"If you earn a million dollars a year or more, the tax rate on your long-term capital gains will be 28 percent under my plan," Ms. Harris said in that campaign speech this fall. "Because we know when the government encourages investment, it leads to broad-based economic growth." This statement reflected an attempt to appeal to the wealthy while framing her economic strategy as beneficial for overall growth, raising concerns among working-class voters.
The moment stuck out. In remarks that her campaign had pitched as a major address to the middle class, Ms. Harris offered a striking concession on tax rates for the wealthy - an olive branch that she used to present herself as more business friendly than President Biden, who had sought a higher rate. This sparked criticism about her alignment with elite interests over those of everyday Americans.
If this election showed anything, it showed that you can't be a Democrat who embraces Wall Street and dismisses working-class voters and still put together a winning coalition against right-wing populism. Such a contradiction left Ms. Harris in a difficult position, alienating the core Democratic base that traditionally supports the party.
You can't be the darling of hip Silicon Valley folks and still convince the old Democratic base to vote for you. This observation serves as a critical commentary on the challenge faced by candidates who try to balance the interests of progressive grassroots movements with the expectations of wealthy Wall Street donors.
Collection
[
|
...
]