Kamala Harris didn't just fail to win second prize; she reportedly landed a distant fourth in a truly ugly contest. This wasn't a beauty pageant, but the backroom battle to crown ex-president Joe Biden's successor, a process that once again exposed the undemocratic nature of today's Democrat Party.
This explosive revelation comes from a former Democrat insider, a plugged-in fundraiser who served on the Democratic National Committee's National Finance Committee. Her new book, "Unburdened," lifts the lid on the internal machinations that led to Harris's unlikely nomination.
For Americans who watched, bewildered, as the cackling, word-salad-spouting Vice President, known for her wildly unpopular public appearances, somehow became the Democrats' "selection" for the 2024 election, this claim makes perfect sense. The American people certainly didn't pick her. Democrat Party insiders did, and apparently, they did so against their own data.
According to the insider, Democrats privately surveyed how Harris, Pete Buttigieg, Gavin Newsom, and Gretchen Whitmer would perform as potential replacements for Biden before he finally abandoned his reelection charade. The outcome? Harris finished dead last.
"Kamala Harris came in dead last. It wasn't even close," the insider told Fox News Digital. Ouch indeed. Even Buttigieg, whom she described as having virtually no support among black voters in the internal polling, somehow managed to outperform Harris.
While this damning poll has yet to be publicly released, the insider asserts it was internally commissioned and its results circulated within a small, elite circle of Democrat operatives and fundraisers. This is precisely the kind of backroom maneuvering the American people have grown to distrust.
“The polling numbers went directly against the narrative that the party wanted to espouse,” she explained.
The former insider argues that Democrat leaders found themselves in a political bind: bypassing a sitting vice president, especially the first black woman to hold the office, threatened to ignite a firestorm within key factions of their coalition. It seems identity politics trumped electability, as it so often does with the modern left.
“They knew that skipping over Kamala Harris would be a slap in the face to the bedrock of the party, which is black women in particular, and they just wouldn’t have it,” the insider stated, revealing the profound fear of their own base that grips the Democrat establishment.
The insider goes further, detailing how "people were terrified of the online mob," specifically referring to the "K-Hive," the fiercely loyal — and often aggressive — online supporters of Harris. This is how the radical left operates: through intimidation and ideological purity tests, rather than genuine democratic selection.
Adding another layer to this political drama, the insider claims Harris was "quietly positioning herself" for Biden's potential withdrawal. While publicly reassuring major Democrat donors that Biden was still in the race, she was simultaneously — and strategically — strengthening her own ties with those very donors. “It was all charade,” the insider alleged, a damning indictment of the political gamesmanship at play.
Biden's eventual withdrawal on July 21, 2024, came after weeks of mounting pressure following his disastrous debate performance against Donald Trump. In what was clearly a pre-arranged move, he immediately endorsed Harris, effectively slamming the door shut on any genuine open Democratic contest. The voters, once again, were an afterthought.
Harris swiftly consolidated support among Democrat officials and delegates, securing the party's nomination without facing a single other candidate in a primary election for the top spot. The "democratic" party simply handed the nomination to its chosen heir, and then watched as she lost the general election to Donald Trump. This outcome, for many America First conservatives, was entirely predictable.
These new allegations paint a clearer picture of the chaotic and ultimately undemocratic weeks leading up to Harris's nomination. The insider’s claim isn't just that some Democrats *preferred* another candidate; it's that party elites had concrete polling data showing Harris was the weakest link among four options, yet pushed her forward anyway.
If these claims hold true, then the DNC's elitism and its fear of the radical online mob inadvertently did Donald Trump a tremendous favor. The second Trump presidency was partly ushered in by the very "democratic" party that constantly lectures Americans on democracy. Perhaps the Founders truly did know better than the woke authoritarians who now run the Socialist Democrat Party? This should be a sobering thought for every Democrat voter who believes in true representation and accountability.
