1. Kamala Harris was an exceptional candidate, who was dealt a difficult hand to play. Thanks to Joe Biden she got into the race late by normal standards. Had Biden done what many expected him to do and taken himself out of a run for a second term at the time of the midterms, she would have had to compete in a presidential primary contest against other aspirants for the nomination. But in doing so and assuming she won the nomination, which, I believe, is safe assumption, she would have given herself time to introduce herself and her vision for the country to the American people. Yes, she was the Vice President, but that is hardly a high profile position. Notwithstanding this disadvantageous start, she ran a remarkable and competitive campaign, deserving the applause of democratic and progressive minded people. The pressures she was under were enormous, but she navigated them with great dexterity, grace, and principle.

2. The economic headwinds for incumbents were severe across Europe and elsewhere. While the post Covid economy rebounded and gained strength, especially here, popular dissatisfaction, nevertheless, remained strong. Inflation, for example, abated, but prices remained high. And people were reminded of that reality every time they went shopping. This pernicious dynamic — moderating inflation on the one hand and prices remaining at high levels on the other — translated into the fall of governments across much of Europe. In the U.S. Biden’s popularity, despite “notable” economic achievements, hovered around 40 per cent. And while Kamala wasn’t the president she was, as Vice President, connected to these negative perceptions of the Biden administration. She tried, but not enough in my opinion.

3. Racism and misogyny figured measurably into the election’s outcome. The election’s outcome wasn’t determined solely by the post Covid economy and its repercussions across the U.S. and Europe. To believe otherwise is to betray a deafness to the unconcealed, unrelenting, crude and unapologetic racist and misogynist tropes articulated by Trump, the likes of which we haven’t heard in a modern presidential campaign. What is more, seeing the closeness of the race in the closing weeks, Trump doubled down on vile forms of racism and misogyny. Indeed, there were no boundaries, no line beyond which he hesitated crossing. The viler the better. While some of his advisors counseled otherwise, Trump, knowing his audience, ignored their advice, letting loose an avalanche of the most dehumanizing invective that up to now was considered politically out of bounds in modern presidential politics.In his mind, racist and misogynist stereotyping and tropes would assist him in his endeavor to return to the White House. And, I believe, he was right. For his base, it was music to its ears. It gave voice to their unspoken thoughts. It drew applause and cheers, while provoking laughter. To think that it had no role in mobilizing voters is naive and worse.

Also in the quiver of Trump and his campaign were vile attacks on immigrants and trans people. For anybody who has been paying attention these attacks were neither surprising nor new. And obviously, Trump and his team believed, and rightly so, such attacks would mobilize Trump’s base supporters to cast their vote for him. To what degree they did is still to be determined.Again, to think otherwise is exceedingly dangerous as we head into a new period that unless resisted could remake America into a right wing, white nationalist, misogynist authoritarian state with a strongman at its head.

4. The gender gap we know now was far less a factor than many, including myself, expected. The support among white women for Kamala turned out to be less than many polling suggested. Trump’s position on abortion didn’t prove to be his undoing among white women. Some who opposed any ban on abortion turned around and cast their vote for him. In the end, Trump’s advantage among men wasn’t nullified by his lack of support among women. This, along with his significant support from Latino men and a cohort of young men, was one of the tipping points in Trump’s favor.

5. The claim that the Democratic Party abandoned working people and submerged itself in identity politics is not only mistaken, but dangerous if taken seriously. Identity politics is, in my view, another term for human and democratic rights and the struggle for them. Moreover the struggle for democracy and democratic rights is bound up with the struggle for working class unity and advance.

6. I don’t think that the Democratic Party and its closest allies “abandoned” the working class and labor movement. That strikes me as political hyperbole that does nothing to help us understand the outcome of the elections nor prepare us for what lies ahead. But I do believe that the Democratic Party and its closest allied organizations have to give the issues of working people, broadly understood, greater weight going forward. And given the likely scale of the attack of the Trump administration, Democrats and their allies will have little choice.