James Carville Reflects on Erroneous Prediction of Kamala Harris’ 2024 Presidential Victory
Veteran Democratic strategist James Carville has publicly addressed his miscalculation regarding the 2024 presidential election, where he confidently predicted a win for then-Vice President Kamala Harris. In a recent interview with Fox News Digital, Carville dissected the factors that led to his incorrect forecast and offered insights into the political landscape following Donald Trump’s victory.
During the final stretch of the election cycle, Carville actively promoted the idea of a Harris victory through various media appearances, even authoring an op-ed in The New York Times titled "Three Reasons I’m Certain Kamala Harris Will Win." His rationale stemmed from perceived advantages Harris held over Trump, including superior fundraising, a stronger ground game with more storefront locations and door-knocking efforts, and the backing of prominent surrogates, including former presidents. In contrast, Carville pointed to Trump’s reliance on figures like Scott Baio, implying a lack of comparable support.
"The polls looked even, alright?" Carville explained. "I thought that Harris had more money. She also had more storefront locations, she had more doorknockers, definitely had better surrogates with two ex-presidents out there. Trump was going around with Scott Baio or something…. And I thought a combination of all of that would be worth a point and a half. It was not."
As it turned out, Trump defied Carville’s expectations, winning the popular vote by approximately 1.5 percentage points and securing the presidency with 312 electoral votes. This outcome forced Carville to re-evaluate his analysis and consider the underlying dynamics that influenced voters.
Carville emphasized the crucial role of having a compelling reason for voters to cast their ballots. He argued that the absence of a clear and motivating message can hinder a campaign’s ability to generate turnout and persuade undecided voters. "You relearn the oldest lesson in politics. The greatest motivator of turnout, of voting, of persuasion is a reason. If you don’t have a reason, you can’t [win]," he stated.
He conceded that the Trump campaign successfully tapped into a desire for change among the electorate, a factor he admits he should have given more weight to. "People had a reason to vote for Trump. The one reason that they were looking for, I should have taken this into more account, was people wanted some change."
Carville specifically criticized Harris’ response during an appearance on "The View" when asked what she would have done differently from President Joe Biden. Harris’ reply, "There is not a thing that comes to mind," was, in Carville’s view, a significant misstep. He argued that her inability to articulate a vision for change alienated a substantial portion of the electorate.
"She completely flubs it," Carville said. "Well, 70% of people, well have time to argue whether they were right or wrong, 70% of people want something different. Well, give it to them!… [Say] anything you want other than I can’t think of anything. Worse answer ever given. Ever given."
Looking ahead, Carville addressed the potential for Harris to pursue future political opportunities. Despite her defeat in 2024, she is already generating buzz as a possible candidate for the 2028 presidential election, with early polls suggesting she could be a frontrunner among Democratic contenders. Furthermore, some have suggested she might consider running for governor of California in 2026, following Gavin Newsom’s departure from office.
When asked directly about Harris’ future prospects, Carville remained noncommittal. "I don’t propose that somebody should or shouldn’t run for office," he stated. He added, "If she runs for president again, she’s got to be a lot better candidate than she was in 2024. Maybe she is."
Carville reiterated his belief that Harris would have benefited from an open primary following Biden’s hypothetical exit from the 2024 race. He criticized those within the Democratic Party who dismissed the idea, suggesting it was a strategic error.
Despite his reservations, Carville acknowledged Harris’ impressive credentials and extensive experience. "Well, I mean, first of all, I think everybody should run," Carville said. "I have a lot of friends. I would say you should run. You know, the more, the merrier, I think. And look, she’s a former vice president. She’s a former prosecutor in a big city, apparently very good at it. She’s a former state attorney general. So, you know, to the vice president’s impressive resume, I mean, who am I to say? But she certainly passes anything you say about who could run for president. She would have to think about it, but it would be very, very difficult for her to win the nomination, but it would be difficult for anybody else."
In a candid admission, Carville acknowledged his fallibility in predicting the 2024 election outcome. "I was wrong," he stated, emphasizing the importance of admitting mistakes in politics. He argued that the public is more forgiving of errors than of politicians who are perceived as dull or predictable.
"The public will never care if you’re wrong. When they’ll turn on you is when you’re boring or predictable. That’s what they don’t like," Carville explained. "If you don’t say something in a colorful way that sticks with people, you know what you’re saying? It’s vapid stuff. And I think the public is just tired of talking points. They’re just worn out."
Carville’s reflections on the 2024 election provide valuable insights into the complexities of modern political campaigns and the importance of connecting with voters on a deeper level. His willingness to acknowledge his misjudgment and offer candid analysis underscores the need for humility and adaptability in the ever-evolving world of politics.
