They're all responsible for their own losses, assuming they were sincerely attempting to win? Just like Harris is responsible for hers, who I presume was sincerely attempting to win.
They're all responsible for their own losses, assuming they were sincerely attempting to win? Just like Harris is responsible for hers, who I presume was sincerely attempting to win.
So your contention is that Chase Oliver could have been elected President in 2024 if he and his campaign had made different decisions? That is . . . a claim that I do not think survives prolonged contact with observable reality.
No, man, I mean that if you go into a race you'll almost certainly lose, then the "almost certainly going to lose part" is a decision making factor in the result, and the inability to recognize that is a mistake. Maybe a correctable one, but at least one that should be addressed for a party.
A major party fielding an opposition candidate against an incumbent in a geography with a strong partisan leaning is almost certain to lose, regardless of who the candidate is. The rationale for running isn't just to try to win. The reason for losing isn't always, or even often, candidate quality.