It's not inconsistent. We see it habitually. Republican power is oversized in the Senate, House, and arguably the Executive due to structural issues caused by our bicameral system and the cap on representatives. This results in the GOP having a much stronger majority control over all three branches - added also that Republican politicians toe the line more frequently for the radical things they want to push.
It isn't an objective matter of how powerful or effective the Executive branch is, but also the power structures in the party in control. It is not a false dichotomy to think that Democrats struggle to pass impactful changes while on power, but the Republicans are able to do that more effectively while in power.
But if you look at the swing states that resulted in her loss, MI, WI, PA the votes are comparable to 2020.
(Votes in millions) MI: 2.80 Trump - 2.72 Harris vs 2.65 Trump vs 2.80 Biden WI: 1.70 Trump - 1.67 Harris vs 1.61 Trump vs 1.63 Biden PA: 3.51 trump - 3.44 Harris vs 3.38 Trump vs 3.46 Biden
Yes, Harris got generally fewer votes (Though not in WI). If Trump performed exactly as he did in 2020, Harris would have won. Trump did better. More people said "yes I want Trump" or more people turned out to vote to make sure it was "too big to steal"
If those numbers are "trumps votes stayed flat too" then, Harris receiving a similar number of votes to Biden in 2020 is flat too, right?
Like yeah there was an enthusiasm gap that seems pretty clear from the popular vote. But if you just look at the must win states it wasn't as far as what the nationwide popular vote would sugget. I think the safest conclusion to draw is Repubs were more energized to beat the fictional steal, and for some asinine reason some anti-trump voters went "...eh..Harris isn't good enough for my vote so we'll risk a fascist winning."
Yeah trump did better with young men, but I don't like % point comparisons like they show. If dem voters don't show up, it appears like Trump "wins". There were definitely articles where it was clearly he was picking up iconically reliable blue votes - Black and Latinos specifically. I think it's more just that people are hurting. The economy sucks for them and has for the past 12+ years. Even considering increased wages, it's still costing ridiculous more to exist.
The only shot the Dems had of not having that around their neck is an actually open primary. Biden needed to stick to what he said he was going to be - a bridge to the next generation. But he didn't. And then hung on top long where the only logical step with three months to go was Kamala. Even if a snap primary on all 50 states could happen again in a month, all the headlines would be "DEMS SKIP OVER CLEARLY QUALIFIED BLACK WOMAN -ARE THEY RACIST?"
Politics is messy. Dems needed a dem candidate. They've asininely let Republicans become the agents of change. The people that will shake things up. Fight the establishment. And it doesn't matter they don't actually do that, most voters are low info. The Democratic party needs to get people back on the picket line. Fight more. Go after business more. Swing for the fences and lose. Propose a negative income tax bracket. Yeah it's more conservative bullshit from the Reagan era, but it's a decent fucking alternative to UBI which doesn't have the broad appeal.
2020 Data 2024 Data