Elite Democrats Turned Away from Democracy During Biden’s Presidency — Now They’re Facing the Consequences

As Donald Trump takes the oath of office on Monday, the United States welcomes its first president in four years.

The Biden presidency has felt more like an intermission, with a lack of clear leadership in Washington.

Harry Truman’s desk was famously marked by a sign stating, “The buck stops here.”

But where did responsibility lie under Joe Biden’s administration?

Voters did not demand an experiment in leaderless governance, yet the party that brought Biden to power served them that anyway.

In today’s political landscape, the label of “Democrats” seems increasingly misleading.

They are, in fact, the less democratic of the two major parties, and their control by insiders reveals how Biden ended up in a position for which he was ill-suited, and why the chosen successor failed to secure any battleground states.

Kamala Harris never previously won a presidential primary.

However, the party’s insiders first elevated her to the vice presidency, and then systematically removed Biden from the ticket, making her the nominee without seeking any input from the voters.

This is not a people-centric party: Bill and Hillary Clinton maintained a belief that the party belonged to them long after Barack Obama defeated Mrs. Clinton for the 2008 nomination.

The Clintons, along with Obama’s circle, structured a power-sharing arrangement that placed Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State and effectively positioned her as the next in line for the presidency.

Biden was always a subordinate partner in the Obama-Clinton alliance, a dynamic that persisted even after he became the party’s nominee in 2020.

Previously, Obama and Hillary Clinton had prevented Biden from entering the race four years earlier, with Obama withholding support for his vice president while favoring Hillary — that was part of the arrangement.

Trump dismantled their entrenched dynastic agreement just as he curtailed the influence of the Bush family over the GOP.

Trump tested a pivotal question in political science: Do party elites control the selection of candidates, or can voters choose a successful nominee against the establishment’s wishes?

Thanks to Trump, Republicans evolved into a party that listened to primary voters, while Democrats continued under the sway of elitism.

The results are evident in both Biden’s dismal job performance and Harris’ crushing defeat at the polls.

Transitioning into a party focused on primary voters was not without its costs for the GOP, leading to the nomination of some weaker candidates during the 2022 midterms and various recent elections.

However, the cost borne not only by the Democrats but by the entire nation for the anti-democratic maneuvers of the Clintons and Obamas has been significantly higher.

By endorsing Biden and Harris five years ago — one too old for the presidency, the other lacking the likability to win a national election — Democrats compromised their future.

The Democratic establishment, including Nancy Pelosi, has retained an iron grip on the party since the 1990s, often sidelining challengers like Bernie Sanders, Tulsi Gabbard, and Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

This led both Gabbard and Kennedy to exit the confines of the Democratic Party and align with the more dynamic coalition of Trump’s GOP.

Initially, the Democrats were pioneers in adopting a modern primary system, but they faced consequences from it.

Richard Nixon won the 1968 election partly due to disarray within the Democrats: like Biden, the incumbent that year, Lyndon Johnson, ultimately withdrew from the race.

Hubert Humphrey, in turn, who replaced Johnson, was akin to Harris — a vice president handed the presidential nomination without participating in any primary.

After experiencing defeat, Democrats aimed to embrace democracy in 1972 by amplifying the significance of primaries, only to end up with George McGovern, who suffered a catastrophic 49-state loss.

Jimmy Carter, whose presidency is now viewed more favorably in contrast to the Biden-Harris tenure, was initially the Democrats’ savior in 1976 and seemed to validate the primary system.

But following three consecutive presidential election losses in the 1980s, when Bill Clinton revitalized the party in 1992, he and his wife became determined to maintain their influence.

Obama had the potential to become the Democrats’ version of Donald Trump, returning power to the grassroots.

Instead, he returned it to Hillary Clinton, leaving the party adrift after Trump defeated her, with only a nonfunctional Biden and an unelectable Harris remaining.

With the insiders’ political machinery now in disarray, will Democrats take the chance to trust their electorate in selecting a new generation of leaders — or are they apprehensive that could mean encountering another George McGovern?

Populism can indeed lead to improved leadership, provided a party’s primary voters are not already too distant from the political mainstream.

Daniel McCarthy is the editor of Modern Age: A Conservative Review.