Well, that, and the fact the GOP establishment took every opportunity to isolate her, demonize her, conduct whispering campaigns, deny endorsements until the end when they were forced to tepidly endorse her, try to recruit one candidate after another to challenge her including a certain disgraced recently former Republican Congressman who's last name begins with an "F" and so on.
All of that might have served to help depress her chances of success too.
And when one of you can point to a good reason why Harris is so unsuitable to serve, but lightweights such as Chafee and Murkowski are not? I'll listen to you. Until then this is a seat I chalk up lost by the smear campaign the GOP led against its own candidate primarily.
BTW, while I concede the seat is probably gone, I don't concede a loss under 40%. Sorry, not buying it.
As is usual on Harris threads, you're completely and totally missing the point. One could, potentially, believe that Harris would be the greatest senator in the history of the country, and simultaneously ALSO believe that at no point did she have the remotest chance of winning this election and that having her be the Republican nominee was mind-bogglingly stupid.
It's not a matter of one's opinion of whether she's suitable to serve, it's a matter of whether someone is a realistic sort that actually has some comprehension of the mindset of an undecided, swing, or moderate voter in a statewide election vs. someone that lives in a political fantasyland.