But in retrospect, it's hard to see how it could have gone any other way. Clinton was an awful candidate. She was elitist, out-of-touch, awkward, and the fact that she was visibly frail didn't help her. It's hard to look good when the Secret Service is having to prop you up "Weekend at Bernie's" style while trying to get you into a van. 

But aside from that, one large part of why Clinton couldn't get her campaign across the finish line first was the constant reminder that Clinton was a woman. So much of her campaign revolves around the fact that it was "her turn," and that she was breaking the glass ceiling. Anyone who didn't vote for her was doing so because they were sexist. The media, activists groups, and even a number of celebrities soaked Clinton's campaign in feminist messaging to the point where it started to give off a secondary message of "no boys allowed." 

Then she lost. Everyone, including Clinton, was surprised, but perhaps no one should have been. Clinton was an awful candidate with awful campaign messaging. 

Which brings me to Kamala Harris, whom increasingly resembles Clinton 2.0, but not because the Democrat Party proper is trying to make her a Clinton clone. The DNC itself seems to have learned its lesson from the 2016 election, as even Newsweek seems to have noticed: 

Hirschmann said that while the idea of electing the first female president might not be the leading message for Harris' campaign, the enthusiasm that comes with her candidacy suggests that "people get it. We don't have to make an explicit issue of it."

"There are many substantive issues of vital importance to women that Harris will promote and defend, and Trump will fight against," she said. "That's more important than being a 'first.'"

It's a solid approach. Not making this about being a woman is smart, but that still leaves them with the issue that they haven't learned from, and it's one that Clinton didn't learn until it was too late either. It's an issue that I talked about before at length. 

They're still the party of "not Trump," and that's what the core of their messaging will revolve around, to their detriment. 

(READ: The One Simple Fact That Ultimately Doomed the Democrats and They Haven't Figured Out Yet)

But here's the issue. The DNC might have figured out the "sexist" approach isn't going to win them an election, but the rest of the Democrat machine hasn't quite gotten the message. As Jeff Charles wrote earlier today, the media is already unable to help itself and are penning articles about how one of the biggest hurdles Harris is facing is sexism sexism sexism. 

Here's Mika Brzezinski on MSNBC and a guest already lashing out at Republicans, saying their "first instinct is to be racist and sexist." 

NYT's @MaraGay on Republicans making fun of @KamalaHarris: "Their first instinct is just to be racist and sexist ... When all else fails, just try racism" pic.twitter.com/WuVTJlgQsl

— Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) July 23, 2024

Of course, CNN isn't going to zone in heavily on the sexist and racist line.

The White House talking points have been deployed. The leftist media are labeling every critique of Kamala Harris as racist and sexist. pic.twitter.com/Lhyoyxw2E8

— MRC NewsBusters (@newsbusters) July 23, 2024

It's the Clinton 2016 defense all over again, but now with racism added in! 

So we have a Democrat candidate that is awkward, unlikeable, has a shady history, has a weird cackle, and any attack against her is immediately written off as sexist and/or racist. 

This is history repeating itself because the Democrats are apparently unwilling to learn from their own mistakes. 

The issue isn't putting up a woman to run for the position of POTUS, it's putting up a woman whom no one likes, can relate to, or can admire for any reason. In the end, just like Clinton before her, Harris will have little to fall back on but superficial defenses that pertain to her identity, not her record.