The general criticism appears to be:
"as soon as she had no influence on that issue practically, she announces she has a different view on it.”
And I’m not sure what is going to push her beyond this sort of response:
Harris’ campaign declined to answer questions about when and why Harris’ views […] shifted.
How do they say it in Texas ?
All Hat No Cowboy?
“Simon, the civil rights advocate who worked with Harris, said she often saw Harris [speak], privately, in frustration about cash bail and other elements of the criminal justice system while she was a prosecutor. But still, Harris had to work within its confines,…”
That doesn’t seem to have been a problem for Philadelphia DA Larry Krasner…
Harris will have to figure out a way to rebrand herself. Authenticity Is pretty much compulsory these days to win. Problem is that she’s ideologically reactive, easily perceived as an opportunist. Maybe something along the lines of “guilty as charged: I’m the most boring, most commonsense, most practical and open minded candidate out there.” She has the charisma to pull that off. Then pick Klobuchar as her running mate and double down on the “country’s in a mess, time for women to clean it up “ shtick.
Ps: I think she’s probably the Democrat worst placed to win in the Rust Belt and Sun Belt. Very risky proposition in the general
If she had been a criminal defense attorney,she’d be under attack for her choice of clients. At this stage in the process,she is not my first choice. If she is the nominee,this issue would not prevent me from supporting her however.
I’ve seen her in action for a long time. From the earliest days of her entry into public life, the word was always out that she was looking to run for President. She’s been very cautious and reactive and I don’t have a strong sense of her having a strong commitment to any particular issue.
Of course I will vote for her if she’s the nominee, but i’d like to see grrater demonstration of her qualities as a leader more driven by principles than by expediency.
The straight answer is that she had a different job then, and did it well enough to learn something.
She sounds like a political weather vane.
Catch-22. At least the GOP has redemption narratives, even if they’re complete hypocritical bullcrap.
Is this happening to Harris because she is a woman?
Biden is a former prosecutor, will they scrutinize him in the same way?
Schiff was also, although he is not running for president, much is being made about Harris as if it is unusual for a democrat to be a prosecutor.
I’m smelling misogyny. This is the same type thing they did to Hillary. Whatever she did it was treated as monumental when it had happened in the past to other candidates with little or no scrutiny. E.g. Benghazi, regular run of the mill cases in private practice, lawyer fees…
That’s right blame Harris for not legislating while she was in the executive. The premise of this hit piece is that she could have done something about the cash bail system when she was a prosecutor or attorney general. That isn’t how things work. Her job was to use the existing system effectively. It is the job of the legislature to change the laws. My understanding is she did a great job as a prosecutor and as attorney general in California.
Wow, the hit pieces are just flying at TPM.
We’ve got a lot of Dems to choose from before 2020. Seems like we should be able to come up with one who has espoused consistently progressive views throughout his or her public career.
We also, of course, want one who can win.
I’m pretty sure we can have both.
An editorialized “article” from the AP, right from the opening line. A “curious” decision? Says who? A couple of biased writers? Followed by a “chiming in” headline at TPM. Pathetically unbalanced coverage.
I’m not so sure about that. The hard-assed prosecutor history might not help her in the primary, but it could help win over some voters in the general election. The R’s won’t be able to characterize her as someone “soft on crime.” She might also be in the best position to sell a more humane immigration policy backed by tough border security where it matters.
A concern I have about Harris is whether her background might make her something of a war hawk in an international crisis. She’s also too tight with AIPAC. I don’t like that, but it’s not a deal-killer for me if she ends up looking better than the other choices at the end of the debates.
Bad choice by TPM to highlight this drivel.
Not sure why this would come up this week. Oh yeah, it’s because she is making headway.
It’s an AP hit job disguised as news. Fuck AP.
Really, Josh, please be more discriminating in using their crap. And TPM Members, please, she’s a great candidate like any living breathing Democratic human.
This AP article is designed to frame her as a political weather vane. Male politicians don’t get this treatment.
All of our primary candidates are people, not unicorns. Proceed accordingly.