Watching the 2024 election cycle unfold, I can’t help but feel frustrated by the confusingly moderate takes coming from Vice President Kamala Harris’ campaign. Once again, a Democratic nominee feels the need to pivot toward the center, hoping to attract swing voters and keep moderates. We’re told this is a smart move, a necessary evil to win in a polarized landscape. But I’m not convinced.
The reality is, this centrist approach often alienates passionate supporters while failing to attract the elusive “middle” voter they’re after. Meanwhile, Trump and the Republicans push hardline, unmistakable conservative agendas with little regard for anyone outside their core base—and somehow, it works for them.
Harris, in particular, has become the embodiment of this centrist playbook. Recently, she’s sidestepped strong positions on trans rights and, more broadly, LGBTQ+ issues — topics she once championed. It’s hard not to feel like she’s shrinking from a more definitive stance, muting her progressive values to fit a palatable centrist mold. Sure, there’s political logic behind it, but in terms of authenticity, it leaves a bad taste.
Harris’ refusal to make big swings on issues like trans rights and immigration makes it seem as if her campaign is tiptoeing around progressive values, when so many people, especially younger voters like myself, are craving bold moves and real advocacy.
In recent years, the transgender community in the United States has been a target for oppressive legislation, and their rights are quickly being stripped away in many red states. Harris’ campaign has been notably restrained when it comes to commenting on trans issues, as if genuinely supporting the trans community might cost her too many moderate votes. It’s frustrating to see, especially when bold action on trans rights is exactly what we need in order to protect the rights and freedoms of the LGBTQ+ community.
And then there’s foreign policy. Compared to Biden’s “return to diplomacy” strategy, Harris has signaled a more cautious approach — aligning with Biden while also suggesting a willingness to toughen sanctions and push for a stronger American presence abroad. But the result, once again, feels like a balancing act. Democrats often fall back on this careful diplomacy, but this strategy rarely excites.
One of the main topics that I, and many progressive voters, would like to see a more radical approach to is the ongoing war in Gaza. While Harris was one of the earliest members of the Biden administration to call for an immediate ceasefire to end the war, she has not supported the call for an embargo to Israel, and has made comments stating that Israel has a right to defend itself. However true the right to defend oneself may be, self defense does not give any one or any nation the right to kill tens of thousands of men, women and children.
This lack of initiative on issues related to Gaza has led to a major outcry from progressive voters for action from Harris. Many voters are even being put off of voting at all because they feel they can’t, in good conscience, vote for a candidate that isn’t passionate about ending this genocide. Personally, I find this reluctance to vote disappointing, as this election has so much riding on it, including vital changes to domestic policy.
The frustrating part is that the Republicans, and Trump especially, don’t play by these rules. They’ve embraced the opposite strategy: focusing on energizing their core base rather than winning over moderates. Trump’s campaign has doubled down on nationalistic rhetoric and conservative stances. He promises hardline policies on immigration, vows to dismantle environmental regulations and continues his staunch opposition to government intervention.
Trump has no qualms about leaning into far-right views because he knows his base will back him even if he alienates the other half of the country. And frankly, his confidence in this approach shows how little the Republican side cares about winning the middle — they’re laser-focused on turning out a reliable, passionate voter base.
If this election cycle has shown anything, it’s that the so-called middle ground might not be the golden ticket Democrats think it is. Every time Harris or any other Democratic candidate pivots to avoid taking a strong stand, they risk alienating the very progressives who could tip the scales in their favor. Many of us are tired of watching candidates chip away at their values to appeal to a group of undecided voters who may not even show up on Election Day.
Ultimately, Harris’ centrist pivot leaves progressives with a choice between mild policy and outright conservative agendas. It’s a lose-lose scenario. Why can’t the Democrats follow Trump’s lead — not in ideology, but in strategy — and go all-in on their principles? Imagine if Harris stayed vocal and bold on the issues that matter to younger voters and progressives: immigration reform, climate action, trans rights and ending the war in Gaza. It might just be the key to bringing out voters who feel unheard and unmotivated by lukewarm promises.
