Harris:
I also know this: it is a false choice to suggest you must either be for the police or for police accountability. I am for both. Most people I know are for both. Let’s speak some truth about that, too.
Well said… now if only the media would portray it in this manner.
Harris’ 2 minute clip on GMA reveals a campaign theme and strategy that is very reminiscent of Bill Clinton’s 1992 campaign. She talking about the whirlwind of social and economic changes that have hit the country in a short period of time, how people feel displaced, and how people need a vision of America in which every person sees him/herself in it. It needs to be an inclusive vision that prepares America to adapt to changes in the global economy and in our society that tackles fairness, civil rights, education, climate change. This is a winning message.
The idea that there’s a comparison between her and the most lawless president ever (well, maybe since Andrew Jackson).
Out of all those who look like they could run for 2020, she is my first pick.
“It’s a presidential campaign, and every aspect of a candidate’s record is going to be scrutinized and they’re going to have to answer for it,”
And we still ended up with Trump for president.
That just gets me. Trump in any single instance of his “record” should have been a non-starter. Any average, reasonable joe should have said “Nah.” But here these people are talking about Harris as if her entire career is something to live down. And in doing so, they are giving ammunition to the opposition and they do not even have to work for it.
I won’t support her, because she was among the first to push Franken out, and without holding a proper investigation. It was all optics. She didn’t seem to care to find out the truth of the matter.
Harris’ background as a prosecutor and AG isn’t a problem for anyone other than a few fauxgressive chaos agents and easily duped Bernie Bros who are looking for a way to make her less attractive to left leaning voters, especially non-whites who have had a contentious relationship with law enforcement.
Be prepared to hear about Kamala the Cop, Corey Wall Street, Big Oil Beto, Warren’s DNA disaster, and Biden’s roaming hands, etc, all from “concerned Democrats”.
Harris* gives me the impression of being a sane, sober, careful person who is aware of the limits of her knowledge and expertise vis-a-vis the almost boundless requirements of the office, and knows where to find more knowledge and experience in a specific field when she needs to.
I’m waiting to see what minority communities have to say about Harris’ prosecutorial background (I’m a middle class white guy so I don’t even feel equipped to judge).
.* (and while I’m on the topic, Klobuchar)
Minorities like tough on crime prosecutors and police. They just want them not to be racist and to be held accountable when they shoot unarmed POC in the back. That’s really what this all boils down to. No one opposes police getting rough with an armed suspect. However, if you know someone is unarmed, don’t shoot them, period. It should be simple and easy to comprehend, but our media won’t focus on that. Harris’ record as a prosecutor is going to be a big plus for her with Latinos, middle of the road voters and will be a big help in the General Election.
Ms Harris has been my number one pick for president almost from the first that I became aware of her, but I’m not sure why. I’m not sure that I know enough about her to consider it an informed opinion, but I suspect that some of it has to do with what I perceive to be her low key approach.
In any case it is consistent with my preference that both Ms Warren and Ms Gillibrand remain in the Senate (or perhaps some cabinet position in a new government) where I believe they can be more effective than as President, and my belief that it is past time that a woman became President (I’m still mourning Ms Clinton’s loss).
Good, don’t support her. Then she can remain in the Senate and do the work she was elected to do.
s/ A Californio
Here’s a factoid. There have been only three presidents elected who came from the senate: Warren Harding, Clinton and Obama. There are about six who have declared or exploring or something, so the odds are against of them. Personally I want Senator Harris to remain in the senate and continue to represent Californians. Same for Warren and Gillibrand.
What I like most about Harris is the idea of her debating Trump (assuming he does debate, which is doubtful). I think she’d clobber him. I don’t have the same feeling about Warren - she’s factually correct but does not ooze the toughness that would win over the lizard-brained among us.
As a Californian, I’d like to hear more about what she did when she was here. Jerry Brown and others spearheaded criminal sentencing reform. On nationwide issues, she was good about joining in, but I don’t recall that she initiated much. I think she needs more time on the Senate and a chance to show what she can do first
Unfortunately those people feed foreign meddling and we all saw how that can affect an election, a few bad apples is enough to up-end an election if the media doesn’t quickly and accurately separate fact from fiction in every regard.
Clinton didn’t come from the Senate. He was governor of Arkansas.
I feel that way about Gillibrand but not Harris. I will say, that though I wanted Franken to stay in and have a thorough investigation, the optics of the Kavanaugh hearing with Franken on the judiciary committee would have been a nightmare. I was glad it was Harris questioning and not Franken…
Oy vey, something Freudian was going on. I meant JFK who was Bill’s idol. A thousand pardons.
@ryp Yes I did mean JFK, for this reason
I think you meant Kennedy not Clinton.