What about Joe Biden made him sufficiently left while Kamala Harris wasn't?

-Joe Biden wasn't campaigning to finish building Trump's wall. Or saying that actually it was a good idea to build the wall and the only problems were just that Trump said Mexico was going to pay for it and that he didn't finish the job.

-Joe Biden wasn't campaigning on being pro-fracking. And bragging about how he was the tie breaking vote for the IRA, which leased new land for fracking. (I understand there was more to this act, but Harris points to it as a way to show she supports fracking)

-At the time the genocide in Gaza hadn't ramped up and gotten as much publicity as has now, so we didn't get to hear Joe Biden's stance on it.

-Joe Biden wasn't calling to ensure America has the "strongest most lethal fighting force in the world".

-Joe Biden didn't align himself with the Cheneys.

You see that 10 million more Democrats voted for Biden, but stayed home for Harris and you believe the problem is with the people and not the candidate? Now granted, racism and sexism played a role in this for sure. But to attribute that much of a difference just to that? Most of the people that are deeply racist and sexist are already voting for Trump because he supports those ideas. And from what I've seen, the Republican voters stayed pretty consistent from last election. It was mainly a dip in Democratic voters. If the problem is with the voters and not just that Harris was an incredibly weak candidate, then why do you believe that many more people voted last election?

Little known thing called COVID-19

No you don't have to explain that. Biden has to explain that. Biden has to explain why he did so little, and even when he did good things, he and his colleagues did such a bad job of bragging about it that a lot of people didn't see.

Of course it's not just Biden, but you don't get to start off by blaming voters for being ignorant when in fact the president himself did a s***** job advertising.

Didn't she gain votes in the swing states and mainly lost votes in states she won nevertheless?

How do we know this when we haven’t finished counting the votes?

Edit: I realize this might have accidentally come across as a “gotcha” question, but I really mean it. So many people are speaking with confidence about voter demographics when only like 60% of the vote is counted. What am I missing?

I'm toying with the idea that we're all wrong, and it was actually widespread fraud that "won" the election for Trump.

Because of targeted social networks circles. The candidate to prop got a radicalized base, the candidate to lose got messaging that either indicated people should disengage ("Genocide Kamala!") or were given the same sort of messaging in 2016 that made Hillary such a surefire win you didn't even have to go to vote, because what's one more vote (appeal to laziness). Cambridge Analytica's successors were also armed with LLM AI as well as Big Data personal data identification this time around.

They clearly prepped up in case the votes didn't go their way, but the post- truth politics paired with people who consider their social network fueled emotions more credible than the facts and merits of lifetime experts was more effective than they could have ever predicted, and this will mark the tendency for all future elections in our "democracies" were education clearly has had no long term impact.