Harris doesn’t have the chops or the state to be Prez. Coming from CA gets you nuthin. You need to come from a Southern or Rust belt state. Colorado is no biggie but it can be a swing state. The critical states are: Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Wisconsin . Any southern state is also good.
And why Harris? Can you name anything she has done? Any big speeches or bills? Are you in favor just because of her sex, race, and political leanings?
And Harris is super anti-gun, which will cost her the moderate gun owner crowd.
The Dems have a big problem in that the type of candidate they need to actually win is someone like Bill Clinton - a southern governor with a track record of relative moderation from the center left. Someone like Phil Bredesen would work.
The problem is that the Democrats have moved hard left, and a person like that would never get the nomination. So I expect the Democrats to put up someone like Kamala Harris or Cory Booker or Elizabeth Warren - and lose again.
Going after Trump’s character is not going to work, since there’s not a single Republican out there who isn’t aware of Trump’s faults. They don’t care. You guys keep dredging up scandal after scandal, and it makes no impact on the electorate at all. Trump’s character issues have been fully discounted. Unless you can find a dead body, it won’t matter.
Democrats have to get back to politics and win by convincing the public that they will be better stewards of the economy. That’s what people actually care about. Show them why you are a better choice if you want their vote. Screaming at Republicans, chasing them out of restaraunts, clawing at the Supreme Court doors - these are loser moves that are alienating everyone who isn’t already in your base.
So, assuming the list I cited above is correct, we’re down to Hickenlooper and Klobuchar. There’s a bumper sticker for you. The home state thing is overrated. The last two Democratic nominees were from big blue States, and Trump won without carrying New York.
I like Harris because of her political leanings, and to be perfectly honest I do think it’s important for the sake of turning out the base that the ticket not be a couple of old white guys. I also like Booker. I would like Sanders, Merkley or Warren too, but I judge them as too old and/or worse general election candidates than Harris.
And I also think some ideological balance would be good for the ticket. So if you want a centrist white guy for the top of the ticket, which a lot of people here seem to, Harris checks all the balance boxes.
We nominated Hillary Clinton, a moderate liberal. So, no the Dems have not moved hard left.
Yes, Kamala Harris or Elizabeth Warren - will result in a Dem loss.
Yes, it will. Sure it wont change his core voter.
But it can change the millions of Independents, progressives, and such that voted 3rd party or stayed home last election. It can also change the votes of a few moderate GOpers. But all the Dems need is for the Independents, progressives, and such… and the Dem moderate stalwarts- to vote dem. The Dems dont need to move a single GOP voter.
Saying that someone is acceptable as VP but not as President seems odd…you know the VP’s job description, right? Or do you just mean electability-wise? And if Biden isn’t too old, then Sanders isn’t, either, so Sanders-Duckworth for the win! But they are.
Because Harris has not enough experience. Why do you like her- be specific.
Sanders is too leftist and lost the last time. Many Dems are also unhappy with him as he didnt try to curbs his fans and also took too long to concede.
Sanders is a decent guy, and got what he wanted on the platform.
I respectfully ask Thing Fish to make one emendation.
I’ve shown six candidates, five of whom survive to your “take seriously” list.
Castro – big-city Mayor , Cabinet secretary.
Harris - state Attorney General; Senator
Gillibrand – attorney for Philip Morris; legislator
Merkley – Oregon NGO’s, legislator
Klobuchar – county Attorney, U.S. Senator
Schatz – Lt. Governor of small very-blue state; appointed Senator
I’m not overly impressed with “Senator” (Recall that JFK, BHO and Harding were the only modern-era Senators to be elected to the Big Job) but will agree that Harris clearly has the 2nd-best resume in the above list.
The very best resume? (And why don’t you take him seriously??) Julian Castro. By far. Big-city Mayor trumps State Atty Gen. Active Cabinet Secretary trumps Senator. There were some other ex-Mayors on the list. Any others from one of the seven largest cities in these United States?
Biden-Castro : would be outstanding if Biden weren’t too old.
Castro-Harris : might be perfect but will the racists think both are “ethnic”?
Hickenlooper-Castro : who gets the top spot?
I’m not sure of the exact pairing. But these are the names to look at: Castro, Biden, Harris, maybe Hickenlooper. Cross everyone else off the list, please.
Hang on: I’ll grant that, like you just said, “Senator” has been in short supply on the modern-era list of Elected-To-The-Big-Job folks.
But compared to Cabinet Secretary? Just how many of those folks would appear on a similar modern-era Elected-To-The-Big-Job list?
(And, look, fair enough on leaving out Truman and LBJ and Nixon, since their time in the Senate wasn’t the point — but it’s still there, as a credential, in the modern era. When, in the modern era, has a Cabinet Secretary stint been that?)
Kamala Harris was District Attorney of the City and County of San Francisco for 7 years, and Attorney General of the largest state for 6 years. U.S. Senator may be a more prestigious job than Attorney General of California, but if you think it’s a more challenging job let me just shake my head.
I’m not knowledgeable to judge the job Ms. Harris did as a 13-year top prosecutor. I know there was some controversy. Like many in law enforcement, Ms. Harris isn’t fond of guns; I guess that disqualifies her in the eyes of many.
As for Cabinet secretaries being “promoted” to President, I guess Taft and Hoover are the only 20th-century examples. Castro, BTW, has a twin brother in the news for asking for an intelligence probe into Jared Kushner and the possible naming of Khashoggi as Trump’s enemy. Maybe vehement anti-Trumpism is a minus. (Maybe just having a twin brother is a drawback for some peculiar reason.)
And to be clear, my zeroing in on Castro, Harris, and Hickenlooper isn’t due to any great infatuation. It’s due to desperation: If not them, Who?
Well, I can tell you that Harris isnt all that popular even here in CA, even among Democrats. And she has done nothing of real note as AG or senator.
Her main qualifications seem to be:
Black
Female.
Great PR firm.
Not that she is terrible, mind you. As a Veep, to “balance the ticket” and get 4-8 years more experience, she could be just fine.
Actually most LEOs like guns- but only in their hands.
If Julian Castro runs, could we count on him to win Texas? If so, that would be a big plus for him.
She seems slightly more charismatic than some of the other toutees. Anyway, all my suggested pairings with her at all, show her in the VP slot. And I don’t want her as VP unless the #1 slot is taken by a white male. I’m not prejudiced but I think a large portion of voters are.
I just don’t see who our knight in shining armor will be. America sure needs one now. Are we sure Admiral McRaven is out of the running?
I think Hickenlooper’s chance is about equal to one of my mentionees.
I Googled the two names you mentioned that I’d never heard of. Googling “phil bredesen for president” gets just one real hit — a newspaper item from a Nashville newspaper in 2002 when Bredeson was a frisky 58 year-old. Bill Nelson may be a great guy, but he’s even older than Bredeson.
Strong turn-out among young people is key to Democratic victory. Yes, they turned out for Bernie Sanders, but would they turn out for a moderate near-octogenerian?
They’d turn out for Biden- IF the party balanced him with a young progressive.
And i think that is out best best- a moderate/liberal white dude, from a southern or rust belt state= with a young, energetic, minority and/or female progressive.
I mean, I’d be open to considering him (as well as LA Mayor Eric Garcetti, but historically “big city Mayor” hasn’t been a launching pad to the Presidency. OTOH, the Dems are increasingly a party of urbanites, so maybe it’s time that could change.
Are we sure Admiral McRaven is out of the running?