This op-ed was published by The National on August 23, 2024
Chants of “USA, USA” rang out amid a sea of American flags. Patriotism was palpable. A football coach turned politician gave a locker room pep-talk. The country’s greatness was unanimously invoked. The presidential nominee emphasised freedom at home and toughness abroad, vowing never to bow before tyrants.
It was a familiar political convention. But it was the Democrats, and not the Republicans. The contrast between their two conventions revealed how much historically-defined roles have flipped. Republicans emphasised national decline and shortcomings, decrying chronic social crises, and demanding revolutionary changes in many of the most important American institutions.
Democrats embraced a straightforward, almost unconditional, patriotism, loving the country as it is and strives to be, not an alternative vision. They defended existing national structures, albeit while demanding a greater share for the middle and working class.
Republicans, by contrast, have become the revolutionaries. They are angry, alienated and rhetorically destructive if not implicitly violent.
In the 1960s and 1970s, these roles were precisely reversed. Then it was the left wing of the Democratic Party that pressed an urgent need for radical change and the elimination or fundamental restructuring of governing institutions.
There wasn’t a hint of that during the four-day Democratic convention that nominated Kamala Harris and Tim Walz. On the contrary, American liberals have not only reintroduced joy and exuberance to US politics, they have staked a convincing claim to being the centre of present-day patriotism and sincere love of country, as it is, warts and all.
The Democrats’ jamboree featured a deliberate and potentially effective effort to position themselves as the genuine patriots and thereby appeal to reachable conservatives who have misgivings about the direction of the Republican party.
Ms. Harris’s powerful acceptance speech included a direct appeal to non-Democrats, promising to be the president of all Americans, regardless of party – an implicit contrast with her Republican opponent, former president Donald Trump, who had just confirmed he “hates” all opponents and vows to “be mean” with personal invective.
The Democrats wisely allotted a coveted speaking slot just before the presidential candidate, to former Republican Congressman Adam Kinzinger. Addressing his fellow conservatives, he insisted that while Democrats were as patriotic as Republicans, the Republican Party is no longer conservative. It has “switched its allegiance from the principles that gave it purpose to a man whose only purpose is himself,” he said.
Several other conservative Republicans strongly endorsed Ms Harris and condemned Mr Trump for his attacks on democracy, character flaws, misconduct and criminal convictions.
The Democrats threw a party that was as raucous and joyful as it was patriotic and purposive. But the door was thrown wide open to any Republicans, conservatives or independents who might want to join in the fun.
Politically, it could hardly have gone better. Ms Harris entered the convention having, in less than a month, already surpassed half a billion dollars in new, and mostly small, campaign donations. She has also opened a noteworthy lead over Mr Trump in national and many swing state polls.
She has even developed a crucial second path to the White House. Even if she were to lose one of the “blue wall” states like Pennsylvania, she could still win by carrying Sun Belt states like Arizona, Nevada, Georgia or North Carolina. In a radically divided America, developing two paths to victory is an accomplishment that demonstrates considerable political strength.
The full political impact of this convention won’t be measured for many days. But it would be surprising if Ms Harris does not surge even further ahead.
The contrast between the angry, alienated and dour mood emanating from the Republican ticket and convention and the energetic, joyous Democratic party may prove irresistible to many who were thoroughly dissatisfied with a choice between two unpopular old men.
Suddenly, the Democrats are offering something new and very different, and celebrating it.
Amazingly enough, Ms. Harris’s status as a potential first woman US president has garnered little debate. Democrats’ misgivings about her while President Joe Biden was still the presumptive nominee were almost entirely about her perceived weaknesses as a candidate, or even her mixed black and Indian ethnic identity (which Mr. Trump disastrously tried to mock).
But doubt has quickly given way to exuberance, with even the gender question being largely ignored. Democratic relief at Mr Biden’s heroic decision to stand aside has given way to elation at Ms Harris’s evident and unexpected political skill. Her controversial decision to select “Coach Walz” as a running mate now appears inspired.
Democrats are absolutely determined to win, and can sense victory. They’ve proven willing to move dramatically and much further to the political center than many liberal activists would normally countenance, even on immigration.
The imperative of defeating Mr Trump and preventing a potential experiment with his authoritarian tendencies and stated intentions – like his vow to be “a dictator,” supposedly, only on the first day, or his insistence that supporters need only vote for him now and, somehow, never vote again – has inspired Democrats to radical moderation.
They have seized key symbols of American patriotism and cultural tropes, such as the footballing and military past of Mr Walz, that traditionally code as Republican and “red”.
With just over 70 days to go, the Democrats are hoping that Ms Harris’s raucous honeymoon will persist just long enough to catapult her directly into the White House. Mr Trump and the Republicans are desperate for her to finally make a serious mistake, which she has thus far deftly avoided.
Several key possibilities for a misstep lie ahead, most notably the debate with Mr Trump scheduled for September 10. Democrats expect the former prosecutor to rhetorically demolish the felonious former president, but the risk is obvious. And she will soon have to sit for unscripted and challenging interviews or press conferences, which she has avoided so far.
But given her brilliant performance over the past month, and especially at the Democrats’ extremely well-executed and politically savvy convention, Ms Harris is firmly in the driver’s seat. Realising this, Mr Trump is now predictably emphasising that Democrats are preparing to “cheat”.
The country is still deeply divided and the election is therefore likely to be narrowly decided. But unless Ms. Harris makes a drastic blunder or an imponderable contingency intervenes, the US appears poised in a few weeks to elect its first woman president.