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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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. 
Soooo…The strategy is going to be “She acts like a woman!” and overanalyzing her speech patterns to point out her womanly flaws?
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.
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?
That is rather sexist of you to automatically associate an emotional outburst with the female gender.
Riiiigggghhht :rolleyes:
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.
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?”
Nah, because she is not going to push some big plan to implement busing, top down.
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.
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.
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
I don’t think the Democrats were planning on getting your vote anyway.
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.
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.
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…
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.