https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/if-biden-isnt-the-democrats-2024-candidate-harris-will-be.html
Polls show Democrats broadly like Harris, think she’s electable, and prefer her to other rising stars in the party.
Good god! NO! Have they learned nothing from 2016???
There's a woman running for president, that seems to be the democrats only option (only because nobody is giving Bernie Sanders the time of day......for some reason......), and an entire nation, both on the left AND on the right, who are saying "Ew, no, we don't want her.....". Opposing her is trump, which one side of the election actively DO want to be president. So they'll have no troube with their voting decision.
And then there's the undecided voter. They don't like either option, but they see that even the left isn't happy with their choice, but the right IS happy with their choice......so from that logic, it sounds like they should vote republican, because they don't like either option, but at least SOME people DO like this option. And that's how trump becomes president.
The only question is, did I just describe 2016, or 2024?
It's such a low bar for the DNC to just put forth a viable candidate, and all they've come up with is a controversial president's wife who doesnt know when to shut up and not tank her own (and others) campaign, a genocidal geriatric strike-breaker, and now, after nearly two decades of blatant, recorded police abuse and widespread protests against police... President "female bad-cop".
Which is insane........because if Michelle Obama even HINTED at running, it would re-energize the entire democratic party.
I mean I guess the same could also be said about Taylor Swift, but personally I would want her to do some lower positions. We've all seen how terrible a president with no experience can go.
Third party, until the "first past the post" system is treated like a Russian who pissed off Putin (defenestration/thrown out the window) and replaced with ranked choice voting, isnt a viable option either at this time.
This is a weird take. As an independent I'd much prefer Harris to Biden. I don't really have anything against her.
But yeah, I'd much, much, MUCH rather have Bernie.
I find it interesting how many self identified leftists are cheering and welcoming a racist and corrupt cop as president of the United States.
Like, this isn’t even about the whole “anyone but trump” or “vote 3rd party” war.
The crowd claiming to be the left are just straight up cheering for cops.
Fascinating how I see the left continually blamed for not meeting Dems in the middle with that 1930s Germany copypasta and yet it’s only one of them constantly shifting right.
Since apparently a rabid mob comes up every time someone touches this topic, yes I understand what’s at stake and will be voting accordingly.
I’m sure all these self proclaimed leftists will be there to advocate for the local socialist parties after we secure the presidency right? …right?
Not I. ACAB. She had a history of horrible policies.
Kamala Harris is a complicated choice for some LGBTQ+ people
https://19thnews.org/2020/08/kamala-harris-complicated-lgbtq-choice/
I have some reservations (need to research her more) as she was relatively progressive in an American context it seems.
If anyone has more starting points for my research, I am absolutely open.
However, for the moment she’s a “NO” from me. Even at the most forgiving judgements, it seems she sent away a whole bunch of poor people and did nothing about the system that is driving them to crime.
Ah also her weird racism, nepotism, and stances on LGBT issues. Who refers to art in their home by the ethnicity of the artist???
Another one for you. As a Californian, we knew she was bad. That's why she dropped out polling 5th in the primary.
The Human Costs Of Kamala Harris’ War On Truancy. The "progressive prosecutor" wanted to transform how California responded to students missing school. Parents like Cheree Peoples wound up paying the price.
Good info on her background, thank you! As a former Orange resident this is especially disappointing to read this story and how the mother and child were treated.
Harris has since replaced her punitive stance with the message that parents of truant children need help, not scare tactics. It’s a shift that happened roughly in step with voters’ waning tolerance for using the criminal justice system to address complicated social problems and Harris’ own preparations to seek higher office.
Emphasis mine
She’s a cop, down to her core. She’s got the mentality that “I can fix social problems through the threat and use of coercive state violence”. That was her law, that she asked for, I assumed drafted/guided, and defended publicly… until she ran for the Oval Office, and was made to choose compassion.
Yeah, it's all performative ladder climbing bullshit.
Why black voters never flocked to Kamala Harris https://www.politico.com/news/2019/12/04/kamala-harris-black-voters-2020-075651
It was wild to see how fast the hype around her candidacy deflated. Admittedly, I got wrapped up in it up until I heard her talk for the second time.
She did something about the system. She defended it. On two occasions she opposed the release of people who had convictions overturned by demonstrating actual innocence to appellate courts on the basis of legal technicalities, in both cases her office argued that they had waited too long to file a petition to be released. Her office argued against the release of inmates eligible for parole after a federal court ruled that the extreme overcrowding in California prisons was cruel and unusual on the basis that releasing the prisoners would reduce prison labor.
She helped with a cover up of an employee at the state crime lab who falsified testing results. The truth came out after the employee was arrested for stealing drugs from the lab and hundreds of convictions were overturned. She defended a police detective that falsified a confession to coerce a defendant into accepting a plea deal. She opposed requiring police to use body worn cameras. She opposed legislation that would have required her office to review police shootings.
She consistently declined to investigate allegations of police and prosecutor misconduct including police shootings of unarmed people. Eventually she had to for the police, it got to the point that the justice department eventually stepped in to investigate an incident where a group of officers surrounded a mentally ill man with a steak knife and shot him 21 times after Harris refused to review the case. While she cooperated with the federal investigation into the police shooting, she backed the prosecutor who had his entire office removed from a case because of proven misconduct including hiding exonerating evidence.
Racism really? You mean being positive about being black? I only ever see bigots referring to black folk as racist.
She had a history of horrible policies.
The idea that voters vote based on policy rather than loyalty is totally incomprehensible to the Democratic party.
Calling out Red MAGA is fine but don't you dare call out Blue MAGA.
Saying that Democrats will vote for literal Genocide if it means Republicans don't win really hurts their feelings. And like the Republicans they will explain that if the other guy wins it would be worse.
Yes these are the same people that tell you that Biden hasn't gotten anything impactful done because the president really doesn't have that much power while following that up with claims that Trump would completely end democracy the minute he gets elected. This is a variation of an argument first coined by fascists who claim that their enemy is both weak and all powerful.
They keep saying that Democrats fall in love while Republicans fall in line, but clearly haven't internalized it.
Because Republicans clearly love Trump, and Democrats keep ordering their base to fall in line.
You realize you are part of the rabid mob too then? Instead of listening to people with which you mostly politically agree, you immediately resort to shitting on and scapegoating them by jumping to a wild conclusion. This type of rhetoric is equally unhelpful.
And that’s a fair assessment as well. It is a scapegoat to say those folks don’t support other leftist policies.
However I must disagree that my conclusion was wild.
My train of thought is, people say they support making peoples lives better and implementing policies proven to work and be more cost effective.
When it comes time to ‘nut up’ and do it, their chosen representatives roll over and compromise and refuse to use the same governing tools used against them to stop the rise of fascism.
Republicans famously grind the country to a halt with a minority. It’s their whole shtick, and yet they sail through these fascist policies nationwide with no fighting back from the Feds.
Is it truly that like minded when the purpose of a system is what it does, and my fellow patriots choose the continued decline of society driven by capitalism?
This, I believe, is the source of this leftist’s anger. Open denial of genocide by party leaders, while capital interests make life shittier literally every day, and no way out between “shit choice” and “literal fascist”.
My stake is that democrats aren’t Nazis. They just dont mind them very much. In fact your political opponents being actual nazis improves your election chances.
There is no left wing in American politics.
No they are just complicit in the most obvious Genocide since 1940 while denying it is a Genocide.
Nothing Nazi to see here. The Nazis were bad because they called themselves socialists. Not the Genocide thing right?
Are you agreeing in a contrary fashion? I am not sure what point you’re trying to make with your sarcasm. Seems like friendlyfire.
They’re not the one actively doing the genocide themselves. They have actual nazis to do the dirty work for them and thats useful to maintain in power.
Actual Nazis are a minority. People who don't mind using nazis to accomplish all kinds of vile deeds are plenty.
If anything i think that makes them worse then actuals nazis because the nazis i know irl at least have some excuse of being to simple minded to understand they are getting played by politics.
With there is no left wing politics in America i mean i consider democrats are right wing. Bidden is authoritarian right winger and hes cool with weaponizing nazis.
And yet the alternative… still worse… insanse planet.
Oh no I heavily disagree. Joe Biden plays the crucial role making israel's Genocide possible. Without Netanyahu israel could continue the Genocide. Without Joe Biden they could not. He is in my book a straight up Nazi.
In fact Joe Biden himself has something to say.
'I am a Zionist': How Joe Biden's lifelong bond with Israel shapes war policy
When Joe Biden met with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his war cabinet during his visit to Israel, the U.S. president assured them: "I don't believe you have to be a Jew to be a Zionist, and I am a Zionist."
Ok yeah that quote is fascist what the actual fuck.
The thing is. I have been talking here on very left and progressive Lemmy (at least a few months ago) about the Democrats are clearly right wing. And not at all center and not at all trying to be progressive (besides some tokens for the mass) and people, progressives that should be allies have been responding with so much hate because they are assuming i am saying “both sides are just as bad, theres no point voting D which must mean i want Trump to have his fantasy”
I cant imagine people being more acceptive to what you’re saying but you have my moral support.
Hey dude how does one fail to commit a genocide for 85 year while actively trying? With a massive power imbalance?
I love it when assholes refer to the Black and Indian woman as a racist. You could say someone of color is bigoted, but racism requires institutional control, and as far as I know black people don't have that kind of power. I would know I go to all the meetings, they have all you can eat catering.
She'd be a very successful candidate no doubt, if the DNC allowed it. You've seen how they did Bernie and he's an old white guy. I can't imagine them going for AOC. They're a fundamentally conservative organisation that exists to vet candidates and prevent anyone with the will to make "actual change" from being in a position to.
Also, they've argued in court that they are not a democratic organisation. They can block nominations entirely unilaterally, to one of the only two parties that can realistically field a presidential candidate. The other party is much more openly corrupt, which is a genuine achievement.
The US electoral system is entirely captured by corporate interests.
If AOC gets more votes than their conservative candidate in the swing states they might grudgingly take her. She likely would not get more votes because the Repubs have been on a propaganda campaign to discredit her since forever.
You're assuming the DNC even wants to win.
They are a corporate machine with a lot of the same donors as Republicans. Their job is to provide a nominal resistance to the oligarchy, not actually win, govern, or fix things. That's why they don't want Bernie who is not on board with their mission. He was so popular his ideas dominated the primaries, so the DNC pulled out all the stops to keep him from winning, because it would've been very hard to maintain their soft obstructionism with him pushing on so many issues from the bully pulpit.
This is part of why I think you actually should vote for the Dem candidate as long as they're not the raging fascist that Trump is - they don't care about your protest vote or whatever. They will just lose, shrug their shoulders and start fund-raising for the next season where they will continue to be the only viable option because of deeply entrenched structural obstacles to any alternative.
Unfortunately there's no chance the middle majority would accept her, she'd be super popular with 30% but really struggle with the rest
Yes, but...
As the Nation is now we'd have to spend a term preparing everyone for it. Her running would realistically begin within weeks after the office is occupied. Lightly, yes, though running still.
Isn't she under the minimum age? Realistically, we should lower it, but until then it's the law...
She will be older than the minimum before election day. But she's not running so it's a moot point.
If she does eventually decide to run, she'll have to beat both parties.
Sure, and Thor would have better chances than Trump. But why compare a normal candidate to a force of fucking nature?
How to lose another election against an actual anti-democracy fascist who couldn't pass a turning test 101.
Or they'll just hide it like they did with Reagan. Someone at this level isn't just going to give up that office.
Really doesn't feel like a democracy when you have to vote for one side because the other is straight up fascist
Yep… time to block this community from my feed. All it seems to be is a place where everyone that has been banned from other communities for sharing misinformation to post their rhetoric.
He says that about anything that isn't performative worship of Biden's support for genocide.
New York Times is now misinfo/propaganda because it didn't instantly say Biden is the best candidate since FDR. I'm really enjoying how liberals are becoming conservatives with "Anything that disagrees with my party is paid off misinfo".
Nice to know that a lot of you would vote for a slaver. Oops, sorry, forgot she is black, so that makes it okay.
Fact check: Kamala Harris is “a cop whose family owned slaves in Jamaica” claim is missing context
The NYT article linked in that Reuters article is missing.
From what i can tell the Top Cop story is pretty accurate.
The Atlantic argued in an op-ed that she doesn’t say enough when pressed about criticisms about her track record, “like that she fought hard to keep innocents in prison and failed to fight hard against corrupt cops.”
Biden was also known as the "tough on crime guy" being a co-writer of one of the largest incarceration laws so they fit together perfectly. Two Republicans cosplaying as Democrats.
The slave owner family criticism is indeed far less relevant as a link to 1800's has like 32/64 people in the parents tree and chances are one of those will be a slave owner but 200 years later that's not super relevant to the children.
The NYT article linked in that Reuters article is missing.
i have to admit i don't really know much about her prosecutorial history, so i am not going to argue about that.
a slave owner but 200 years later that’s not super relevant to the children
it is not relevant even if it is your parent. your parents are unique and independent individuals and you can't be responsible for their actions.
it can be problematic, to a degree, if you somehow profited from it, but that is really not the case here.
I was more talking about how the American justice system is legal slavery. By being the primary cause of incarcerating people, Haris is a slaver.
No she isn't a slaver, that argument never works when used against one of us. And it's not an argument any decent liberal or progressive would use.
By being the primary cause of incarcerating people
primary cause of incarcerating people is people committing crime.
ffs. The USA has a long standing history of creating bs laws to incarcerate people. Do you seriously believe it is reasonable for someone to get 20 years in prison for a few flecks of weed. That also doesn't cover the police's long standing tradition of making up shit. Also also legality =/= morality
Do you seriously believe it is reasonable for someone to get 20 years in prison for a few flecks of weed
i don't.
where is this happening? and was harris prosecuting in place where this is happening? and why did you chose her as the "primary reason"? why not the arresting officers or judge? and why not the stupid decision to carry a weed when it is punishable by 20 years in prison?
That also doesn’t cover the police’s long standing tradition of making up shit.
and how is that the prosecutor's fault?
Also also legality =/= morality
yeah... and?
you are just cherry-picking random unconnected trivia that doesn't even support your conclusion.
Wow, just look at all these unconnected facts that are said to contribute to systemic racism. Yup, totally unconnected.
You should delete this comment. I don't tolerate anyone referring to a black person as a slaver.
So... instead of a conman cosplaying as a fascist, you might be getting a pig - someone well-versed in the business of fascism.
This just keeps getting better and better.
Yeah, I'd vote Harris without complaint. That's basically our closest path to normality.
Without complaint? Really? The only thing she has going for her over Biden is he age
I'd vote for her the same way I'd vote for Biden - begrudgingly
Honestly I think that's a great example of just how low my bar is at this point, younger than ancient and not trump is enough to get me excited.
She a scumbag cop guess if your wanting to speed run to police state faster she be your choice.
I do not honestly think she would make the police state worse as the lead Democrat nominee. She has been and would continue to be pushed to be more progressive to keep her job.
Whose pushing the top dems to be more progressive? If anything it's thenexact opposite. We essentially have two right wing parties now.
Ok...a right wing party that is pushing transgender rights, supports abortion rights, has the most progressive platform in U.S. history...I'll take it.
Her approval rating is lower than Biden's...
Voters have real doubts about Kamala Harris as potential president, poll finds
https://www.politico.com/news/2024/06/12/kamala-harris-favorability-poll-00162093
Just like they had doubt about Hillary. Show me one woman presidential nominee that polls over 50% in the US.
