So What About Kamala Harris?

[honorentheos]

One of Ceebs vids focused on a statement made on CNN about the likelihood of a Biden victory meaning Kamala Harris will become our first female President of the United States since Biden's debate performance shows he might not make it four more years.

The narrative pushed by folks like the podcasters is that Harris is a joke, bad at her job, and any statement to the contrary just spin and propaganda.

So, does that hold up?

Let's start with a video clip to position against the other clip:

https://youtu.be/eQUaWPZ4A2E?si=6nbb6pXI3M6-7peV

The 10 minute clip above from PoliticGirl explores the narrative attacking Harris as well as finishing with a run down of her role and achievements both before and after becoming VP.

I avoided posting this in the YouTube Public Forum thread because it is still primarily commentary.

For a more multidimensional take, this interview on the Ezra Klein Show with Elaina Plott Calabro which is worth the listen, in my opinion.

https://youtu.be/KyvaxlKuOuE?si=CXJAurnYy9XiK9Vx

[honorentheos]

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/ar ... ge/675439/

Here is the article referenced in the above interview. A few quotes:

THE KAMALA HARRIS PROBLEM
Those closest to Harris have tried to make sense of why the vice president’s positive qualities—her intelligence, her diligence, her integrity—have failed to register with Americans. It is impossible, of course, to talk about perceptions of Harris without laying some of the blame on racism and sexism. The briefest glance at the toxic comments about Harris on social media reveals the bigotry that motivates some of her most fervent detractors. But the vice president’s allies also acknowledge that she has struggled to make an affirmative case for herself. Judging from what has gone viral online, she is better known for her passion for Venn diagrams than for any nugget of biography; right-wing personalities enjoy mocking this predilection almost as much as they enjoy mocking the way she laughs.

Harris may understand intellectually the imperative to seem “relatable” to a broad audience—to condense her background to a set of compelling SparkNotes to be recited on cue—but she hasn’t made a habit of doing so. In smaller settings, she can be funny at her own expense. When I asked her what advice she would give to a successor, she referred back to some of those social-media reviews: “Don’t read the comments.” In our conversation at the residence, she touched briefly on how her “first woman” status shapes even the most workaday elements of the job: “I’m not going to tell you who said to me—it’s a previous president of the United States. He said, ‘Wow, women—I get up, I go work out, I jump in the shower, and I’m out the door. You guys …’ ” (I suspect she was quoting Obama, a friend of hers who has spoken about his efficient morning routine.) Harris told me that she has to let the Secret Service know a day in advance if she is going to be wearing a dress instead of a pantsuit, because agents have to pick her up in a different kind of car.

[huckelberry]

Thank you honorentheos, good information for Kamala Harris.

She has remained low visibility. For news, Trump is the cheapest easily available news every day so he stays in the spotlight. The media produces his win by attention.

[honorentheos]

Thank you honorentheos, good information for Kamala Harris.

She has remained low visibility. For news, Trump is the cheapest easily available news every day so he stays in the spotlight. The media produces his win by attention.

She's a complex person, to be sure, and I appreciated the varied perspectives so I thought they'd be worth some discussion.

Reading them reminded me of the projected hope placed on her early in the 2020 Democrat primaries, not too different from when Obama was running in 2008. Maya Rudolph played her in SNL skits with more than a little sense that Harris was actually the one representing her. Being the projected vehicle for the dreams of so many intersecting groups of non-white-male Americans is challenging, and it would have been impossible for any real person to live up to those expectations. As Calabro notes, it's likely most of us have no idea who Harris is as a person because what we think we know is almost certainly constructed out of our own beliefs, media, and her own difficulties in being authentically herself in the spotlight of national politics.

[Kishkumen]

I would love to be proven wrong, but I am very anxious about her prospects of winning. I am sure she would do a fine job. Certainly Hillary would have. But you have to get elected. If that doesn’t happen, the rest doesn’t matter.

If she is the nominee, I will vote for her. I do anticipate, however, that she will lose. If I am wrong, I will be hugely relieved and celebrate.

[honorentheos]

Whether she could beat Trump head-to-head, replacing Biden as the head of the ticket is one question. The other is for those who are wondering if a vote for Biden is a vote for a future President Harris given how Biden's age is now front of mind for so many. I don't know how many folks are out there who would vote for Biden otherwise but baulk at the idea he might not serve four more years, leaving Harris as President.

Personally, I am becoming more in favor of Biden stepping aside for Harris, if nothing more than transparency and letting voters be the ones who choose her. There's something I think damaging if our first woman President takes office any other way than being directly elected. Don't know.

[Xenophon]

538 did take a crack at running Harris through their model, even with their limited data set. There are some pretty big assumptions about how incumbency advantage and things would translate so I'm not sure how useful it is, but at least it adds some data to the conversation.

Personally, I am becoming more in favor of Biden stepping aside for Harris, if nothing more than transparency and letting voters be the ones who choose her. There's something I think damaging if our first woman President takes office any other way than being directly elected. Don't know.

Just some rando's opinion but I'd say it is best for the long term health of the party but maybe (I might go so far as to say "likely") not the best for the short term. My real concern on that front is that our democracy may not hang around to benefit from that strategy, even if it is the best call.

[Binger]

There's something I think damaging if our first woman President takes office any other way than being directly elected.

Sure, it damages the DEI selection if she is not actually elected. No question about it. You are absolutely correct.

The damage to the process is almost complete and permanent. The superdelegate sham of 2016 was bad - real bad. The coalition to get Klobashar, Buttigieg and Warner off the primary ballots to keep the populists from getting delegates in 2020 was worse, much worse. The coverup of Biden's brain damage is irreversible and was known in 2020 for chrissakes. He was clearly brain damaged when he won the delegates in 50 state elections in 2024.

The process matters. Any nominee other than Biden will require a modification or hack to the process. Good luck with that. I am fairly certain, though, that destroying the democratic process in the republic and winning control of the war machine for at least four more years is a win win for the destroyers of democracy and for the war machine.

[Binger]

Just some rando's opinion but I'd say it is best for the long term health of the party but maybe (I might go so far as to say "likely") not the best for the short term. My real concern on that front is that our democracy may not hang around to benefit from that strategy, even if it is the best call.

Democracy, by definition, is destroyed if the person who won 50 elections is removed and replaced by a select bunch of elite clowns. Taking Biden off the ticket, AFTER the voters picked him, would be the very definition of anti-democratic. Destruction!

Politely put, the short term benefit of destroying democracy has no long-term benefits for a dead democracy.

[Binger]

If she is the nominee, I will vote for her. I do anticipate, however, that she will lose. If I am wrong, I will be hugely relieved and celebrate.

Winning and losing comes down to ballots counted in 4 cities: Milwaukee, Detroit, Pittsburgh, and Philadelphia. This has nothing to do with the counties and states. It does not have anything whatsoever to do with anything else but counting ballots in four cities. It has nothing to do with voting, neither with leading, neither with the ability to do the job. If Kamala can provide a plausible explanation for counting those ballots in those cities - she will be the nominee probably the winner of the EC and we are going to have a process integrity issue.

Sleep well, Kish. I don't see those cities counting ballots to lose.