The Democrats Might Lose This Upcoming Election: Here Is Why.

The Full Embrace of the Corporate Establishment is a loosing strategy.

Next week marks the 2024 election between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris where the Democrats have a good chance of losing. According to NPR Trump has to win either Michigan, Pennsylvania, or Wisconsin, while Harris needs to win Pennsylvania, North Carolina, or Georgia in order to win the election. According to the latest polls, Trump is up one point in Pennsylvania and is tied with Harris in Wisconsin while Harris is losing to Trump in Pennsylvania and Georgia and tied with him in North Carolina.

In this article, I will explain why the Harris campaign and Democrats have a good chance of losing to Donald Trump.

The Democrats War Mongering.

It’s hard to win a group over while committing genocide against their people.

The Democrats may lose this upcoming election, in large part because of their embrace of neoconservative warmongering.

Kamala Harris is losing support from Muslim Voters in crucial swing states like Wisconsin, Michigan, and Arizona. This is because Kamala Harris and the Democrats have refused to put an end to Israel’s Mass murder campaign in Gaza which has now expanded to Lebanon.

Green Party Candidate Jill Stein polls the best with Mulsim Voters in, Michigan (40 percent vs Harris’s 12 percent), Wisconsin ( 44 percent vs 39 percent for Harris), and Arizona (35 percent vs 29 percent for Harris) because she is in favor of ending Israel's genocidal slaughter in the Middle East.

Kamala Harris and the Democrats could easily win all of these voters back if they stopped the mass slaughter in Gaza, which has killed hundreds of thousands of people, or the current Isreali invasion of Lebanon which has killed thousands of people, something they could do with a phone call as Israel gets the majority of their arms important from America and could not commit the current genocide without American support.

But instead of doing this Kamala Harris and the Democrats would rather listen to their donors from major Israel lobby groups and arms manufacturers than win back Mulsim voters in crucial swing states by ending the genocide.

Kamla Harris has alienated Muslim voters even further by touting the endorsement of and cozying up to Liz Cheney and her father Dick Cheney a man best known for being the architect of the mass murder of Muslims during the criminal wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, false imprisonment and torture of Muslims at Guantamo Bay and Abu Garib and a surveillance state that overwhelmingly targeted Muslim Americans.

The Democrats are so bad in the Middle East that they have even let Trump gain some rhetorical victories over them. Instead of attacking Trump for his warmongering with Iran, the DNC platform goes after him for not bombing Iran enough saying that he “abruptly called off any actual retaliation” with Iran a policy they claim “caused confusion and concern among his own national security team”. The national security team the DNC platform is referring to - as journalist Caitlin Johnstone noted- is “psychopathic war criminal John Bolton, who was reportedly “devastated” when Trump called off a deadly military assault on Iran.”

The Democrats have also lauded Trump’s first secretary of defense James Mattis for resigning from the Trump administration but as journalist Ken Klippenstien pointed out the only reason he took issue with Trump in the first place was over his “desire to withdraw U.S. troops from Syria” where Trump himself admitted they were stealing Syria’s oil and the defense departments Dana Stroul admitted was intended to keep Syrians from their “resource-rich economic powerhouse”, leaving Syria “in rubble” in hopes that it could be used to have “leverage for affecting the overall political process for the broader Syrian conflict”.

By attacking Trump from the right on the Middle East, the Democrats have given him a rhetorical victory. Trump has called Liz Cheney a “low IQ WarHawk” and said that her father was “a leader of our ridiculous journey into the Middle East, where Trillions of Dollars were spent, millions of people were killed—and for what? NOTHING”. In his recent interview with the Joe Rogan show, he said his biggest mistake was hiring “neocons” such as John Kelly and John Bolton. This is why Trump is doing better than Harris with Muslim voters in Michigan and why some Muslim leaders in Detroit, Michigan - including two democratic mayors- have endorsed Donald Trump.

In reality, Trump’s Middle East policy in his last term was abysmal: Bombing Syria, ramping up drone strikes, creating a “peace deal” at the behest of Netenyahu that sidelined Palestinians, and killing a top Iranian general are just some of the neo-con policies he supported in the Middle East while president.

Currently, his only problem with the Democrats on Israel is that they are not pro-Israel enough, he is calling for Israel to “finish the job” of the genocide in Gaza and has taken 100 million dollars from zionist donor Miriam Adelson. But the Democrats have been so abysmal in the Middle East that they are allowing the warmongering zionist Donald Trump to look like the more reasonable option for some Muslim voters.

Democrats have historically assumed they will automatically have the Muslim vote because they can fearmonger they have nowhere else to go. But when you are currently backing a genocide of Muslims in Gaza and are paling around with neo-cons like the Cheneys and John Bolton whose main political goal is to engineer endless bloodshed and destruction in the Middle East, it’s pretty hard to tell Muslims to vote for you because “the other guy is scary” or “it could get worse”.

The Ukraine Proxy war is a losing strategy.

Another strategy from the Democrats has been to fearmonger about the possibility that Trump may end their proxy war in Ukraine that has been going on for over two years. For example, Kamala Harris attacked Trump for what he called a “surrender” policy in Ukraine and vowed to continue funding the war. Since Trump launched his campaign the democrats’ loyal stenographers in the media have made the claim that he may end the war in Ukraine a main talking point against him. Examples from the last few days are a Washington Post article with the headline “Europe’s pledge to Ukraine tested by Trump” and a New York Times article titled “In Rambling Interview, Trump Blames Zelensky, Not Putin, for Ukraine War”.

The problem with this strategy is that outside of Washington DC neocons, who have wanted a proxy war with Russia through Ukraine since the fall of the Soviet Union, many Americans want to end the war. A 2023 poll found that 55 percent of Americans are opposed to sending more arms to Ukraine and 51 percent think America has sent enough already.

It only takes a minimal amount of research to find out that this war was provoked by NATO encroachment on the Russian border, as well as American support for the 2014 coup against Ukraine’s democratically elected president and the fueling of the 8 years proxy war between pro-Russia separatists and pro-West Ukrainian nationalists in Ukraine’s Donbas region. It is also easy to learn that the Biden administration blocked a peace deal two months in because they wanted to use the war to weaken Russia and because arms manufacturers and investment firms such as Blackrock and Goldman Sachs want to make money off this war.

Even for Americans who don’t know anything about Ukraine, in a country where 65 percent of the population lives paycheck to paycheck and people are drowning in medical debt due to the lack of a universal healthcare system, funding a war halfway around the world is not an appealing policy.

Part of Kamla Harris and the Democrats’ thinking by campaigning on their support for the proxy war in Ukraine is that they think for every Muslim voter they lose in swing states like Wisconsin and Michigan, they will pick up Polish voters there through their Ukraine stance. This is why at the debate Kamala said that Trump ending the war in Ukraine would be an insult to “the 800,000 Polish Americans right here in Pennsylvania.”

The irony of this strategy is that many of the Polish Americans the Democrats are trying to get with this strategy want to end the proxy war in Ukraine. This was broken down in a Politico piece where journalist Emilio Casalicch spoke to Polish Americans in Pennsylvania and found that “Harris’ invocation of a war 5,000 miles away seemed far from winning the argument against Trump”.

One Polish American activist told the magazine that Ukraine is not a top issue for Polish American voters saying: “We watch it (the war in Ukraine) from afar but you’ve got to remember it’s not in front of our face”. Another Polish American they spoke to said that they care more about being able to “work, make money, come home, enjoy their families.” over the war in Ukraine.

Other Polish Americans spoken to by the Magazine were actively opposed to the proxy war. One Polish American said much of the community was mad about Ukrainian President Zelensky singing an American made bomb at a Pennsylvania-based Army Ammunition Plant “Because you’re signing bombs that could potentially kill innocent people”. The magazine also reported that “Some Polish Americans argue ending the Ukraine war and associated bloodshed must be the priority even if it means ceding some Ukrainian land”. One Polish American named John Kuna said that some of them are “strong Trump supporters because we want this war to end”.

Other Polish Americans referenced in the piece simply did not care about the war in Ukraine and cared more about domestic issues. One fourth-generation Pole said “I was born here, we have a lot more things to worry about (than the war in Ukraine). I'd rather see what’s here improved rather than giving away all our money.” Another said, “I don’t care (about the war in Ukraine) I don’t live there anymore. I care about it here. People can’t afford groceries”.

The final absurdity of this strategy is that Trump won’t even end the war in Ukraine. While he was president he was far more hawkish towards Russia than even Obama was, sending lethal arms to Ukraine, sanctioning the Nord Stream pipeline, and pulling out of important Cold War-era nuclear treaties. Since leaving office he has given Republican leadership the green light to approve arms packages to Ukraine showing that his policy will not be any different from the current pro-war status quo.

The Democrats could easily point out that while Trump claims he will end the proxy war in Ukraine, his actual action says differently but they instead think it’s a good strategy to pretend that he will end an unpopular bullshit proxy war, and act like that’s a bad thing.

Neo-Liberal Identity Politics Or Economic Populism.

Another reason the Democrats may lose the upcoming election is their embrace of neoliberal identity politics and abandonment of economic populism.

Kamala Harris is not offering any of the economic populist policies from the Bernie Sanders era of the left such as Medicare for All, A livable minimum wage, breaking up the big banks, canceling medical debt, taxing Wall Street, UBI, or universal jobs guarantee. Instead, Kamala Harris goes around touting her endorsement from Goldman Sachs, as she did in her debate with Donald Trump.

Because Kamala Harris proudly has many corporate interests backing her campaign, she is attempting to appeal to voters not with actual policies to improve their lives but with political pandering that makes Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign look like a brilliant political strategy.

In one ad from the Harris campaign, a bunch of hired actors dressed as stereotypical masculine men recite lines like “I’m man enough to cook my steak rare” and “You think I’m afraid to rebuild a carburetor? I eat carburetors for breakfast,” along with lines like “a woman wants to be president, well, I hope she has the guts to look me in the eye and accept my full-throated endorsement.”

If that woman happened to be third-party candidate Jill Stien or Claudia De la Cruz the Kamala campaign would have a completely different reaction, but aside from that -if the Kamala campaign thinks getting a bunch of actors to say they are real men who eat raw meat with a side of carburetors and will vote for Kamala is a better strategy then ending the current genocide they are backing or fighting to get people healthcare, they are the most out of touch political campaign in history.

An even more pandering ad put out by the Harris campaign as described by a Fox article depicts

a dating game in which a Black man approaches a group of women who are holding balloons. They begin to ask him questions about himself, including how much he makes, how tall he is, and whether he works out.

The man’s answers get seemingly positive responses from the women, until one asks him if he has a plan to vote in November.

"Nah, not my thing," the man says, prompting all the women in the scene to pop their balloons.

"Vote. Election Day is Nov 5," reads a message at the end of the ad alongside a Harris-Walz campaign logo

The ad is as pandering and ridiculous as the description sounds. Instead of offering policies that would create well-paying jobs, a good economy, and healthcare for all, Kamala's outreach to Black Americans is to try to get Black men to think they won’t be able to get dates if they don’t vote for Harris.

As the Revolutionary Blackout Network’s Nick Cruise said of the Democrats pandering to black voters on the System Update show:

The question we should be asking liberals is what is the plan for the black working class, the black poor, the black Americans who hold record amounts of medical debt… are you solving the issue of medical debt that is plaguing our community, no.

Instead of pushing for policies like Medicare for All or a Living Wage that would actually help black Americans, the Kamala campaign has resorted to the most insulting and pathetic pandering imaginable.

One would think it would be easy to out-populist Trump, whose main legislative victory while president was a tax cut where 83 percent of the benefits went to the richest 1 percent of the country but the pandering over policy has continued.

Michaell Obama recently gave a speech in Kalamazoo, Michigan where she said “Anyone out there thinking about sitting out this election or voting for Donald Trump or a third party candidate in protest because you’re fed up, let me warn you, your rage does not exist in a vacuum … To the women listening, we have every right to demand that the men in our lives do better by us”

Reproductive rights are certainly an important issue but her husband Barack Obama had the chance to save them by codifying Roe vs Wade when he was elected but instead said “It wasn’t his highest legislative priority”.

Aside from that, the idea that Michigan voters who are voting third-party are somehow anti-woman is some of the most ridiculously pandering identity politics I have ever seen. First of all the leading third-party candidate in Michigan beating Kamala, is Jill Stein, a woman. All of a sudden electing the first female president doesn’t count when the woman isn’t a tool of Wall Street and the Military Industrial Complex. Second, the Michigan voters who are voting third party are doing so based on the fact that she is facilitating the genocide in Gaza where Israel has slaughtered at least 25,000 women. As stated earlier in the article even many of the Muslim voters going to Trump are doing so because they believe (admittedly incorrectly) that he will be less bloodthirsty in the Middle East.

Michelle Obama’s speech outlines the absurdity of neo-liberal identity politics, somehow voting for a female third-party candidate because the Democratic candidate supports the mass slaughter of women (as well as men) in Gaza makes you a misogynist.

This kind of pandering nonsense over substantive policy and weaponization of identity politics to accuse your political opponents of bigotry is exactly what helped Hillary Clinton lose to Donald Trump in 2016. The pandering ads are reminiscent of Clinton’s infamous “I’m just chillin’ in Cedar Rapids” and “Pokemon go to the polls” clips. The Harris campaign’s ignoring of voters’ actual concerns around healthcare, the economy, the genocide in Gaza, and the proxy war in Ukraine are reminiscent of Clinton’s ignoring of voters’ actual concerns around job outsourcing or neo-liberalism. The Democrat’s accusation of sexism against those not voting for Harris is reminiscent of the Clinton campaign’s accusations of sexism against Bernie Sanders supporters.

Finally, what the Democratic establishment does not understand is that most American voters do not give a single shit about the things that matter most to them as they do not affect their lives in any way.

The Democrats and Kamala Harris have been continuously repeating the fact that former military leaders are calling Trump a “fascist” but the reality is most of them only hate Trump because he wasn’t enough of an imperialist for them. As journalist Ken Klippenstien noted Trump’s former chief of staff John Kelly -who the Democrats keep quoting calling Trump a “fascist”- only resigned from the Trump administration because he tried to make peace with North Korea. As noted earlier James Mattis who has also been quoted by the Kamala campaign only resigned from the Trump administration because he wanted to pull out of Syria.

The Democrats have also made the January 6th riots a big part of their campaign, another issue that many working-class voters could care less about. In an unintentionally comedic segment, an MSNBC reporter asked Michigan union workers about January 6th and the criminal charges against Donald Trump, many of whom said they were not following the stories and cared more about issues like immigration and the cost of housing that actually affects their lives.

A Chance For Reckoning

If the Democrats lose the election next week, they have the chance to actually examine themselves and realize they need to stop supporting imperialist wars, the genocide in Gaza, and cozying up to neo-cons and instead embrace economic populism and issues that actually impact the lives of regular voters over pandering identity politics and political scandals that most Americans could care less about.

Unfortunately, just like in 2016, they will likely blame sexism, racism, and Russia for their loss instead of doing some introspection. Rachel Maddow is already doing segments with neocon and extreme Russia hawk Victoria Nuland about nonexistent “Russian election interference” showing that they will likely dust off the old Russiagate playbook from 2016, instead of changing their neo-liberal ways.