Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 06-29-2019, 04:58 PM
Unreconstructed Man is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 299
In the debate, Harris was one of two candidates who said she’d get rid of private health care (Bernie was the other). If she gets the nod she’s gonna need to walk that the fuck back immediately, and that’ll be pretty embarrassing.

Other than that, I think she’s a pretty good candidate. Not my favourite, but definitely up there.
  #52  
Old 06-29-2019, 05:17 PM
DSYoungEsq is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Indian Land, S Carolina
Posts: 14,411
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unreconstructed Man View Post
In the debate, Harris was one of two candidates who said she’d get rid of private health care (Bernie was the other). If she gets the nod she’s gonna need to walk that the fuck back immediately, and that’ll be pretty embarrassing.

Other than that, I think she’s a pretty good candidate. Not my favourite, but definitely up there.
She already has.
  #53  
Old 06-29-2019, 05:44 PM
Unreconstructed Man is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 299
Cool. Glad to hear it
  #54  
Old 06-29-2019, 05:56 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 10,675
Quote:
Originally Posted by China Guy View Post
My feeling is that practically all of the candidates are rolling long shot dice to be the top of the ticket, but would be satisfied with VP or a cabinet post. From just a marketing point of view, one could argue for the white guy at the top of the ticket, and a person of color and/or gender as the #2. Trouble is Joe is too old, has too much baggage, and frankly was a distant also ran at least twice. Poor analogy, but he's a minor leaguer that can't make it in the show (or to be kind, he's a Michael Jordan that can't hit off of a Major league pitcher). Same for Bernie, a one trick "socialist" that suddenly found himself in "what was old is new" situation last time around, and also no where near to making it past the convention, much less the primary.

The only saving grace I can think of for an old white guy with a proven track record of falling short in the big leagues, is that it would be a back door way to elect the first female president when he croaks in office. Assuming the ticket wins.
Good post, but the part I bolded is of particular significance. I think Joe's past failures as a candidate, as recently as 2008, can't be dismissed as a case of simply not being his time. Not everyone's good at campaigning and building a political coalition from the ground up.

Since we're using sports analogies, I think Joe Biden is kinda like the back-up QB that went on a 4 or 5 game win streak and landed a new contract and starting job with another team that saw promise. Maybe he's the Matt Cassel or Jimmy Garapolo of politics.
  #55  
Old 06-29-2019, 06:17 PM
Locrian is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Valley Village, CA
Posts: 4,295
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post

Since we're using sports analogies, I think Joe Biden is kinda like the back-up QB that went on a 4 or 5 game win streak and landed a new contract and starting job with another team that saw promise. Maybe he's the Matt Cassel or Jimmy Garapolo of politics.
There's always Nick Foles...
  #56  
Old 06-29-2019, 09:34 PM
Kent Clark's Avatar
Kent Clark is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Posts: 26,505
Quote:
Originally Posted by China Guy View Post
The only saving grace I can think of for an old white guy with a proven track record of falling short in the big leagues, is that it would be a back door way to elect the first female president when he croaks in office. Assuming the ticket wins.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Biffster View Post
I was thinking exactly the same things.
I'll bet a whole bunch of the religious right were thinking the same thing about Mike Pence when they voted for Donald Trump.
  #57  
Old 06-29-2019, 10:16 PM
Lamoral's Avatar
Lamoral is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Fenario
Posts: 2,829
No, they were thinking "if Pence vouches for Trump, then shit, Trump is our guy." Most of those people LOVE Trump now. They're not waiting for him to croak.
  #58  
Old 06-30-2019, 02:30 AM
China Guy is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Pacific Northwest
Posts: 11,675
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lamoral View Post
No, they were thinking "if Pence vouches for Trump, then shit, Trump is our guy." Most of those people LOVE Trump now. They're not waiting for him to croak.
I think they were thinking "we will give trump a chance, and if he fails god with smite him smitely, and Pence is our insurance
  #59  
Old 06-30-2019, 05:40 AM
Jragon's Avatar
Jragon is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Miskatonic University
Posts: 10,560
I'm... more of Harris than Biden, but among (at least young) leftists Harris has a rep as "a cop" as in "all cops are bastards" and "never trust a cop". She was a prosecutor, not literally police, of course, but she has a rep as being an arm of the crueler part of the state which is especially dicey given the political situation with the perceived overreach of the (state/city-level) executive arm such as civil forfeiture, over-incarceration problems, BLM etc. She may ameliorate a degree of this among at least some classes of leftist POC being black herself, and having at least made some attempts while DA to raise "accountability" and other things, but she still has that attached to her.

She also has a rep for making some really bad calls wrt her record as DA, such as fighting fairly hard to deny trans women GCS in prison. She's also been very aggressive about sex work which is something that even a lot of progressives (that is, Liberals-But-Not-Quite-Leftists) are liable to take notice of on the heels of the FOSTA/SESTA debacle. She also had a bit of a bad look in the office when it came to her office defending prison slavery. She did say that's not the intention and she didn't know the defenses were being made, but she still was ultimately the one guiding her office's agenda to push back against increased parole opportunities, and her best defense is "I know it looks bad buuuuuut". It looks like the equivalent of "sorry you were offended."

She's walked a lot of this back for her primary bid, but especially due to the "never trust a cop" wariness, a lot of the left is extremely leery she's going to stab them in the back so to speak. Due to it they're very ready to drop her if she walks back on enough. Fair or not, she's in a precarious position as a general candidate where if she walks back on just one too many things, a lot of people are going to pull back from disgust because they'll perceive her as about to walk everything else they want/need back to her previous positions the second she takes office.

This isn't an unfounded fear, she already walked back the medicare thing, and people in this thread are already lauding her for her perceived ability to "pivot" to further right positions during the general.

Personally, I don't see her as a great candidate for the general because in my view, our gains aren't going to be converting people who voted for Trump. It's largely going to be motivating people with existing sympathies to the Democratic party to actually bother voting, and Harris defeats a lot of that with further left voters. This isn't "Hillary 2.0" but it is a similar problem to what Hillary faced wrt motivation I think.

Note as far as "getting (non-radicalized) Trump voters" I feel like there is something to gain there with working class voters, but I think the party in general is already doing a fairly decent job of addressing the issues to convert them, or convince them to at least stay home -- meaningfully acknowledging the economic problems we face and presenting concrete solutions that don't scapegoat a bogeyman like immigrants, foreign countries, or refugees. A lot of the Trump voting was IMO frustration with weak liberal policymaking and a failure to really engage with or pay attention to a lot of issues brewing beneath the surface. That's why Sanders caught such fire, for instance. Trump acknowledged those problems... the solutions he proposed were bigoted nonsense, but he acknowledged the problems and presented a seeming solution.

Harris wouldn't necessarily be any weaker on this front, but she certainly isn't any stronger than her peers, which is why I think we need to focus more on exciting the back-end when most of the frontrunners already have plans that, intentionally or not, address these issues.
  #60  
Old 06-30-2019, 09:01 AM
QuickSilver is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 18,792
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSilver View Post
Harris has a smugness about her that I think some people find off-putting. She strikes me as a politician with a flexible populist instinct, not as someone with a very deep set of convictions. She seems more given to doing what's expedient.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSYoungEsq View Post
QED
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #61  
Old 06-30-2019, 11:21 AM
Fiveyearlurker is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 6,613
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
I think it's good that Harris showed some vigor and tenacity, and I agree that those characteristics would serve her well in a debate against someone like Trump.
I will eat my hat if Trump agrees to debate Harris.
  #62  
Old 06-30-2019, 12:34 PM
Covfefe is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: 100 miles N. of Chicago
Posts: 1,544
Trump would absolutely debate Harris. Maybe he doesn't yet know it, she has plenty of legit weaknesses as a candidate, some of which Jragon touched on. He would want to spend as much time on the offense as he could is all. One that hasn't been brought up ITT yet is her apparent affinity for executive orders, which may be perceived by many as being of a greater magnitude than other presidents.

While she should thrill those who believe in her, I'm not convinced Harris would come out ahead in the scales of public opinion in a debate with Trump. She made a splash by kind of employing personal victimization in a weaponized fashion - that is Trump's bread and butter. She might have to overall offer a more transcendent case against him in addition to adequately fending off arrows.

Klobuchar is the one Trump probably wouldn't enjoy the idea of debating because he isn't going to rattle her or be able to come at her from many angles.
  #63  
Old 06-30-2019, 12:35 PM
Covfefe is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: 100 miles N. of Chicago
Posts: 1,544
Trump would absolutely debate Harris. Maybe he doesn't yet know it, she has plenty of legit weaknesses as a candidate, some of which Jragon touched on. He would want to spend as much time on the offense as he could is all. One that hasn't been brought up ITT yet is her apparent affinity for executive orders, which may be perceived by many as being of a greater magnitude than other presidents.

While she should thrill those who believe in her, I'm not convinced Harris would come out ahead in the scales of public opinion in a debate with Trump. She made a splash by kind of employing personal victimization in a weaponized fashion - that is Trump's bread and butter. She might have to overall offer a more transcendent case against him in addition to adequately fending off arrows.

Klobuchar is the one Trump probably wouldn't enjoy the idea of debating because he isn't going to rattle her or be able to come at her from many angles.
  #64  
Old 06-30-2019, 08:02 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,259
I understand the nervousness about nominating another woman against Trump, I really do (I don’t think being black is an issue after Obama—a reason Booker has been one of my favorites all along). And I think the other female candidates, especially Warren, would be weaksauce against Trump. My bias has been to look for someone tall and imposing. Beto and Inslee were the other two in my top three.

BUT after seeing this debate, I am now convinced that she has a special kind of toughness that overrides these concerns. She got a huge surge of donations in the 24 hours after the debate, 58% of which were from people who never gave to her before. I was among that 58 percent, and she is now my top choice.

The progressives who don’t like some of her background? Tough shit. If they don’t swallow their disappointment and come out to defeat Trump next year, they will have revealed a fundamental moral bankruptcy that proves they have no business being allowed anywhere near the halls of power.
  #65  
Old 06-30-2019, 08:23 PM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 22,510
I like her, have liked her. I’ve talked her up as a major contender for the whole last year. I could see her as the nominee and she might end up my own number one choice. She’d do well I think.

But damn people. This was one really nice three point shot, not the game. Most of Biden’s support won’t peel off that easy.

I’ll wait to see how the next few possessions play out before declaring her the nominee ...
  #66  
Old 06-30-2019, 08:55 PM
AHunter3's Avatar
AHunter3 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: NY (Manhattan) NY USA
Posts: 20,508
Most of the people I'm LiveJournal or Facebook friend with are not Kamala Harris fans. But one person's take on her kind of sums up the general attitude: "She did awful things in criminal justice and didn't have the common sense to realize she had a problem until it blew up in her face. I don't like her, she's a bit of a Nazi. But would I vote for her in the general? Hell yeah, because she isn't TRUMP-level bad."
  #67  
Old 06-30-2019, 08:58 PM
Kent Clark's Avatar
Kent Clark is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Posts: 26,505
Quote:
Originally Posted by Covfefe View Post
One that hasn't been brought up ITT yet is her apparent affinity for executive orders, which may be perceived by many as being of a greater magnitude than other presidents.
You mean other Presidents like Donald Trump? Let's just say that's a wash.
  #68  
Old 06-30-2019, 09:03 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 10,675
I actually think doing awful things in criminal justice might be...a selling point in the general election?

In any case, one thing that made me think that Harris was a potential challenger to Biden wasn't merely her multicultural heritage; rather, it's that she won a statewide election in California. I know people tend to dismiss California as a far-left state, and for sure, there are a fair number of Loony Leftvilles in Cali, but even in California it's hard to win a statewide election by being, say, a democratic socialist.

If nothing else, by winning a statewide race there Harris demonstrated that she has the ability to organize a major campaign. She demonstrated the kind of toughness and ability to work with broad coalitions that are usually required of presidential front-runners. She can speak to different audiences. TBH, I don't know if Biden has ever really done that on his own at any time in his career.

Last edited by asahi; 06-30-2019 at 09:04 PM.
  #69  
Old 06-30-2019, 10:29 PM
Bone's Avatar
Bone is online now
Extrajudicial
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 10,670
While there are a limited amount of substantive issues being raised, does it not concern anyone that leans left that the majority of the discussion surrounds demographics? It's mostly identity politics, and in a bad way. Harris may ride that in the general, but the way things are discussed in this thread are quite off putting to my libertarian sensibilities.
  #70  
Old 06-30-2019, 11:04 PM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 22,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bone View Post
While there are a limited amount of substantive issues being raised, does it not concern anyone that leans left that the majority of the discussion surrounds demographics? It's mostly identity politics, and in a bad way. ...
Are you reading the same thread as me?

Oh there is concern that her identity may be problematic for some voters but that is not what most mean by “identity politics”.

The biggest substantive issue for me is pulling back from the harms that this administration has caused. Winning the presidency and maybe the Senate will allow much no matter which of these people are in. Question one has to be who can best deliver that. Harris is the first making a credible case of having the goods maybe better than Biden’s case. Discussing the merits of that case is most cogent.
  #71  
Old 06-30-2019, 11:05 PM
Jragon's Avatar
Jragon is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Miskatonic University
Posts: 10,560
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bone View Post
While there are a limited amount of substantive issues being raised, does it not concern anyone that leans left that the majority of the discussion surrounds demographics? It's mostly identity politics, and in a bad way. Harris may ride that in the general, but the way things are discussed in this thread are quite off putting to my libertarian sensibilities.
There's an awful lot of this in here that's for sure.
  #72  
Old 06-30-2019, 11:56 PM
Ambivalid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 13,865
I honestly loathe Harris. She is an empty suit. She stands for nothing, believes in nothing, has no message and is fueled by *nothing* but personal ambition. She isn't running because she wants to improve the country, she's running for the personal achievement of being elected President. If she becomes the nominee, *of fucking course* I'm going to vote for her. I mean, fuck, I'd vote for Marianne fucking Williamson before i voted for Trump or abstained altogether. But Kamala isnt too far ahead of Williamson in my book of favorites.
  #73  
Old 07-01-2019, 06:19 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 10,675
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambivalid View Post
I honestly loathe Harris. She is an empty suit. She stands for nothing, believes in nothing, has no message and is fueled by *nothing* but personal ambition. She isn't running because she wants to improve the country, she's running for the personal achievement of being elected President. If she becomes the nominee, *of fucking course* I'm going to vote for her. I mean, fuck, I'd vote for Marianne fucking Williamson before i voted for Trump or abstained altogether. But Kamala isnt too far ahead of Williamson in my book of favorites.
I highly doubt she stands for nothing. Like most career politicians, though, she's probably an opportunist and will occasionally express viewpoints and support policies across the political spectrum. I honestly do not see the problem with that. In my view, that makes her more electable, and it's a sign that she's pragmatic and politically astute enough to be capable of forming an executive branch of government. Now compare her to someone like Bernie Sanders who's a good senator and a positive force for change, but who keeps regurgitating themes that have a rather high chance of political failure.
  #74  
Old 07-01-2019, 08:56 AM
ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 50,325
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bone View Post
While there are a limited amount of substantive issues being raised, does it not concern anyone that leans left that the majority of the discussion surrounds demographics? It's mostly identity politics, and in a bad way.
That is indeed being practiced by the party trying to tell us "she isn't really black", and yes, it's concerning, as it should be to anyone. Is it concerning to you as well?

Quote:
Harris may ride that in the general, but the way things are discussed in this thread are quite off putting to my libertarian sensibilities.
You're a single-issue voter, and this isn't that issue.
  #75  
Old 07-01-2019, 10:05 AM
Bone's Avatar
Bone is online now
Extrajudicial
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 10,670
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
Are you reading the same thread as me?

Oh there is concern that her identity may be problematic for some voters but that is not what most mean by “identity politics”.

The biggest substantive issue for me is pulling back from the harms that this administration has caused. Winning the presidency and maybe the Senate will allow much no matter which of these people are in. Question one has to be who can best deliver that. Harris is the first making a credible case of having the goods maybe better than Biden’s case. Discussing the merits of that case is most cogent.
Certainly why Harris may be better or worse than Biden is substantive and not identity politics. And of course there is a bit of overlap, but look at these:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thudlow Boink View Post
Part of me thinks that the Democrats and Trump-haters are going to vote for whoever the Democrats run, so the best strategy is to pick a "safe" candidate that conservative and undecided voters who aren't all in on Trump would feel comfortable with. And a white male might be "safest" in this sense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bijou Drains View Post
Born in early 60's , foreign born black father, first term senator. Sounds familiar.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
Keeping this focused though. At this stage she needs to steal the Black support ball from Biden. Playing out the hypothetical of this thread that she is the nominee, in the general she will be trying to pivot to that for all the people message. Not running as "Her" or as a person of color but for everyone's votes.

What evidence do we have for and against her ability to make that sale?

I need to hear her make the case of how Trump has failed whites with less education and show that she can resonate with them better than HRC did. I do not accept that her identities alone disqualify her with all of them, but neither do I assume she has the goods to do so.

A Harris VP needs to be an explicit nod to the importance of those voters. Which is not Mayor Pete.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lamoral View Post
Having Harris as the nominee immediately frames the whole thing, in the collective mind of America, as "the woman and color party" versus "the white male party." This isn't going to get the blue collar white Midwestern votes that are desperately needed. The dude who spends all day covered in dirt and grease working with a bunch of hot machines in a loud room and goes home feeling physically worn out, doesn't give a damn about busing and he doesn't give a damn about whether or not Trump is finally prosecuted for everything.
Quote:
Originally Posted by black rabbit View Post

Put Pete on the ticket to draw in a few White Guy votes and for the entertainment value of watching Pence ascend into rapture live on national TV during the VP debate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
I wouldn't say that at all, but we need someone who doesn't scare off white guys. If we're going to pick a totally non-white male ticket, pick carefully.
It's true though, there is virtually nothing Harris could do to get my vote. For me, I prefer political discussion that is more about issues rather than voting blocks based on race or gender.
  #76  
Old 07-01-2019, 10:17 AM
carnivorousplant is offline
KB not found. Press any key
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Central Arkansas
Posts: 58,962
When people or politicians begin yelling, I tend to not listen.

Last edited by carnivorousplant; 07-01-2019 at 10:17 AM.
  #77  
Old 07-01-2019, 12:08 PM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 22,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bone View Post
... It's true though, there is virtually nothing Harris could do to get my vote. For me, I prefer political discussion that is more about issues rather than voting blocks based on race or gender.
And this is more than a bit disingenuous.

Obviously race and gender are part of the RealPolitik horse race of electability and cannot be ignored. Discussing those is not what makes it impossible for her to get your vote. The issues are.
  #78  
Old 07-01-2019, 12:24 PM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 62,071
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bone View Post
It's true though, there is virtually nothing Harris could do to get my vote. For me, I prefer political discussion that is more about issues rather than voting blocks based on race or gender.
And if it comes down to Harris vs. Trump?
  #79  
Old 07-01-2019, 12:30 PM
Sterling Archer is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,088
Harris would embarrass Trump on a debate stage like no one else in the democratic field. Many of the others would destroy him on issues and policy, but it would take a discerning, intelligent voter to realize it. Harris would humiliate him both intellectually and at the insult/tough-guy game. She’s my #1 now.
  #80  
Old 07-01-2019, 12:32 PM
carnivorousplant is offline
KB not found. Press any key
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Central Arkansas
Posts: 58,962
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm View Post
And if it comes down to Harris vs. Trump?
Them some, but not enough, will vote for Harris.
  #81  
Old 07-01-2019, 12:36 PM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 62,071
Quote:
Originally Posted by carnivorousplant View Post
Them some, but not enough, will vote for Harris.
I am actually asking Bone who he would vote for if it came down to Harris vs. Trump since he said he couldn't vote for Harris.
  #82  
Old 07-01-2019, 12:55 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,259
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambivalid View Post
I honestly loathe Harris. She is an empty suit. She stands for nothing, believes in nothing, has no message and is fueled by *nothing* but personal ambition. She isn't running because she wants to improve the country, she's running for the personal achievement of being elected President.

This is true to an extent. The same extent it is true of everyone who has ever been elected president, as well as most of those who unsuccessfully sought the office.
  #83  
Old 07-01-2019, 02:32 PM
sps49sd is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 519
Harris was still backed by Willie, and her Senate race was against another Democrat, but one with little name recognition. Were you aware this is how California does elections now?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sterling Archer View Post
Harris would embarrass Trump on a debate stage like no one else in the democratic field. Many of the others would destroy him on issues and policy, but it would take a discerning, intelligent voter to realize it. Harris would humiliate him both intellectually and at the insult/tough-guy game. She’s my #1 now.
I think y'all are putting too much on the debate performance. She made a prepared attack that really came from left field (Busing?) against a target someone had researched. I do not think she will think on her feet well in defense nor any kind of back and forth. We will see, but I have not been impressed by her intelligence since she began in politics.

I know, I know: Trump! But this thread is about Harris.
  #84  
Old 07-01-2019, 02:59 PM
tampora is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 32
I must be the only person who thought Harris seemed to be on the verge of tears and needing a minute alone to recompose herself. The quiver in her voice when talking about those racial issues made my woman-in-distress spider sense tingle.

Any person who thinks THAT was a 30-second response either: has no grip on reality and should not be in charge of nuclear weapons, or, they have no respect for agreed rules and also should not be in charge of a rule-based organization.
  #85  
Old 07-01-2019, 03:22 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,259
I think it was rehearsed to the nth degree. And I LOVE politicians who can so effectively simulate emotions! This is exactly why she is now my top choice.

Last edited by SlackerInc; 07-01-2019 at 03:22 PM.
  #86  
Old 07-01-2019, 05:44 PM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 62,071
Quote:
Originally Posted by tampora View Post
I must be the only person who thought Harris seemed to be on the verge of tears and needing a minute alone to recompose herself. The quiver in her voice when talking about those racial issues made my woman-in-distress spider sense tingle.

Any person who thinks THAT was a 30-second response either: has no grip on reality and should not be in charge of nuclear weapons, or, they have no respect for agreed rules and also should not be in charge of a rule-based organization.
Soooo...The strategy is going to be "She acts like a woman!" and overanalyzing her speech patterns to point out her womanly flaws?
  #87  
Old 07-01-2019, 06:04 PM
Ambivalid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 13,865
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
This is true to an extent. The same extent it is true of everyone who has ever been elected president, as well as most of those who unsuccessfully sought the office.
Suffice it to say I disagree. Are you telling me that Elizabeth Warren (for example) *doesnt* actually want to improve the country? Obama didn't?

Sure, personal ambition and savvy political instincts are *also* needed to get elected President. But it shouldn't be *all* that's needed. At least not on our side. And that is all I have ever seen when i watch, listen to and read about Kamala Harris.
  #88  
Old 07-01-2019, 07:20 PM
Kent Clark's Avatar
Kent Clark is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Posts: 26,505
Quote:
Originally Posted by sps49sd View Post
Harris was still backed by Willie, and her Senate race was against another Democrat, but one with little name recognition. Were you aware this is how California does elections now?
If by now you mean "since 2012," then yeah. The 2016 election was the first statewide election to have that particular quirk.

In the 2016 primary (which was the election that really counted) Harris got 37.9% of the vote against six other Democrats, 14 Republicans, two Libertarians, and a whole mess of other candidates. Her 37.9% of the vote was more than the next four candidates combined.

When the general election rolled around, Harris beat Loretta Sanchez, 61.6% - 38.4%. Harris got 7.5 million votes and won every county in the state except four. Granted, that's 1.25 million fewer votes than Hillary got at the top of the ballot, but it's close to the 7.85 million Obama got in 2012 against Romney. It's also close to the 7.7 million votes Gavin Newsom got in the far-more contested governor's race.

Willie Brown might be the most powerful person in all of California politics, but he was 82 years old in 2016. Just how much clout did he really carry with 7.5 million voters?

Last edited by Kent Clark; 07-01-2019 at 07:23 PM.
  #89  
Old 07-01-2019, 07:35 PM
tampora is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm View Post
Soooo...The strategy is going to be "She acts like a woman!" and overanalyzing her speech patterns to point out her womanly flaws?
That is rather sexist of you to automatically associate an emotional outburst with the female gender.

Last edited by tampora; 07-01-2019 at 07:36 PM.
  #90  
Old 07-01-2019, 07:38 PM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 62,071
Quote:
Originally Posted by tampora View Post
That is rather sexist of you to automatically associate an emotional outburst with the female gender.
Riiiigggghhht
  #91  
Old 07-01-2019, 08:19 PM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 22,510
As the dust settles I am thinking she will drop back again pretty fast. Answering my own op she has pretty much doomed herself for a general with the very debate move that got her the bump in the polls.

She has now said that mandatory busing is a good idea for today and that will haunt her, and not just with the key blocs of the Obama-Trump and Romney-Clinton voters but with suburban voters as well. Few of any color when it is their child want to have no say in whether or not their kid has to get on a bus and get shipped to school far away each day and have no option or choice or say about their child staying in their neighborhood school instead.

That equals unelectable in the general.
  #92  
Old 07-02-2019, 02:25 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,259
Maybe it’s too risky a debate move, but I fantasize about Harris looking Trump right in the eye and asking “You keep using ‘she’s not my type’ as your defense against the many women accusing you of rape and sexual assault. So what IS the type of woman you can envision forcing yourself on?”


Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
As the dust settles I am thinking she will drop back again pretty fast. Answering my own op she has pretty much doomed herself for a general with the very debate move that got her the bump in the polls.

She has now said that mandatory busing is a good idea for today and that will haunt her, and not just with the key blocs of the Obama-Trump and Romney-Clinton voters but with suburban voters as well. Few of any color when it is their child want to have no say in whether or not their kid has to get on a bus and get shipped to school far away each day and have no option or choice or say about their child staying in their neighborhood school instead.

That equals unelectable in the general.

Nah, because she is not going to push some big plan to implement busing, top down.
  #93  
Old 07-02-2019, 02:25 AM
drivekiller is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
Whether progressives like to admit it or not, Barack Obama and Bill Clinton have been the most successful progressive politicians over the past 40 years.
I used to think Clinton was progressive, and then along came Obama. I thought Obama was progressive, until I heard Sanders and Warren. I'll worry about whether she's really a progressive, or just a capable, humane and ethical leader after the election.
  #94  
Old 07-02-2019, 02:52 PM
sps49sd is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 519
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kent Clark View Post
If by now you mean "since 2012," then yeah. The 2016 election was the first statewide election to have that particular quirk.

In the 2016 primary (which was the election that really counted) Harris got 37.9% of the vote against six other Democrats, 14 Republicans, two Libertarians, and a whole mess of other candidates. Her 37.9% of the vote was more than the next four candidates combined.

When the general election rolled around, Harris beat Loretta Sanchez, 61.6% - 38.4%. Harris got 7.5 million votes and won every county in the state except four. Granted, that's 1.25 million fewer votes than Hillary got at the top of the ballot, but it's close to the 7.85 million Obama got in 2012 against Romney. It's also close to the 7.7 million votes Gavin Newsom got in the far-more contested governor's race.

Willie Brown might be the most powerful person in all of California politics, but he was 82 years old in 2016. Just how much clout did he really carry with 7.5 million voters?
Enough to get the SF/ Oakland Bay bridge named after himself in 2014. He has held no elected office for years; his clout is with the Legislature and Democrat leadership (including unions).

She beat Loretta Sanchez (D). Big deal.

Last edited by sps49sd; 07-02-2019 at 02:54 PM.
  #95  
Old 07-02-2019, 03:11 PM
Shodan is offline
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 39,808
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
As the dust settles I am thinking she will drop back again pretty fast. Answering my own op she has pretty much doomed herself for a general with the very debate move that got her the bump in the polls.

She has now said that mandatory busing is a good idea for today and that will haunt her, and not just with the key blocs of the Obama-Trump and Romney-Clinton voters but with suburban voters as well. Few of any color when it is their child want to have no say in whether or not their kid has to get on a bus and get shipped to school far away each day and have no option or choice or say about their child staying in their neighborhood school instead.

That equals unelectable in the general.
Which is a common problem I have with Democrats - they back off from stuff I like, and not from stuff I hate. Harris was a tough prosecutor - which is considered a drawback. She pushes Biden on busing, which was a stupid idea then and is a stupid idea now. Now either Biden stands by his position, which he more or less does, and that hurts him in the primaries, or he waffles, and that hurts him in the general. Biden needs a Sister Souljah moment.

Regards,
Shodan
  #96  
Old 07-02-2019, 03:30 PM
ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 50,325
I don't think the Democrats were planning on getting your vote anyway.
  #97  
Old 07-02-2019, 03:34 PM
DChord568 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,189
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sherrerd View Post
I agree. Recalling that Hillary DID win the popular vote, should put paid to the 'women can't win' theories.

But maybe she'd need an authentic dim-jock sort for VP in order to keep everyone happy. How about Tim Ryan? He seems to fit that particular bill...
Ryan is my representative, and while I don't dislike him, I've never been exactly enamored with him either.

But I believe he's absolutely right about one thing: the Dems have to fight the perception of being a coastal party and start paying more attention to the working class in the middle of the country. That was one of Hilary's many mistakes.

My county and the one immediately to our north have been unquestioned Democratic strongholds for decades. The one to the north went for Trump in 2016, and my county came very close to doing the same. That was simply unprecedented.

We can't have a repeat of that.
  #98  
Old 07-02-2019, 04:01 PM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,378
Based on what I saw in that debate, pretty good.

I think female candidates probably face the unfair burden of having to convince Certain Voters that they're "tough" enough to handle the job.

Like, Elizabeth Warren's resume of "former Harvard professor" will probably hurt her with those voters in a way that it didn't with Obama. "Former criminal prosecutor", now, that's another story.

And FTR I have been calling her the most likely nominee for probably about a year now. If she can narrow it down to a three-way race against Biden and Sanders, she's ideologically in the center of the field and also looks a lot more like the average Democrat than they do.
  #99  
Old 07-02-2019, 04:05 PM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,378
Quote:
Originally Posted by DChord568 View Post
Ryan is my representative, and while I don't dislike him, I've never been exactly enamored with him either.

But I believe he's absolutely right about one thing: the Dems have to fight the perception of being a coastal party and start paying more attention to the working class in the middle of the country. That was one of Hilary's many mistakes.

My county and the one immediately to our north have been unquestioned Democratic strongholds for decades. The one to the north went for Trump in 2016, and my county came very close to doing the same. That was simply unprecedented.

We can't have a repeat of that.
Serious question: what does it mean to be a "coastal" party? Do working class voters on the coasts have different concerns than those in the interior do? Because really, I hear this and it just sounds like code for "stop talking about racial and gender justice issues". But guess what, there are a lot of minority and female working class voters in the Midwest, so...
  #100  
Old 07-02-2019, 07:04 PM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 22,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
... Nah, because she is not going to push some big plan to implement busing, top down.
Her "big idea" so far is that mandatory busing was a good idea (voluntary was not) and is something that should be done today. True none of the candidates' big idea are things that they can implement top down and most are just sales pitches that they know they will never deliver, but she for her part is the one who has most embraced the imperial presidency using executive orders to just make things happen ... so for her more than others. And all will be held as the one who wants these dreams, be it no private insurers, or free college for all, or decriminalizing crossing the border.


"Coastal" has a clear meaning to those not on the coasts, be it accurate or not. It evokes the old New Yorker cover of seeing the rest of the states as unimportant flyover country and the concerns of their voters as picayune and rather quaint. A candidate who hails from New York or California has that as a stereotype going in. Playing the part of the stereotype will lead to bad results. It only amplifies the impact of disregarding the real problems of less educated working class whites.


Yes Biden needs to attack mandatory busing as a bad idea today, clearly and forcefully, as the wrong approach to dealing with issues of racial justice and inequities. I think that would serve him well in the primaries and in the general.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:54 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017