerns or the potency of the double-secret game plan being formulated at campaign headquarters in Wilmington.

Think about that.

Three-quarters of the electorate didn’t want Biden to run for re-election and, after mulling it over, the White House’s conclusion was that Biden was the only one who could beat Trump. “Delusional” doesn’t quite capture the derangement of this calculation.

Especially since everyone knew that Biden “had lost a step or two” or “wasn’t quite as sharp as he used to be.” These were quotes from his friends. Impartial observers, foreign leaders, Democratic Party elected officials, operatives. major donors and the best-informed political journalists were much more “candid” in private. A number of them couldn’t imagine Biden surviving the campaign, much less another four years as president.

But on it went until it could no longer be sustained. The first and only debate with former President Trump made it clear to all concerned that President Biden could not stand for re-election unless the Democrats insisted on losing. To everyone’s continued amazement, the Biden White House did just that for about a month after the debate, insisting the president was “in it to win it” and had no intention of dropping out.

During this post-debate period, Axios reported that “from 10am to 4pm, Biden is dependably engaged — and many of his public events in front of cameras are held within those hours.” That begged a disturbing question: What was happening before 10am and after 4pm?

It was a question few, if any, Democrats had interest in discussing. Led by Nancy Pelosi, the termination of the Biden re-election campaign went into overdrive. The media narrative shifted accordingly. The question of who would replace Biden at the top of the ticket became the only question in American politics.

One might think that for the leadership of the Democratic Party, such as it is, the most important qualification for the new nominee had to be his or her ability to defeat Trump. That’s what mattered above all else: electability….someone — anyone — who could prevent Trump’s return to the Oval Office.

So what did the leadership do? They anointed a California liberal woman of mixed race as the Party’s presidential nominee. Obviously there is nothing “wrong” with being a woman of mixed race who hails from California and has liberal views on policy matters. That’s not the issue. The issue was/is whether being “a California liberal woman of mixed race” made it harder for the Democratic Party to win the 2024 presidential election. The answer to that question is “yes, it does; it makes it harder for the Democrats to win.”

Knowing that, knowing the racial dynamics and the ancient stereotypes about women being “weak” and “too emotional”, Vice President Harris’s selection of a running mate took on added importance. She needed to add an element of lethality to the mix — someone scary — which pointed toward the selection of a recently retired U.S. military leader. Vice President ‘Mad Dog’ Mattis, for instance, had a reassuring ring to it.

Such an appointment would have instantly changed the electorate’s view of Harris; “yes…she might be a San Francisco liberal Democrat but the man standing next to her is a warrior. So we don’t have to worry about that ‘weakness’ thing anymore.” Such an appointment would have increased the likelihood of Trump’s defeat, significantly.

Instead, Harris chose Minnesota Governor Tim Walz — good guy, well-liked governor, self-described “knucklehead.” Gov. Walz doesn’t exude “lethality.” His pointless fibbing has eroded his stature. He seems like someone under-qualified to serve as President, in the event something should happen to a President Harris. In short, he added (and adds) nothing of real value to the Democratic Party ticket.

Compounding this problem is the Harris campaign’s assertions that Gov. Walz is an important addition to the team because he was in tune with rural and exurban voters. “He speaks their language” and “rural folks can ‘relate’ to him” were two such assertions that popped up in the press coverage following his selection.

One can only imagine how this landed with those Trumpian rural and exurban voters. Listen up rubes! We’ve sent a rube to relate to you. You’ll like him. He coached high school football. We think he’s one of you. We chose him hoping that you were stupid enough to think we care about you.

Walz went over like a lead balloon out there in rural-world. The rubes weren’t fooled for one minute. The whole thing was insulting. A senior military officer of stature would not have been insulting. It would have been appreciated.

The Biden re-election campaign, the anointing of Harris as the Democratic Party’s nominee and the selection of Gov. Walz as her running mate were all political mistakes. The final mistake is now unfolding. It’s referred to as “bubble wrap.”

The Harris campaign’s strategy is to not lose. Not losing is all about minimizing mistakes. Therefore: package Ms. Harris with plenty of bubble wrap: Everything scripted. Friendly media only. Limited interaction with voters. Raise vast sums of money to pay for 8 million TV ads and 8 billion social media impressions.** No separation from the Biden administration, except when separating from the Biden administration seems convenient. Boiler-plate, obviously poll-driven policy proposals. Boiler-plate Social Security/Medicare attack plan for the last two weeks. Nothing that suggests actual change, just focus group-tested messages about “turning the page” and “not going back.”

The people running the Harris campaign are not stupid people. They’re experienced professionals. They’re Obama campaign veterans; probably the best operatives the party has on offer. In 2008 and 2012, they did not bubble-wrap Barack Obama. They didn’t have to. Obama wasn’t a “word salad” guy. He could confidently and articulately engage in any forum or format.

Team Obama-Harris has bubble-wrapped Harris because they think they have to. They’re not confident she can handle any forum or format. That’s part of the reason the election is as close as it is. People sense that she’s not ready for primetime because her campaign is telling them, sotto voce, that she’s not.

We’ll see what happens in her interview with Bret Baier on Fox News. Maybe the bubble wrap is coming off. Maybe she’s going to throw caution to the winds and get down there on the killing floor with Trump. Maybe she figures that running a low risk campaign increases the likelihood of defeat. The good news for Democrats is: the race is still competitive. It would have been over long ago had Biden remained the party’s presidential nominee.

** Not literally.