Okay so the message from many Democrats today is that Biden is to blame.

He waited to late and although Harris ran a flawless campaign, she could not overcome the short runway she had. I find it hypocritical that after all the praise laid on Biden after he dropped out that he is now the scapegoat but I will leave that hypocrisy and Monday morning quarterbacking alone for now.

But I will not leave the talks about Harris alone. Look, folks. Harris was a very flawed candidate. The short runway was an advantage and a disadvantage. With the right candidate you could have escaped real scrutiny with the short time period. So I think people are overstating the effects of that issue. And to be clear I am not saying that this loss is all at her feet. There are larger social and institutional elements which I will post on in a couple of days that may have made it impossible for any Democrat to win, although I suspect that a better candidate would have at least won some swing states. So I do not want to pile on Harris but truth is the truth and Harris was a flawed candidate.

We should have know she would be a weak candidate as she could not even make it to Iowa in 2020. Her failure then cannot be due to sexism or racism as people are saying was the powerful factor in her current loss. It was because she lacked charisma and could not handle the big stage.

Concerning the current election, she took way too long to put a plan out there. And no that is not all due to the suddenness of her candidacy as she had been thinking about being president for quite a while. With the short timeframe she needed people to know more about what she would do sooner rather than later. Also, her interviews generally were programmatic talking points. She never did an all-comers press conference. I think due to past failed interviews she was afraid to get out there and let people get to know her.

Do you know the best speech she gave? I say it was her concession speech. It felt natural and nonprogramatic. That Harris could have made this a better race. But I do not know if she could have sustained that type of communication over three months.

Finally, her very progressive record made her vulnerable. She never gave satisfying answers to why she changed her mind on so many issues. It felt opportunistic and with a progressiveness born from California politics it became realtily easy to paint her as far left. A Democrat with at least some centrist tendencies like Shaprio would have fared far better. On the topic of Sharpiro, her selection of Walz who had morphed into a far leftist made this problem worse.

Once again I am NOT saying that Harris the major reason why the Democrats lost. But she definitely did not help them. I do wonder if the Democrats had run a more skilled politician like Obama or B. Clinton if they would have had a chance. But ultimately with the mood of the country they had no chance with Harris. I can, and do, sympathize with someone who has faced rejection on such a national level. But that sympathy does not lead me to sugarcoat her weaknesses which contributed to this loss.