We’ve had this a hundred times in the press. It’s not useful to pick on some thing of hers. She is just attempting to speak the language of white male voters. Not sure how Trump did it, but they bonded with him.
Don’t mean to take this out of context, but it made me immediately think of Obama’s “Better is Good”. The part of his speech is right up there with Teddy Roosevelt’s “The Man in the Arena” speech. Here is the part, softly edited:
Better is good. That’s the history of progress in this country — not perfect, better.
The Civil Rights Act did not end racism, but it made things better. Social Security did not eliminate all poverty for seniors, but it made things better for millions of people. Do not let people tell you the fight’s not worth it because you won’t get everything you want.
The idea that well, there is racism in America so, I am not going to bother voting because there is no point. That makes no sense because you can make it better. Better is always worth fighting for.
Sensible, pragmatic, wise, and somehow extremely inspiring.
So to the OP, being irked with a candidate on several issues is perfectly fine and reasonable. It would almost be odd if you were not (ie, you’d be like a cult Trump supporter). It’s just about keeping things in the proper perspective and playing the long game, which is the only game that gets things accomplished.
Just to amplify that point a bit …
And there is nothing – not anywhere down into my DNA --that has me even the least bit skeptical that Harris/Walz would abide by the rule of law, the Constitution, and the norms and traditions of our Democracy.
IMHO, they would play by the rules, seek to use those rules to their advantage where possible, and seek to amend or alter those rules where necessary.
By all of the usual and customary procedures.
But at no point would I ever imagine them setting the playbook on fire.
As opposed to the other Presidential candidate…
Yes, yes, yes. Better is good.
When I listen to centrists, I get annoyed by their lack of courage to fight for needed changes, and that makes me lean to progressives.
When I listen to progressives, I get annoyed by their pitching programs that have no chance of passing, and that makes me lean to centrists.
Obama was a centrist who got important bills, like the ACA, passed. Biden is a centrist who got important bills, like the Inflation Reduction Act, passed. I’m always startled when I read fulminations about how leftist, progressive, and socialist they were. History will treat them well, especially when looking at the ridiculous levels of obstruction they had to overcome.
Harris did run in 2009 as a progressive, touting policies that had no chance. I have to hope that Biden chose her to keep pushing for those policies as VP, and not just because she was the DEI hire that conservatives slander her as.
She is now doing the only sensible maneuver, abandoning policies with no chance and reversing herself on those issues, as well as handing out large generalities that appeal to the majority. Moving closer to Biden without actually mentioning him by name.
Fortunately, the party’s progressives seem to understand that they have to shut up for six more weeks. Love you guys, but this is the time to win. Nothing else matters.
I think of Biden as an honest-to-gosh liberal. He turned into one on Inauguration Day. The first liberal president since LBJ (although I’ve heard the claim that Nixon was the last liberal president). Looking forward to another liberal administration with Harris.
So of those three I have no problem with two of them…
- There is another thread about her gun comments. Tl;Dr: they are are not a change in gun policy from any other democratic candidate in recent history, and I think putting it in an emotive attention grabbing way like this is a very good thing. I want to see more of this.
- The fracking thing is just politics in the real world. A Californian politician has different policies in the primary to when she is running for president 5 years later (for a policy that specifically effects a vital general election swing state)? That’s just a fact of life for politicians who want to get elected.
The tip thing is a bit dumb IMO. It’s a stupid policy that is being proposed as a blatant bit of pandering. But ultimately Harris has shown excellent political instincts in every call she’s made, and she is well aware of what’s at stake here (much more than any of us). If she thinks a bit of dumb pandering is whats called for at this point in the election then I’m going to give her the benefit of the doubt.
I came in to post about the tip business, but got mass-ninjaed on it. If after including tips you’re still making less than say $30,000, you aren’t paying much tax anyway. If after including tips you’re making $100,000, then you can afford the tax. Tax should be based on your total income, no matter if paid by employer or by tip.
Very good post. I was going to post something very much like it, but you worded it better.
For each issue there are three related but distinct policies
- The policy the candidate promises in their campaign
- The policy the candidate actually wants
- The policy the candidate can pass
Of these three the only one that matters is the third one. Which generally means that at the end of the day the choices really come down either a slightly left of center policy, a slightly right of center policy*, or nothing.
Since I am left of center I will vote Democrat the general, and in the primary I don’t worry too much about the policy specifics and instead concentrate on who I think is most likely to 1) win, 2) get laws passed, 3) manage the executive branch and foreign policy.
*unless Trump succeeds in destroying Democratic norms and enacting dictatorial powers in which case radically right is on the table
Pretty much this encapsulates it.
I’m okay with her pandering if it works. It’s a bad idea and it helps sell her to many in Nevada in particular. Fine. It get through Congress. Not without major changes anyway.
Reality is that, progressive or centrist in her heart of hearts, is going to be left of where the center of mass in Congress will be, and will be working to get some small amounts of very basic left center stuff done and to continue the process of undoing harms the Trump administration had done. She is correct to be vague on policy as this thread shows, every specific will get someone complaining. What she runs on as policies are starting points for legislation to be developed and horse traded on at best.
But those who know that are not the target and don’t decide elections.
Once she is in office and doesn’t get Congress to pass her plans? The economy will continue to improve. She will likely get credit for it despite the fact that it isn’t because of her. Good.
So do I.
The Dems have had a long and distressing history of throwing this or that marginalized group under the bus in order to win support. This Administration has thrown none of its citizens under the bus. Not Blacks, not LGBTQ+ persons, not unions, not women and abortion rights, not low-income people. For the past three and a half years, for the first time since I started identifying as a Democrat, I have been consistently proud to be a Democrat - not just for a moment here or there, but all the time.
Me too, very much so.
Yep. And the Treasury dept will put in their opinion. But there has been a LOT of talk about fixing the minimum wage laws so that tipped employees get the same as everyone else. I think that would be the compromise.
Yep. and anything too radical wont go unless Harris get a super majority, and maybe not even then. Not to mention The dems are NOT gonna get 60 in the Senate.If they get 51, I will be really happy.
Exactly.
Not to mention a bipartisan gun control bill.
But to me, Biden and Obama are/were slightly left of center.
This is VERY wrong. Right Wing Populists make “pie in the sky promises” that they either know they cant pass- or it just cant happen. trump could not bring back those crappy manufacturing jobs- it aint the 50’s no more. America isnt the only nation with factories that werent bombed to rubble in ww2 anymore. (Man the 1950’s were a golden time of American manufacturing, we more or less made the only cars, etc in the world)
So, when certain Politicians make promises just to get elected- and that has worked- see trump in 2016, and the Tories with Brexit- they most certainly do matter.
I was saying that in terms of what policy gets enacted only the third one matters. The candidate can say that they are going to ban assault weapons, they may actually want to ban all guns, but if they can’t get either of those through congress (and the supreme court), everyone is going to be able to keep their guns.
The show Frontline on PBS has put out a video exploring the history of each candidate. Frontline published the one for Harris/Trump yesterday. They note a moment in Harris’ past where she opposed the death penalty for someone who killed a cop (she wanted life in prison and got that) and she was (figuratively) beaten-up badly for doing so. The video makes the case that this very much informed he future politics and steering to the middle.
The whole video is worth a watch (I love Frontline) and it is long (nearly two hours). If you want the bit mentioned above jump to @47:00 in the video. That section is only a few minutes long.
Sure, but if the idea is NOT to actually ban anything, but just to lie and get elected- getting elected is the winning end goal.
OK if you apply what I said to an entirely different context, then sure you’re right.
IME the tipping thing is something both candidates are saying, and both know the score on how likely it will get thru congress. I am not sure who said it first, but the other camp probably identified it as a throw-away campaign promise, and just decided it was an easy way to nullify any potential gains it may have garnered among likely voters and attention in the press. I dont think Harris or Trump actually think they’re going to do anything in this space if elected.
I had her on in the background earlier today. She’s kind of boring as a speaker. Whatever.
I’ve said it before, if her only policy position was Stomping Kittens, she’s still head and shoulders better than the alternative. There is just no real question.
And how many times has she mentioned no tax on tips?
When Harris has committed as many crimes and divulges vague plans to overthrow democracy like her opposition, that’s when I’ll start to complain about her campaign.
Trumpers: Kamala has no plan! Open borders!
(Vice presiddnts have few plans of their own.)
Kamala lays out plan.
Trumpers: she is flipflopping! First she has no plan, now she has a plan. She is just a chameleon. Just like Trump said! Flipflopping from Indian to black.