What Went Wrong & How to Fix It

Time to deal with some hard truths.

The point of this article is not to wallow in misery, feel sorry for ourselves, or start finger-pointing. At the same time, we have to face some hard truths about where we are at as a party, and how a 78 year old right-wing populist demagogue widely rejected by voters just 4 years ago could win so many votes despite election denialism, an attempted coup on J6, felony convictions, obvious cognitive decline.

I shared everything contained below privately and with members of our Meidas team as these things were happening. At times I raged about them and was infuriated. But I never thought it was appropriate to air these things publicly knowing that they would simply be used by MAGA to create division amongst us. I tried to make my discontent known in subtle ways and backchannels, but it is tricky when your primary vehicle to do so is a very public social media account.

I do not blame Kamala Harris, Tim Walz, or their campaign team for what just happened. They inherited an unprecedented situation in American political history - a sitting president dropping out of the race less than 4 months before the election. The closest thing was Lyndon Johnson announcing 7 months out he wouldn't seek re-election in 1968. But there was still a fully contested primary before Democrats lost to Nixon.

This time there was no time for a coalition-building primary where Harris could win the support of the base or prove that she was the best possible nominee against a field of highly talented candidates - most of whom would have been successful and popular governors. Or there would have been time for Democrats to decide on a different candidate. But the short window allowed for only one practical option to move forward - and that was simply nominating and choosing Biden's VP.

But dwelling on how this played out really isn't that constructive moving forward because I believe that most of the seeds for Trump's victory were planted in 2021-2023, long before Biden dropped out of the race.

The point of this article is not simply to criticize, but to offer some solutions and reasons for hope and optimism despite the incredibly difficult challenge we face over the next four years.

Biden Running Again, Then Dropping Out

Harris had to run as the #2 from an Administration whose approval ratings never got above 41% - and no incumbent has ever won with such dismal job performance ratings. Harris was in a difficult position where she either had to repudiate her boss and distance herself from many of his policies, or choose loyalty without clearly articulating a new direction. She choose the latter, and the latter doesn't work when you are defending something that hasn't satisfied voters.

It would have been tricky but certainly possible to more forcefully distance herself from Biden, or to make the case why the approval rating on the Administration was not an accurate reflection of the accomplishments. But she never did that. One of the first questions she was asked in her first interview was what she would have done differently had she been president. She should have been prepared to rattle off 3-4 specific things and should have talked about that with Biden ahead of time so he wasn't blindsided. He's an old pol who knows how the game is played. But that didn't happen. Is that why she lost? No, but it didn't help.

I never wanted Biden to run for a second term. I posted a lengthy thread on Twitter one week after the 2022 midterms where I made my case for why he should not. At the same time, I didn't think it was my place to call for him to step down like so many other former Republicans. To me, it was important for him to make that decision on his own and that is the decision I fully expected him to make at the time. I was very surprised when he decided to try to run again where he was asking America to give him 4 more years with a 40% approval rating where he would be 86 years old at the end of a second term.

The Pandemic and Inflation

But the main reason why I didn't want Biden to run again was not just his age. I viewed Biden in 2020 as a transitional president. Someone who was coming out of retirement at an advanced age to build a centrist coalition to unseat Trump while he was bungling covid and generally causing chaos. But I always believed that Biden's intent was to pass the baton to a new generation of leadership while he shouldered the responsibility for cleaning up the mess he inherited from Trump. He obviously viewed it differently, enacting a sweeping domestic agenda while simultaneously dealing with a global pandemic, withdrawal from 20 years in Afghanistan, and Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

The main reason why I didn't want Biden to run again was because I knew that he was going to do some very tough things to fix the covid mess he inherited. He was very aggressive with vaccine mandates, which were intensely unpopular with many who didn't want them. I also knew that he was going to get the blame for global economic problems caused by the pandemic - supply chain, inflation, energy costs, food costs. He did not deserve the blame for those things that were largely beyond his control, but the party in power is going to get the blame whether it is deserved or not. A fresh nominee from outside the Admin would not get the blame for any of that, but Biden/Harris did.

The Trump campaign had very simple and effect messaging on inflation - things cost less when Trump was president. Over and over they talked about the change in prices of everything from gasoline to bacon. The Admin could have forcefully pushed back that this was a global problem created by the pandemic and it was much worse in nearly every other country. They didn't, but I'm not sure it would have mattered if they did. Biden was going to get the blame because it happened on his watch, which was then imputed to Harris.

The Afghan Withdrawal

At the same time Biden/Harris was implementing dramatic shifts in covid policy, it had to execute a difficult withdrawal from Afghanistan. What made it impossible to pull off in a smooth and orderly fashion was something that nobody anticipated - that the Afghan military would lay down their arms and refuse to fight almost instantly. Perhaps they realized the inevitable, while we believed 20 years training and equipping them was going to keep a pro-US regime in power. But that worked out about as well as it did in Vietnam for us.

With Trump leaving a skeleton force of US troops behind, coupled with the instant collapse of the Afghan military and government officials fleeing the country, we were left with a chaotic scramble to get everyone out must faster than anticipated. It was a miracle that we only lost the lives of 13 US service members under these circumstances. But while Trump unleashed his firehose of lies about the withdrawal, the Admin initiated what would become a disturbing pattern of simply not talking about things they perceived as problems for them. Which left Trump to spread lies unchallenged. 

Just one simple example is that Trump claimed that we "abandoned $85 billion in equipment to the Taliban." That was complete fiction. That was the total amount we spent training, equipping and paying the salaries of the Afghan military over a 20 year time period. So the number was wildly exaggerated on what was "left behind." His claim that we would have "taken everything out" necessarily means that the US would disarmed and removed every piece of equipment from the Afghan military before starting our withdrawal. That was asine, but went almost completely unchallenged by the Administration, which choose instead to ignore him.

The failure to effectively communicate what happened with the Afghan withdrawal, or why Trump set us up for failure, and why his statements about it were false and ridiculous allowed Trump to set the narrative early on that the Biden Admin was weak on foreign policy, which ultimately contributed to Putin's aggression in Ukraine. A false narrative, but one that worked because the Biden Admin failed to communicate effectively.

The Southern Border and Migrant Crisis

Next came the migrant crisis, and it was a crisis despite the Administration and Democrats' refusal to acknowledge it until shortly before the 2024 election when it was too late. The first three years of the Biden Admin saw the largest influx of migrants coming across the southern border into our country in history. By far. An estimated 10-12 million people from over 100 countries entered the US. There were many reasons for this that were beyond the Admin's control, but the Admin also rescinded many of Trump's executive orders with others expiring, without replacing it with any new policy that made sense.

The Biden Admin never once clearly articulated what their border/immigration policy was. Do you know what it was? What it certainly looked like was that any person who showed up at the border with an tenuous "asylum" claim was allowed into the country until their case was adjudicated in 2-3 years by an immigration court, with minimal vetting. This was a recipe for disaster. Such a huge and sudden influx of people is inevitably going to result in problems. Every crime committed is going to magnified, new infectious diseases are introduced, kids show up at schools speaking no English, housing and social services were overwhelmed in many cities and communities. 

While Fox and Newsmax were showing videos (yes, real videos) of thousands of migrants streaming across the border every day, and Trump and Republican politicians were screaming about it constantly, the Admin and the Democratic Party decided that the best way to counter that was to not talk about it. I would watch Fox and huge portions of their broadcast day was devoted to the migrant crisis, which other channels and the Admin never talked about it.

Alejandro Mayorkas, in my opinion, was a weak leader at DHS and a horrendous communicator. His congressional hearing testimony and TV appearances were a mess, where he allowed himself to be bullied and the Administration’s policy mischaracterized. I believe if Pete Buttigieg and Mayorkas switched jobs, everything would have been different. DHS was a much more high profile job dealing with a major crisis that would become the centerpiece of Trump's campaign. And Mayorkas simply wasn't up to the job. When I think of how Buttigieg would have handled it differently, from both a policy and communication perspective, I believe the difference would have been stark.

Then Biden did Harris no favors by announcing in 2021 that she would be in charge of investigating the root causes of the border crisis. This led to Harris being dubbed the 'Border Czar' by the media and Republicans - a mischaracterization of her role and a job she clearly did not want or ask for. Biden making her the Administration's public face on the border crisis with a feckless Mayorkas at the helm would come back to haunt her when she ultimately became the nominee. Instead of being free to articulate a new vision, she was held responsible for the mistakes of the past.

At the 11th hour, with the election in full swing, the Administration pushed for a bipartisan border bill to be negotiated in Congress. The problem is that this was way, way too late. They had to realize that Trump was never going to let Mike Johnson pass that in the middle of the election, giving Dems a major win and a political out with voters. The plan to just blame Trump and Republicans for blocking the border bill was ineffective because they could simply counter that it was being advanced late in the game for purely political reasons. 

Why wasn't a border bill introduced by Dems in 2021-23? Because it wasn't a priority, and that would come back to haunt them in 2024.

Merrick Garland and Trump's Crimes

We now know that neither Joe Biden nor Merrick Garland had much interest in pursuing a criminal investigation or criminal charges against Donald Trump after J6. I think there were three reasons. First, they are both institutionalists who did not want to be the first to put a former American president in prison. They shied away from any perception that they were going after their political opponent using the awesome power of DOJ. 

I also believe that they thought Trump was finished politically after J6 and the American public would never consider forgiving Trump for what happened or entrust him again with the reins of power. I also think that they failed to fully appreciate what a dangerous threat he had become to American democracy and the rule of law. So they dithered and did nothing - until the very public J6 hearings unveiled incriminating evidence which finally forced Garland to appoint a Special Counsel. 

But this appointment was done far too late to have the cases adjudicated before the election - especially considering complex legal issues that would be appealed to a very Trump-friendly Supreme Court. Meanwhile, Trump and right-wing media went on a daily mission to reconstruct an alternate narrative around J6 where he was only tangentially involved and harmless "trespassers" were treated worse that "real criminals." So this became perhaps the greatest textbook case to illustrate the maxim - 'Justice delayed is justice denied.'

At the same time, Democrats who now simply dwell on Garland's weakness and failures as the sole reason for a second Trump presidency are doing themselves and the party a disservice. First, it doesn't help us going forward to simply blame what happened in the 2024 election on Garland. That isn't why Harris got nearly 20 million fewer votes than Biden in 2020. While Garland's failure was historic, and will be recognized that way by posterity, making him the scapegoat is a much easier path than confronting your own shortcomings as a party, which is counter-productive because we need to worry about tomorrow.

Transgender Issue and "Wokeness"

I hate the fact that we have to talk about this because I realize it is a very sensitive subject and it deals with a tiny handful of people who have been unfairly denigrated and persecuted for centuries. But Trump made this a major issue in his campaign - he spent tens of millions in swing state ads just on this issue alone, and it was very effective on a demographic that Democrats lost badly - men. White men, black men, latino men, young men, old men - polls showed this issue resonated with these voters, which is why the Trump campaign kept buying more anti-trans ads.

The key was in the framing. They cherry-picked comments Harris made over the years and took them out of context to set the narrative. That she was for children getting gender reassignment surgeries without parental consent, that people born biological males were introduced into women's sports, locker rooms, bathrooms and prisons with disastrous effect. UPenn swimmer Lia Thomas became their poster child - videos of 6'1" Thomas, who was born male, towering over female competitors while breaking records resonated. That was followed by female boxers in the Olympics refusing to fight or losing to Imane Khelif. 

When Harris chose Tim Walz as her running mate, this threw gasoline on the fire as the Trump campaign dubbed him 'Tampon Tim' for supposedly putting tampons in boys bathrooms in schools. What was the Harris campaign or Democratic Party's position on all of this? I don't know. I still don't know. That is because I think they understand that trans athletes in women's sports and locker rooms is wildly unpopular with a big chunk of the public, but if they stake out a position that is in any way perceived as anti-Trans or anti-LBGTQ they know it will result in passionate backlash from their base. 

So the plan was just to say nothing. Again. Just like the Afghan withdrawal. Just like the border. Just like inflation. We have this issue that is hurting us, and our strategy is that we won't talk about it and hope it goes away - or hope voters don't care. But Republicans are talking about it all the time, and voters do care. To me, the simple solution was to say that it is up to each sports league to determine eligibility for their participants, not politicians. But Harris never said anything like that, or much of anything at all on the issue, other than to try and avoid answering questions about it.

Elon Musk and Social Media

Barack Obama was the first presidential candidate to understand and fully utilize the power of social media to great effect. Trump and MAGA learned from that. The Trump campaign's social media presence and strategy in 2016 dominated Hillary Clinton's and was a significant factor in Trump's victory. But in 2020, content moderation on Twitter, Instagram and Facebook was ratcheted up like never before to deal with covid disinformation. That resulted in thousands of major right-wing social media accounts being suspended and banned during the 2020, then an even more comprehensive ban resulting from J6.

If those account bans and content moderation rules had remained in effect throughout 2023-24, the landscape of this election would have been dramatically different. But enter Elon Musk. When Musk bought twitter he fired the entire content moderation team and began reinstating right-wing accounts that would later prove to be instrumental to Trump's victory. Mark Zuckerberg then followed Musk by reinstating banned accounts and loosening the rules in IG and Facebook.

This will probably be an unpopular opinion with some Democrats, but I actually think the previous Twitter regime was way too heavy handed with content moderation and suspensions, and far too elitist on account verification. Some of those banned accounts richly deserved it, but the algorithm became way too sensitive and unfair at times. If Musk bought Twitter with the intention of doing what he claimed - making it less restrictive, reinstating Trump, and taking off what was arguably a thumb on the scale in favor of liberal orthodoxy, that would have been one thing. 

Instead, Musk did the opposite. He not only turned Twitter into the modern social media version of the Wild West where anything goes, he put his thumb firmly on the scale in favor of the Right and Trump campaign - amplifying their accounts and content with the algorithm and aggressive use of his own account with 200+ million followers. This resulted in a massive paradigm shift on social media that gave the Trump campaign a tremendous advance in that sphere.

The Demographics of the 2024 Election

There were 3 groups of voters where Trump's vote totals showed marked improvement over 2020, which resulted in his victory: Latinos, Young Men, White Working Class Without College Degrees. 

Latino Voters

This was by far the largest shift in a single voting block from 2020 to 2024. As someone who was active in Republican campaigns in Florida for three decades, I always understood that there are sub-groups under the heading "Latino" that should always be recognized and considered. A second-generation Cuban-American in Miami typically has very different views than a first-generation Mexican-American in LA. So, I hesitate to group them into one block, but there are some common trends.

Many Latino voters are very socially conservative, pro-family, and Catholic. They perceive much of what Democrats do with their messaging on abortion, LBGTQ issues, and strict separation of church and state as hostile to their traditional belief system. At the same time, Republican messaging promoting the nuclear family and traditional values, the "anti-woke" agenda, and either outright bans on abortion or strict limitations has allowed them to flip many of these voters that Democrats took for granted. 

What is the solution? First, to listen more to leaders in the various Latino communities rather than me. But generally I think that Democrats will only recapture these voters if they moderate in some areas, reframe in others, and communicate better. When Harris is asked if she supports any restrictions at all on abortion and her only answer is "I trust women," that is simply not what these voters want to hear.

Latino voters are traditionally very entrepreneurial and pro-small business. Many of them came to America and thrived by starting small businesses. They perceive the Republican Party as being more pro-business and have bought in to their messaging that Democrats are just like the socialist and/or communist regimes they fled. That perception is something that simply has to change, but it is going to take time and a lot of effort.

Young Men

The 'Republican Alpha' versus 'Democrat Beta' messaging has resonated with young men, who favored Trump over Harris by a wide margin. Republican political leaders and influencers from Trump on down go to great lengths to project a strongman 'Alpha' image to young men. While much of it is contrived and fake, it has worked. Then they hear from Democrats about "toxic masculinity," and come to believe that the party wants to "feminize" them.

Again, this is an area when Democrats who are younger men need to play a lead role here, alongside older men who can clearly communicate that being a "real man" isn't someone who treats women as less than, with disrespect or as chattel to dominate and control. And Democrats need to communicate to these voters that they aren't hostile to young men who aspire to building a traditional nuclear family with a like-minded partner.

White Working Class, No College

The last time Democrats had a solid hold on these voters was the Clinton presidency of the 1990s. They have steadily trended away from the Democratic Party since that time with Obama able to bring some back into the fold, only to see them flee in droves when Hillary Clinton was nominated in 2016.

Donald Trump has successfully messaged these voters into believing that Democrats look down on them and don't care about them. They argue that Democrats for decades have "brainwashed" people in the public school system at an early age that they must go to college and get a degree to be successful. Therefore, if they choose a different path, snobbish Dems look down on them as "failures," and they don't value blue collar workers and people who work in trades like plumbing, electrical work, truck driving, construction, etc.

That perception is also reinforced by the belief among these voters that Democrats are largely bi-coastal urban elites with advanced degrees who don't understand rural America, don't come from rural America, and don't care about them. When Democrats roll out celebrities from Hollywood and the music industry every 4 years as endorsers and rally performers, that allows Republicans to feed this narrative by saying that Democrats only care about and identify with coastal elites, whose art also may clash with the values and culture of rural America.

But We Have the Talent to Win, and Win Big

Political leadership must set the tone for any new messaging, outreach and approach. Nobody showed how to do that better than Barack Obama. The good news is that the Democratic Party has so much talent that has largely been sidelined from a larger national spotlight by a Boomer generation hanging on to leadership a bit too long. 

While we have many bright lights in Congress to give us hope, to me the greatest constellation of future talent is with Democratic governors. I believe that our next president is going to come from one of them, and they are well positioned to appeal to the voters we lost since 2024. 

Just look at the talent among the youngish current governors: Gavin Newsom, Gretchen Whitmer, Andy Beshear, Wes Moore, Josh Shapiro, Jared Polis, and others. Two of these teamed up on a 2028 ticket would be very formidable, and can bring new ideas and a fresh approach. I also believe that Kamala Harris will join their ranks as Governor of California in 2026.

The Trump presidency will likely be a complete disaster for the country if he is able to implement even 10% of what he has proposed. The people he plans on bringing in to the government are arguably even worse that he is in many respects. I believe this second Trump Admin will seek to radically transform our institutions, alliances overseas, budget and tax code, economy, environmental regulations, health care, the food supply, separation of church and state, along with all the usual drama that surrounds Trump and his minions.

While all of that is bad for the country, so much so that many of us have dedicated our lives over the last 5 years trying to prevent it, it will also provide an opening for Democrats to reposition themselves to take back the presidency, House and Senate in 2028.

But we can only do that if we stick together, remain united while hashing out differences in good faith, and broaden our coalition. Americans will be hungry for a change after four more years of MAGA and Trump toxicity, and we have to be a party that appeals to them for reasons other than the fact that we aren't them.