The following was published in the Spectator Australia on the 5th of November 2024. You can see the article on their website here.
In July 2024, the Democratic Party faced a pivotal moment when President Joe Biden withdrew from the presidential race, endorsing Vice President Kamala Harris as his successor. What followed was a clumsy process in which the Democratic National Committee avoided a convention vote, sidestepped any kind of open primary amongst voters, and installed Harris as the candidate. This move sidelined potential contenders, notably California Governor Gavin Newsom, who was clearly ready to throw his hat in the ring. The message to the party faithful? Thanks for your support, but we don’t need your input.
By bypassing the traditional primary process, the Democrats handed the Republicans a gift-wrapped narrative: Harris’ nomination wasn’t earned, it was orchestrated. This has now become a central point of attack in the ongoing campaign, painting the Democrats as an elite-driven operation more interested in preserving control than pushing a clear policy agenda that resonates with voters.
Ignoring a transparent selection process doesn’t just create grumbling among party members – it undermines the very legitimacy of the campaign. Without the competition, scrutiny, and momentum that comes from a real primary battle, Harris entered the race with an asterisk next to her name. Voters notice when they’re told who their candidate is, rather than choosing them. And when the first act of a campaign feels like a backroom deal, it sets a tone that lingers, making it harder to inspire enthusiasm and trust when it matters most.
Australia offers a parallel cautionary tale. When the Labor Party parachuted Kristina Keneally into the ‘safe’ seat of Fowler in 2022, bypassing a locally endorsed candidate, the backlash was swift and unforgiving. Keneally’s credentials weren’t the issue – her imposed candidacy was. The narrative became all about how Labor’s upper echelons ignored local voices, and voters responded by handing the seat to an independent. The result wasn’t just a lost seat; it was a clear message that how a candidate is selected matters as much as the candidate themselves.
The Democrats’ manoeuvre with Harris echoes this misstep. Even if she is the best candidate for the Democrats – and she very well might be – how she was chosen casts a shadow over her campaign and any potential Presidency. The absence of a primary denied her the chance to prove herself, not just to party leaders, but to the voters whose trust she needs to win. The party might still pull off a victory, but current polling and political chatter suggest it won’t be the sweeping mandate, but it will be a tight race.
The lesson is clear for political parties in any democracy: processes aren’t just procedural. They’re a demonstration of faith in the people who power the party, the ones knocking on doors and campaigning. When leaders sidestep that faith, voters remember. The Democrats may find themselves facing that reminder soon, in the tight, nail-biting returns of a few swing states. Just ask Labor strategists still reeling from Fowler’s fallout – ignoring democratic norms comes at a cost, and it’s often steeper than any party plans for.
Blake Keating is a member of the NSW Liberal Party State Executive and a former President of the Australian Liberal Students’ Federation.