Kamala Harris is Joe Biden's Vice Presidential running mate

[Ocarina_117]

The more I read about Kamala Harris the more bemused I am regarding the reception around all of this.

Said earlier in the thread... she can't absolutely get fucked with the shit she pulled regarding Sikhs.

Is the reception due to it being the best of a bad bunch as opposed to her being a good person/politician?

 

[Narroo]

fyi

Just An FYI, Condoleezza Rice And Susan Rice Are Not The Same Person | Essence

The Hill caught a good old Twitter dragging after posting a photo of Condoleezza Rice with a story about Susan Rice

www.essence.com

Click to shrink...

Cr***p. I could have sworn I saw people talking about "Condi Rice" being a VP pick earlier in some other threads. I thought it was bizarre that she was being considered and thought it was part of Biden's "Reach across the aisle approach."

This is embarrassing.

 

[Deleted member 35987]

9/10 democrats and more popular than Joe. Hmm, must be the best of a bad lot decision. Man, women of color with that magnifying glass level scrutiny.

 

[Powdered Egg]

If her voting record is very progressive, whats the concern about where the domations come from? Do you feel she will do a 180? That she was just progressive in congress..for reasons?

Click to shrink...

Where your donations come from makes a huge difference and shows who you are beholden to.

There's a difference between raising $20M from public donations vs $20M from a weapons manufacturer or the private prison lobby. There's not much patience anymore for politicians bankrolling of underhanded human rights abuses or fighting with both arms behind their backs when it comes to consumer protection.

 

[Deleted member 4346]

From the left Kamala Harris is an intensely-problematic figure, particularly in a year where millions of American participated in mass protests over criminal justice reform. The Democratic Party is hopelessly lost; the ticket is the racist architect of a crime bill which lead to mass black incarceration, joined with a former attorney general with her own grisly record. I guess it's hardly surprising at this point. I actually was quite high on her back in 2018, just looking at her voting record, but the more I learned of her time as AG it seemed to me to be disqualifying for 2020, and then of course here we are.

Really Harris has near-zero appeal to the left of the party despite her Senate record. What's her primary policy focus? She ran a primary campaign which was incoherent, ran away from M4A, accused Biden of racism and groping, and then joins his ticket. This is a pick for liberal Democrats, someone who is "safe" (aka the donors trust her to play ball, not an ideologue), younger, ticks the right boxes, and is admittedly probably prepared to assume the office of President in case Biden would fall ill or die in office.

Still seems to me that Harris might have been the safest pick of the bunch even if she doesn't deliver any particular bloc of voters. She's hard to attack from the right on ideological grounds as a former "tough on crime" AG, maybe the gun control stuff is an issue for some voters in the center? Republicans will have to go racist and sexist on her. Which they certainly will.

The Harris pick isn't enough to salvage this wretched ticket for me personally. Really terrible choices this year, worse than the 2016 ticket in some ways.

 

[Feep]

From the left Kamala Harris is an intensely-problematic figure, particularly in a year where millions of American participated in mass protests over criminal justice reform. The Democratic Party is hopelessly lost; the ticket is the racist architect of a crime bill which lead to mass black incarceration, joined with a former attorney general with her own grisly record. I guess it's hardly surprising at this point. I actually was quite high on her back in 2018, just looking at her voting record, but the more I learned of her time as AG it seemed to me to be disqualifying for 2020, and then of course here we are.

Really Harris has near-zero appeal to the left of the party despite her Senate record. What's her primary policy focus? She ran a primary campaign which was incoherent, ran away from M4A, accused Biden of racism and groping, and then joins his ticket. This is a pick for liberal Democrats, someone who is "safe" (aka the donors trust her to play ball, not an ideologue), younger, ticks the right boxes, and is admittedly probably prepared to assume the office of President in case Biden would fall ill or die in office.

Still seems to me that Harris might have been the safest pick of the bunch even if she doesn't deliver any particular bloc of voters. She's hard to attack from the right on ideological grounds as a former "tough on crime" AG, maybe the gun control stuff is an issue for some voters in the center? Republicans will have to go racist and sexist on her. Which they certainly will.

The Harris pick isn't enough to salvage this wretched ticket for me personally. Really terrible choices this year, worse than the 2016 ticket in some ways.

Click to shrink...

She appeals to me because she votes incredibly progressively. Everything else is secondary to me.

Of course, I don't know who a VP pick is really swaying regardless.

 

[Deleted member 11413]

The more I read about Kamala Harris the more bemused I am regarding the reception around all of this.

Said earlier in the thread... she can't absolutely get fucked with the shit she pulled regarding Sikhs.

Is the reception due to it being the best of a bad bunch as opposed to her being a good person/politician?

Click to shrink...

Most people here don't really care about the areas in which she is flawed. All of the legitimate critique of her record comes from the left, and comes further left than the majority of posters here. That's why.
"Best of a bad bunch" regarding the crop of candidates for VP and their progressiveness? Nope, but she's a safe choice. Which is why I've been confident she would be the pick since Biden wrapped up the nom.

 

[Deleted member 11413]

As opposed to who? Elizabeth Warren, the white lady who claimed Native American heritage, or Condoleezza Rice who was Bush's Nation Security Advisor and is still a Republican? Or maybe Bernie Sanders; the old white guy?

Or perhaps there's some more obscure politician that most people have never heard of that you'd like?

Who is this VP pick that would not be tone death nor bad?

Click to shrink...

The irony of you acting like the poster you are quoting couldn't come up with a woman of color more in line with their own politics while mistaking Susan Rice for fucking Condoleeza Rice is so fucking rich. Maybe you should just bow out of this conversation because you clearly have no clue wtf you are talking about.

Go have your "newscaster mistakes Samuel L Jackson for Lawrence Fishbourne" moment somewhere else

Thank God Gina Raimondo wasn't the pick - she actually is the kind of neoliberal centrist that still think it's 1998 that people think normal center-left Democrat's like Harris, Biden, Booker, etc. are.

Click to shrink...

Lol Biden is actually that neoliberal centrist too that's why he liked her so much. Article directly states he had to be talked down from picking her because the labor unions hate her so much. But keep up your historical revisionism of his record and see if that gets you anywhere. We all know we have to vote for him come November, least you could do is be honest about the man and his politics.

 

[Narroo]

The irony of you acting like the poster you are quoting couldn't come up with a woman of color more in line with their own politics while mistaking Susan Rice for fucking Condoleeza Rice is so fucking rich. Maybe you should just bow out of this conversation because you clearly have no clue wtf you are talking about.

Go have your "newscaster mistakes Samuel L Jackson for Lawrence Fishbourne" moment somewhere else


Lol Biden is actually that neoliberal centrist too that's why he liked her so much. Article directly states he had to be talked down from picking her because the labor unions hate her so much. But keep up your historical revisionism of his record and see if that gets you anywhere. We all know we have to vote for him come November, least you could do is be honest about the man and his politics.

Click to shrink...

OR, perhaps I didn't really start paying attention to politics too closely till around the Trump election, so I just didn't know who Susan Rice was. I knew Condoleeza Rice was because she was always on TV hawking the Afgan/Iraq war when I was a kid...when I actually watched TV.

Rice isn't exactly a common last name, so when you're skimming an article or a post and you see "Biden is considering former National Security Rice as his VP; she would be the first woman of color to hold the post." It's like: "Obviously that has to be Condoleeza Rice. I mean, what are the chances of there being another "Former National Security Advisor Rice" In the 8 years between the Bush and Trump administrations?"

Apparently....very high....

 

[24thFrame]

OR, perhaps I didn't really start paying attention to politics too closely till around the Trump election, so I just didn't know who Susan Rice was. I knew Condoleeza Rice was because she was always on TV hawking the Afgan/Iraq war when I was a kid...when I actually watched TV.

Rice isn't exactly a common last name, so when you're skimming an article or a post and you see "Biden is considering former National Security Rice as his VP; she would be the first woman of color to hold the post." It's like: "Obviously that has to be Condoleeza Rice. I mean, what are the chances of there being another "Former National Security Advisor Rice" In the 8 years between the Bush and Trump administrations?"

Apparently....very high....

Click to shrink...

Bro, take the L. You did a racism.

 

[Narroo]

Bro, take the L. You did a racism.

Click to shrink...

Oh fuck off. All because I'm not familiar with every possible political figure of color doesn't mean it was racially motivated. Again, how many "Rices" are there even in politics?

Hell, if you google "American Politics Rice" almost all of the results are about Condoleeza. It's not always about race; sometimes it's just an honest mixup.

Doubly so when you see other people making the mixup and not realizing it.

 

[MazeHaze]

Oh fuck off. All because I'm not familiar with every possible political figure of color doesn't mean it was racially motivated. Again, how many "Rices" are there even in politics?

Hell, if you google "American Politics Rice" almost all of the results are about Condoleeza. It's not always about race; sometimes it's just an honest mixup.

Doubly so when you see other people making the mixup and not realizing it.

Click to shrink...

Rice was widely known as one of the people being considered for the spot. If you're that unfamiliar with the current VP nominations maybe you shouldn't be talking down to posters who disagree with you, you seem too uninformed to be so hostile against the opinions of others.

I think Kamala is a better pick than Rice tbh, but I can see arguments for both

 

[jviggy43]

Lol Biden is actually that neoliberal centrist too that's why he liked her so much. Article directly states he had to be talked down from picking her because the labor unions hate her so much. But keep up your historical revisionism of his record and see if that gets you anywhere. We all know we have to vote for him come November, least you could do is be honest about the man and his politics.

Click to shrink...

Being dishonest about it is part of the reason why we continue getting people like Biden at the top of the ticket-who then go on to nominate people that will be the face of the party for the next 4-12 years for being VP and so on and so forth. If everyone was honest from the getgo we likely could have avoided all of this to begin with but alas. If you live in a swing state vote Biden to get Trump out of office. Thats really all the argumentation that should be required-trying to frame this ticket as "the most progressive ticket ever" isn't going to sway any progressives who know that thats an entirely meaningless argument within proper context (IE one of the least progressive candidates of the bunch + that sentiment will be true for every subsequent dem ticket moving forward). Biden is the neoliberal centrist who we vote for to get Trump out, nothing more. And if we don't want more Bidens, which no one should, we can't be dishonest about the kind of ticket he represents here.

 

[Deleted member 35740]

Yes of course they are. They are disingenouous in general against certain candiates.

Click to shrink...

Enough about her record.

Is Kamala Harris really the most liberal senator, as Trump claims?

It's an attack President Trump has latched onto as Republicans try to find something to stick Harris with. Here he is Thursday morning with Fox Business Network talking about Joe Biden's vice-presidential pick: "Well, she's radical left, now she tries to pretend she's not, but she is the most liberal person in the U.S. Senate, acknowledged to be."

But wait, how can something be true according to the data but also not feel right? Could Harris really be more liberal than Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) or Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.)?

The answer is that the data GovTrack.us tracks, while useful, is not a complete look at how liberal or conservative a politician is or would govern. "We always say that one number can never represent the complete picture of a politician," said Joshua Tauberer, founder and president of GovTrack.us.

Click to shrink...

Here's an example. Even though Harris signed onto Sanders's Medicare-for-all bill, she came up with her own health-care plan during the presidential primary that was decidedly not a full, single-payer health-care system. She proposed allowing private insurers to continue to provide similar insurance as Medicare. It was more similar to centrist primary candidate positions such as those of Pete Buttigieg, that people should get Medicare if they want it but not be forced into it.

Back in Congress, she also supported (as did all Senate Democrats) a 2018 criminal justice reform bill that Trump signed into law. You could argue that giving the president one of his major legislative achievements isn't an extreme liberal thing to do.

Click to shrink...

Fact of the matter, her congressional record alone doesn't dictate how progressive she really is given her record as AG and her presidential primary platform on a number of issues, including her own proposal for a healthcare plan. So is she for M4A or not? Her problem is that she votes according to what generates the most political capital at the moment, and so it's hard for pregressives to trust her.

 

[rashbeep]

From the left Kamala Harris is an intensely-problematic figure, particularly in a year where millions of American participated in mass protests over criminal justice reform. The Democratic Party is hopelessly lost; the ticket is the racist architect of a crime bill which lead to mass black incarceration, joined with a former attorney general with her own grisly record. I guess it's hardly surprising at this point. I actually was quite high on her back in 2018, just looking at her voting record, but the more I learned of her time as AG it seemed to me to be disqualifying for 2020, and then of course here we are.

Really Harris has near-zero appeal to the left of the party despite her Senate record. What's her primary policy focus? She ran a primary campaign which was incoherent, ran away from M4A, accused Biden of racism and groping, and then joins his ticket. This is a pick for liberal Democrats, someone who is "safe" (aka the donors trust her to play ball, not an ideologue), younger, ticks the right boxes, and is admittedly probably prepared to assume the office of President in case Biden would fall ill or die in office.

Still seems to me that Harris might have been the safest pick of the bunch even if she doesn't deliver any particular bloc of voters. She's hard to attack from the right on ideological grounds as a former "tough on crime" AG, maybe the gun control stuff is an issue for some voters in the center? Republicans will have to go racist and sexist on her. Which they certainly will.

The Harris pick isn't enough to salvage this wretched ticket for me personally. Really terrible choices this year, worse than the 2016 ticket in some ways.

Click to shrink...

agreed with every word, but if i were american i'd still be voting biden

 

[PlanetSmasher]

From the left Kamala Harris is an intensely-problematic figure, particularly in a year where millions of American participated in mass protests over criminal justice reform. The Democratic Party is hopelessly lost; the ticket is the racist architect of a crime bill which lead to mass black incarceration, joined with a former attorney general with her own grisly record. I guess it's hardly surprising at this point. I actually was quite high on her back in 2018, just looking at her voting record, but the more I learned of her time as AG it seemed to me to be disqualifying for 2020, and then of course here we are.

Really Harris has near-zero appeal to the left of the party despite her Senate record. What's her primary policy focus? She ran a primary campaign which was incoherent, ran away from M4A, accused Biden of racism and groping, and then joins his ticket. This is a pick for liberal Democrats, someone who is "safe" (aka the donors trust her to play ball, not an ideologue), younger, ticks the right boxes, and is admittedly probably prepared to assume the office of President in case Biden would fall ill or die in office.

Still seems to me that Harris might have been the safest pick of the bunch even if she doesn't deliver any particular bloc of voters. She's hard to attack from the right on ideological grounds as a former "tough on crime" AG, maybe the gun control stuff is an issue for some voters in the center? Republicans will have to go racist and sexist on her. Which they certainly will.

The Harris pick isn't enough to salvage this wretched ticket for me personally. Really terrible choices this year, worse than the 2016 ticket in some ways.

Click to shrink...

I think that's the point, though. There really isn't a candidate they could pick that would meaningfully change the political landscape for Biden.

The thing about being a politician is that the longer you're in the field, the more bad shit you're directly or indirectly attached to. There is no politician with a clean record, there is no one who doesn't have skeletons in their closet that would make you uncomfortable to read about outside of the 25 to 30-year-olds who JUST got elected in the past three or four years. And none of them are viable VP candidates.

Right now the primary goal from the Democratic party is to break Trumpery's lockdown on the government. Everything else is secondary to that. Picking a VP candidate who will be able to easily stand up to Mike Pence in debates and who can't be systematically dissected by FUD campaigns is basically the only option they had.

 

[Narroo]

Rice was widely known as one of the people being considered for the spot. If you're that unfamiliar with the current VP nominations maybe you shouldn't be talking down to posters who disagree with you, you seem too uninformed to be so hostile against the opinions of others.

I think Kamala is a better pick than Rice tbh, but I can see arguments for both

Click to shrink...

That isn't a bad point; I just take offense to playing the "well obviously you must be racist so shutup card."

But,

 

[MazeHaze]

That isn't a bad point; I just take offense to playing the "well obviously you must be racist so shutup card."

But,

Click to shrink...

I don't think youre racist. Assuming someone is talking about Bush Admin official and Republican Condoleezza Rice as the democratic VP candidate and not Susan Rice, widely discussed and known potential Biden VP pick, shows a pretty hefty amount of ignorance though.

 

[Narroo]

I don't think youre racist. Assuming someone is talking about Bush Admin official and Republican Condoleezza Rice as the democratic VP candidate and not Susan Rice, widely discussed and known potential Biden VP pick, shows a pretty hefty amount of ignorance though.

Click to shrink...

It does...I admit, turning the run-up to the announcement for Biden's VP, I kinda tuned out because I wasn't too interested in rumors about his shortlist. I heard a few snippets about "Rice" or (And I could have sworn about "Condoleezza Rice"). At the same time, BIden said he'd be willing to run with a Republican running mate, so I thought "Friggen Biden better not seriously be considering C. Rice; that better just be a dumb rumor."

Anyways, fast-forward to now, in my sarcastic response I was mainly thinking of possible VP's in general; not specifically Biden's shortlist. But I had thought there were rumors about C. Rice because...skimming through posts and articles because I didn't care about silly short-list rumors and I wasn't familiar with who Susan Rice was.

I do think the point still stands though; out of prominent politicians, who is this perfect VP pick that everyone would be unconditionally happy with? Reviewing Susan Rice's career, some people would probably be angry with her positions on the Libyan and Syrian Civil Wars as extending US imperialism, for example.

 

[Schreckweg 5000]

From the left Kamala Harris is an intensely-problematic figure, particularly in a year where millions of American participated in mass protests over criminal justice reform. The Democratic Party is hopelessly lost; the ticket is the racist architect of a crime bill which lead to mass black incarceration, joined with a former attorney general with her own grisly record. I guess it's hardly surprising at this point. I actually was quite high on her back in 2018, just looking at her voting record, but the more I learned of her time as AG it seemed to me to be disqualifying for 2020, and then of course here we are.

Really Harris has near-zero appeal to the left of the party despite her Senate record. What's her primary policy focus? She ran a primary campaign which was incoherent, ran away from M4A, accused Biden of racism and groping, and then joins his ticket. This is a pick for liberal Democrats, someone who is "safe" (aka the donors trust her to play ball, not an ideologue), younger, ticks the right boxes, and is admittedly probably prepared to assume the office of President in case Biden would fall ill or die in office.

Still seems to me that Harris might have been the safest pick of the bunch even if she doesn't deliver any particular bloc of voters. She's hard to attack from the right on ideological grounds as a former "tough on crime" AG, maybe the gun control stuff is an issue for some voters in the center? Republicans will have to go racist and sexist on her. Which they certainly will.

The Harris pick isn't enough to salvage this wretched ticket for me personally. Really terrible choices this year, worse than the 2016 ticket in some ways.

Click to shrink...

agreed with every word, but if i were american i'd still be voting biden

Click to shrink...

Fun fact, Harris writes and backs police reforms.

 

[Deleted member 3896]

From the left Kamala Harris is an intensely-problematic figure, particularly in a year where millions of American participated in mass protests over criminal justice reform. The Democratic Party is hopelessly lost; the ticket is the racist architect of a crime bill which lead to mass black incarceration, joined with a former attorney general with her own grisly record. I guess it's hardly surprising at this point. I actually was quite high on her back in 2018, just looking at her voting record, but the more I learned of her time as AG it seemed to me to be disqualifying for 2020, and then of course here we are.

Really Harris has near-zero appeal to the left of the party despite her Senate record. What's her primary policy focus? She ran a primary campaign which was incoherent, ran away from M4A, accused Biden of racism and groping, and then joins his ticket. This is a pick for liberal Democrats, someone who is "safe" (aka the donors trust her to play ball, not an ideologue), younger, ticks the right boxes, and is admittedly probably prepared to assume the office of President in case Biden would fall ill or die in office.

Still seems to me that Harris might have been the safest pick of the bunch even if she doesn't deliver any particular bloc of voters. She's hard to attack from the right on ideological grounds as a former "tough on crime" AG, maybe the gun control stuff is an issue for some voters in the center? Republicans will have to go racist and sexist on her. Which they certainly will.

The Harris pick isn't enough to salvage this wretched ticket for me personally. Really terrible choices this year, worse than the 2016 ticket in some ways.

Click to shrink...

Actually, per her record in the senate, Harris is one of the most progressive serving senators. And she's just come out in favor of the GND after co-authoring a climate bill with AOC.

And this is on top is the Biden platform being one of the most progressive in US history.

Warren was my choice but this ticket is shaping up to be pretty fantastic.

 

[Powdered Egg]

The most progressive platform ever doesn't mean much until sometime next year. Black people have done the promises promises thing for 5 decades now.

If Kamala ends up doing nothing for our people after four years she may as well excuse herself next week.

 

[Deleted member 3896]

The most progressive platform ever doesn't mean much until sometime next year. Black people have done the promises promises thing for 5 decades now.

If Kamala ends up doing nothing for our people after four years she may as well excuse herself next week.

Click to shrink...

Be skeptical, of course. Be very skeptical. But why be cynical? Is there anything more anti-revolutionary than that?

 

[Codeblue]

Be skeptical, of course. Be very skeptical. But why be cynical? Is there anything more anti-revolutionary than that?

Click to shrink...

Not sure I would categorize pattern recognition as anti-revolutionary.

 

[Deleted member 3896]

Not sure I would categorize pattern recognition anti-revolutionary.

Click to shrink...

No, but cynicism certainly is.

 

[Curufinwe]

The most progressive platform ever doesn't mean much until sometime next year.

Click to shrink...

It won't mean anything next year if the Democrats don't also win the Senate. No real police reform will be passed with the Corrupt Turtle still in charge.