With Donald Trump's landslide victory in the rear-view mirror, the recriminations among Democrats have begun. That's the great thing about the transition period. It's uniquely enjoyable in that the victors aren't in power yet and thus can't be blamed for anything, but the losers fight it out over who was at fault. Grab your popcorn because things are going to get spicy. 

Before we get to the quotes, though, it's important to lay out the battle lines. To do that, you only have to understand one thing: The Joe Biden camp has always hated the Kamala Harris camp. From the beginning of the now-outgoing administration, the long knives have been out. For example, I wrote the following piece back in 2021. 

READ: The Long Knives Come Out for Kamala Harris As Her Vice-Presidency Continues to Collapse

Worn out by what they see as entrenched dysfunction and lack of focus, key West Wing aides have largely thrown up their hands at Vice President Kamala Harris and her staff — deciding there simply isn’t time to deal with them right now, especially at a moment when President Joe Biden faces quickly multiplying legislative and political concerns.

The exasperation runs both ways. Interviews with nearly three dozen former and current Harris aides, administration officials, Democratic operatives, donors and outside advisers — who spoke extensively to CNN — reveal a complex reality inside the White House.

There were even claims that Biden's handlers were treating Harris unfairly due to racism. That animosity never subsided because the vice president never got any better. She spent the entire term resting on her laziness, showing herself unprepared and incapable in the most important moments. Don't take that as a defense of Biden, who likewise matched those descriptors, though he at least had senility to blame it on. 

With Harris' loss official, whatever facade of niceties existed is being torn down, and both sides are coming to open blows. 

What they're saying: One Democrat familiar with the White House's dynamics pointed a finger at Mike Donilon and Steve Ricchetti, Biden's top political aides: "Mike and Steve will have a lot to answer for — having him run" for re-election at 80 years old.

• One person involved with Harris' team told Axios: "The 107-day Harris campaign was nearly flawless. The Biden campaign that preceded it was the opposite."
• Another person involved in the vice president's campaign said: "We did what we could. I think the odds against us were insurmountable," referring to Biden's low approval ratings and his late exit after the disastrous June debate that raised questions about his mental fitness.
• In an implicit criticism of Biden's team, top Harris aide David Plouffe posted on X that the campaign had "dug out of a deep hole." He later deleted his account.

"Flawless" has become the word of the week for Harris defenders. Her campaign has been described in those exact terms on MSNBC, by late-night hosts, by Democrat politicians, and now, by Harris' own team. It's a defense mechanism in which they pretend they were always the underdogs and expected to lose due to Biden's disastrous presidency and re-election run. 

Is that true, though? I don't think so. When Harris jumped into the race, the campaign being shortened was often cited as an advantage. According to the talking heads, she would be able to enter the arena rested and ready, having not been the focal point for the last grueling year of presidential politics. That would allow her to use her billion-dollar war chest to define herself on her terms without months on end for her opposition to tear her down. 

And you know what? They were probably right. It was an advantage for Harris to get into the race so late because the longer she was in, the more unpopular she became, to the point where Donald Trump led the popular vote polling going into election day. So for them to now flip the script and blame the shortened campaign is laughably detached from reality, and that wasn't lost on Biden's handlers. 

A former Biden staffer dismissed the Harris team's criticisms as making excuses for the vice president's failures: "How did you spend $1 billion and not win? What the f***?"

Another person familiar with the dynamics said that some on Biden's team resent Harris for not using the president more during the campaign, even though he is unpopular and prone to gaffes.

• "The Harris team benched [Biden] and then they lost, so now the people who represent Biden are saying, 'Maybe you shouldn't have benched him,' " they said.

The Harris campaign had a three-to-one money advantage over Trump, and they got to utilize that in a compressed timeframe that allowed their money to have more impact. If money matters in politics, and Democrats constantly assure us it does, there was no excuse for Harris to not only lose but get blown out. 

With that said, sometimes there is no right answer for a loser like Kamala Harris. Would trotting Biden out onto the campaign trail to have his brain fall out on the floor over and over have turned the tide? Of course not. So that makes the arguments coming from Biden's side just as delusional. 

I'll end with this tidbit from the all-call Jen O'Malley Dillon, Harris' campaign manager, had with the staff. 

• During the call, Harris told staffers: "Yeah, this sucks....We all just speak truth, why don't we, right? There's also so much good that has come of this" campaign.
• The message didn't resonate with some Harris staffers: "It was detached from the reality of what happened," one said. "We are told the fate of democracy is at stake, and then the message was, 'We'll get them next time.' "

Watching lefty political operatives realize in real time that all the "threat to democracy" stuff was made-up garbage meant to trick the American people into voting against their own success is just too good. Some of us tried to tell them it was all nonsense. Instead, the entirety of the left, from the press to politicians, ran with the "threat to democracy" narrative. In the end, normal people got sick of being gaslit and just voted for less inflation and a solution to the border crisis. 

That sure feels like poetic justice. Rhetoric did not prevail over tangible policies for once, and that's a good thing. So let them fight about it. I'll be here to laugh at all of it.