Hes a big Trump supporter and is stockpiling for the coming “war”. He also likes conspiracies. I do too, but your prents have nothing to do with you as a candidate.
Remember that if one of Harris’ father’s distant ancestors had a white parent, that means he is descended from a woman raped and impregnated by a white slaveowner. And therefore Harris is also a result of slave rape by whites.
Now ask your friend just how proud he is of finding that out.
I just want to say that i think her ambition, her open, obvious, ambition, is one of the things I like about Harris. Damn, it’s time for some openly ambitious women in the public stage. What a great role model for ambitious girls.
Anyway, I like the pick, and she excites me. I probably would have liked other picks, too, as i haven’t invested a ton in studying the options or falling in love with other potential candidates. But Harris looks presidential to me, and looking at the age of the top of the ticket, that’s probably the most important thing to me. That and whether she can help him win, of course.
Y’know, folks, Abrams is plenty capable of doing her job search herself if she’s interested.
That does remind me of a time when it was thought Colin Powell (son of Jamaican immigrants…) could make a good potential first Black candidate as a way to “ease it in” by having it be a moderate Republican with military credentials. So yes, there has been a sort of an expectation that America will react better to a standard-mainstream-positioned centrist candidate who happens to be Black, rather than to one fully “coming from” the SPOCetc.experience (you need to work on that initialism, y’know) and running as The Black Candidate.
True. I purposely made the acronym clumsy, so it wouldn’t resemble anything already out there. (To do otherwise would run the risk of another round of “you’re saying she’s not really [xyz]??”.
Anyway, I think it’s time to move on. Nobody’s perfect, but the consensus here and we’ll beyond is that she’s a good pick, strategically and otherwise, and will make a fine VP, and a fine POTUS, too, if that happens (whether through voting, or through the heartbeat-away thing).
I’ll sign off on this thread by mentioning what another poster did: at the Biden-Harris coming-out talk in Delaware, how refreshing that Biden insisted on a VP who would sometimes present him with an opposing or alternative point of view.
It is interesting to read Politifact, the MAGA hatters and the Kremling are pumping out all sorts of lies about Harris.
Almost 400 posts in this thread since I last logged on. I’ll just say I am firmly ensconced on the Biden-Harris bandwagon.
The only downside to Harris is it means Joe couldn’t talk Michelle into running with him.
Seriously, I mentioned this in the early stages of this thread, but it keeps coming up when friends ask me how I feel about Harris.
Picking a VP was Biden’s first “presidential” decision, and it reassured me that he’d listen to others, weigh many factors (and in this case, re-weigh them), and then make a wise choice.
I seem to be the only one of my friends who was energized by everyone on Biden’s short list (even the longer ‘wild speculation’ list). Was there anyone there who would’ve been a problematic choice?
Michelle Obama’s qualifications are, basically, who she’s married to. She seems like a smart woman, but there are lots of smart women. She might not be the smartest eligible woman named “Michelle.” Kamala Harris actually has experience as an elected public servant.
FWIW, the tiny town of Luray, where this happened, had a protest march against the mayor right after he said it.
The Harris pick has the curious quality of being both boring and safe and yet exciting because of her background and what it represents. The story of a daughter of immigrants from India and Jamaica on a major party ticket is itself a sharp riposte to Trumpism. In general, the Democrats are too obsessed with demographic tickboxes but in this moment perhaps it was appropriate. Her prosecutor background will provide the ticket with additional cover on the law and order issue which could become more prominent especially if there are more riots. Overall it’s a good pick for the immediate purpose of winning the election.
Having said all this, there are reasons to be skeptical about her as a future Presidential candidate which has now become much more likely. She is average at both the poetry of campaign rhetoric and the prose of public policy proposals which is why her own campaign went nowhere and floundered badly on health care in particular. Her main gift appears to be climbing the political ladder and she is exactly the kind of careerist candidate who loses winnable elections. At the least there needs to be a serious challenger whenever she does decide to run.
Frank Bruni, a New York Times columnist, agrees with you that she is not good at conveying her personal story in a way that would make an emotional connection with voters.
Yeah I read that column and it really underscored how much good material there was in her life story which, if deployed well, could have connected with so many groups within the Democratic coalition: Blacks, Asians, working mothers. I just hope the Biden people can get her a good speechwriter and coach and she can raise her performance at the convention and the rest of the campaign.
That stuff can be worked on. I mean Biden can surely help her with that. I’m sure someone along the way told her not to get too personal about her background and she has to unlearn that.
Who says he even wanted to?
I’ll never understand Michelleism (and in a broader sense, I am a big believer in taking an “I’m not interested” at face value). But hey, if/when she’s had a term in the Senate or a major Cabinet department under her belt? Different story.
For this job I want someone who IS actively interested and has been overtly working to earn it all along.
Could be, she probably “trained” herself to not use it so as to have broader appeal outside the identity-group ecosystem, and perhaps also dodge the whole moronic “is she really Black as we mean it” debate. But yes, she has the intelligence to be able to learn to use it as a positive. (IMO, when she tried to use her life experience in the primary debates to try and hit Biden on the busing issue, it landed clumsily and was ineffective.)
If she runs for president she will be running either as a VP after Biden’s term(s) or as an incumbent if god forbid something happens to Biden.
Her life story is less important then than the accomplishments of the administration. The prose of her policy proposals less than what policies have been enacted and how she has advocated for them.
If Biden’s term(s) are successful then she has a good shot. If not? A great life story well told and visionary policy proposals well articulated won’t do her much.
Agreed. It played against her established brand and was inauthentic. She has an authentic American Black experience but her authentic experience, as the daughter of an academic physician and a Stanford professor, was not the little brown girl who if not for busing would have been denied a good education.
Sure but in a close election it also matters whether enough voters like and trust you. Particularly if the Biden administration is middling: avoiding major scandals and enacting some useful regulations but unable to achieve massive legislative victories. This is a pretty plausible scenario and will leave Harris in a neutral position where a lot will depend on her personal connection with voters.
In that sense I think her ability to sell her story in the next few months will shape her long-term political trajectory.
Can you point me to an election she has ever lost?
No but I don’t think a string of election wins in a very blue state mean much for a Presidential run.