Kamala and Pete—Two Peas in a Woke Pod

For those who may be wondering about the future of the Democratic Party after the senile fixture in the Oval Office departs, a podcast on RealClearPolitics produced for “Breaking Points” may be of interest. This discussion centers on who will become the Democratic presidential standard-bearer in 2024. Based on the comments, it seems the contest will be driven by the followers of two Democrats who have massive support among party activists: Kamala Harris and Pete Buttigieg. Both figures are leaning on the same Democratic constituency, which is full of party donors and local volunteers. 

Never mind that Kamala’s approval rating has plummeted to 28 percent and continues to fall, as her utter vacuousness becomes apparent to independents and to more and more registered Democrats. It may be tough to tell which is more off-putting: Kamala’s gibberish about being some kind of minority victim or her cacophonous cackle each time she is asked a question. It may also not matter that Mayor Pete (formerly of South Bend, Indiana) was AWOL from his job as secretary of Transportation for three months and still sounds as if he’s on the moon when asked to explain the breakdown of the global and U.S. supply chains. His summer vacation was apparently well-spent, indulging in paternity leave after he and his homosexual partner adopted children and had themselves photographed together with their bespoke offspring in a birthing bed. 

It does tell us something that Democrats are seriously considering such figures as presidential candidates and that their respective votaries are already taking sides. We are left to conclude that the leftist element of the party may now have such overwhelming control that they can establish  these two peas in a woke pod as the party’s choices. Gone will be the pretense of a “moderate” Democrat in the White House presiding over what was supposed to be (but has not turned out to be) a centrist administration. 

Biden’s nonadministration has apparently turned out so well that we need an even larger dose of multicultural, victim-based politics. The Democrats may soon be drowning us in a mixture of wokeness, higher taxes, and government regulations.

These virtue-signalers or deplorable-haters will likely pay a price if they proceed with their eccentric experiment. They will forfeit what remains of their white working-class base, most of which may have already left their party. 

Although the Democrats will likely hold on to the black vote, they may lose more Hispanic voters than they did in 2020. The 55 percent of the Hispanic vote that went to Glenn Youngkin in the Virginia gubernatorial race earlier this month may be a harbinger of even bigger Democratic losses among this demographic. Why should the average Hispanic family vote to have their children immersed in critical race theory and transgender ideology, or support a party that makes them pay soaring energy prices to promote a Green New Deal? 

Please note that I am not arguing the GOP is the ideal alternative to the Harris-Buttigieg party. But even in their wishy-washy blandness, Republicans are less toxic and less likely to repel normal people. 

The choice that “Breaking Points” discusses also drives home how isolated the woke Left may be from most Americans. This group imagines that its control over the mainstream media and over the educational establishment will allow it to surmount all its political opponents on the national scene. If these sources of power aren’t quite enough for their purposes, our elites believe they will, once again, have at their disposal truckloads of ready-made marked ballots arriving in urban centers in the middle of the night and the services of vote harvesters. They may be convinced there is no way they can lose, no matter how bizarre their presidential candidate appears to those of other persuasions. But if the present administration continues to register dismally low approval ratings, they will have to resort to even more blatant trickery to gain a win in 2024. 

And this time the Democrats may go too far.  

Dan Gelernter has made a distinction between cheating enough and not cheating quite enough to explain the recent razor-thin victory of the Democrats in New Jersey and their noteworthy loss in Virginia. Democrats can usually swing a certain number of dubious votes in their favor and sometimes garner enough of them to win. But in other races they don’t finagle quite enough to eke out a victory. Typically, in off-year elections, according to Gelernter, the Democrats can “fine-tune their vote-stealing strategy.” Because of this exercise in finessing election results, Democrats usually come out savvier in managing presidential races. 

But one can only imagine how strenuously Democratic fixers will have to work to drag Kamala or Pete across the finish line. Republicans would have to nominate a total fool (say, Joe Biden) to lose to either.  


Get the news corporate media won't tell you.

Get caught up on today's must read stores!

By submitting your information, you agree to receive exclusive AG+ content, including special promotions, and agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms. By providing your phone number and checking the box to opt in, you are consenting to receive recurring SMS/MMS messages, including automated texts, to that number from my short code. Msg & data rates may apply. Reply HELP for help, STOP to end. SMS opt-in will not be sold, rented, or shared.

About Paul Gottfried

Paul Edward Gottfried is the editor of Chronicles. An American paleoconservative philosopher, historian, and columnist, Gottfried is a former Horace Raffensperger Professor of Humanities at Elizabethtown College in Elizabethtown, Pennsylvania, as well as a Guggenheim recipient.

Photo: Oliver Contreras-Pool/Getty Images