Submit your letter to the editor via this form. Read more Letters to the Editor.
Variety of factors
led to Harris loss
Re: “Election results indict American character” (Page A6, Nov. 13).
Kamala Harris lost for a number of reasons.
To begin with, having only 107 days to run a presidential campaign would be a tall order for any politician, let alone a relatively unknown Black woman from what is arguably the most liberal state in the country. Joe Biden should have announced he would not seek reelection right after the 2022 midterm elections and there would have been a contested primary such that the strongest candidate would have emerged. But inflation and the border hurt the most.
Beyond that were polls showing that 70% of voters felt the country was on the wrong track, and even though he deserved to be charged for inciting the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection and the classified documents case, Donald Trump did what he does best, i.e. he “whines till he wins,, and plays the victim card, causing quite a few voters to believe he was being persecuted.
Arthur Straus
Walnut Creek
American moderates
need their own party
It would solve no constructive purpose for us moderates to spend our energies blaming the current state of American politics on the progressives.
Instead, we need to teach the lesson its evolution has revealed: A political party that adopts an ideology, rather than focusing on solving real-world problems, becomes a church. Its leaders become priests who shepherd their flocks according to the doctrinaire agenda of their faith. They cannot be bothered with solving the day-to-day needs-to-survive of their charges.
The curse of religion is that its faithful cannot learn objective lessons from the evidence before them. Progressives will fight to retain their hold on the party, come what may.
The only constructive alternative I see is to form an American Moderate Party. Can you hear us Barack Obama and Bill Clinton?
Howard Winet
Berkeley
Democrats seem
committed to losing
Re: “Election results indict American character” and “Sexism, bigotry played role in election results” (Page A6, Nov. 13).
Robert Thomas wrote of voters, “They chose to ignore Trump’s known history of racism, fraudulent business practices, sexual predation, malicious rhetoric, yen for dictators,” and the letter from Martha Van Orshoven said, “the election reflects the misogyny of society.”
As David Brooks, hardly a Donald Trump supporter, wrote in the East Bay Times on Nov. 10 (“Voters to Democratic elites: Do you see me now?“): “There will be some on the left who will say Trump won because of the inherent racism, sexism and authoritarianism of the American people. Apparently, those people love losing and want to do it again and again and again.”
Bruce Colley
Lafayette
Democrats miss that
voters preferred Trump
Re: “Non-voters put Trump back in White House,” “Election results indict American character” and “Sexism, bigotry played role in election results” (Page A6, Nov. 13).
All three Letters to the Editor on Nov. 13 have the common theme of providing explanations for why Donald Trump was elected — other than pointing out that the American people simply preferred him to the alternative.
In a democracy, a system I presume they prefer, the writers have chosen paths to future defeats. The American people are a pragmatic lot and will vote for the candidate they expect will more likely make their lives better.
The writers are certainly entitled to their own opinions, but elections aren’t won by telling voters they don’t understand the important issues.
Daniel Mauthe
Livermore
