Now that she's the official nominee, is anyone else excited about Kamala Harris's chances?

[twodowntwotogo]

Just to get it out of the way - I am completely against Trump being elected President. I'm pretty excited to see Kamala being officially nominated, and looking forward to her fighting a strong campaign - albeit slightly nervously. Anyone else?

That's fine if you personally think she is the better choice. I would say her track record has been pretty damning (to name just one example, her despicable efforts to imprison parents for truancy).
As an individual she seems likeable and upbeat, but I disagree with her basic principles of running a society (which I've explained above), so I could never in good conscience vote for someone like her.

Who do you want to win then?

Surely it's better if Harris does so that trump who, lets face it, is just a useful idiot for others, can finally be gone and Republicans can regroup and put forward a decent candidate for the Presidency in four years time?

Well you aren’t being asked to vote for her as you are not a US citizen. As you have no skin in the game your likes and dislikes are irrelevant.

But if we were to take your viewpoint seriously it sounds like you would like the American president to be family friendly and to be suspicious of the carceral state and the improper use of police power as well as the school to prison pipeline?

What luck for those of us voting for the Democratic party that these are core values and goals of the party—as teachers are a core constituency and as public school snd public investment in education are the key methods our party favors to help families and children thrive.

Even if I took your criticism of Harris seriously, which I do not as its shallow and puerile, the nature of US politics is that multiple stakeholders choose a party and then work together to get policies enacted. Our legislative history always includes horse trading snd politicking. As FDR is famously supposed to have said when a group of supporters csme to him with a rewuest “It sounds good: now go out and make me do it.” So there will always be an inside snd outside game.

The truancy thing is not a good idea but I must say the UK with its monetary fines for missed sessions and its two child cap on benefits is no standard bearer for children snd families.

This is a really interesting and balanced, deeper look back at the truancy policy, for anyone interested (which @Stumped7 probably won't be as they seem to only want to regurgitate very facile talking points).

https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2020/10/17/924766186/the-story-behind-kamala-harriss-truancy-program

Thanks for posting that. I am personally very opposed to the carceral state and work hard for its abolition. I dislike policies which intrude police and courts into community spaces. But these things are always complicated.

That being said as has been well observed upthread the choice is binary: we either choose Harris and the Democrats or we lose to Trump. His policies and his administration will be horrendous for women, children, the elderly, immigrants, hospitals, education, the climate, etc…etc..etc..There is no question about that.

So I will proudly cast my vote for any democrat to orevent that from happening. Luckily for me I sm very impressed by the campaign Harris and Walz are running and by its ability to pull new, young, people into politics. The more diverse and excited our voters the more our many communities will be heard in the political arena.

The reality is that politicians in office have to navigate very tricky waters. The most progressive of politicians can get mired down in trying to pass and implement programmes, especially in the American system that is designed to force compromise. People think, oh, California is blue, it's progressive, but Democrats fight like anything and there's still Republican parts of the state. You can't make everyone happy.

Everyone even thinks SF is just super duper lefty. But DA Chesa Boudin got recalled and the school board got a lashing for focusing on school names when Covid was happening. It's not simple. Leftists don't have enough support distributed in enough places to win.

Very good point about the complexity of getting anything done in the US. There are a number of choke points that produce regressive results: the EC, the Senate are both regressive institutions that elevate the power of rural white minorities over the more populated states and cities.

Even at state level where things are a bit fairer, you've got 2 houses and the governor all elected separately (for any Brits, state senates are by districts usually, a couple of states have unicameral legislatures), and they all have to dicker and horse trade. The parliamentary model is so much simpler for getting legislation passed. One house, the same party has control of the legislature and the executive, and the powers are not separated in the same way. Here, even when there's unified control, the legislature introduces bills independent of the executive, everyone horse trades to produce some kind of compromise, and hopefully the president/governor signs it.

Yes! And many rules governing elections were instituted after the civil war specifically to prevent the rise of progressive politicians—at the time identified with the newly freed black slaves. So some states have off year elections to depress turn out, or weak governorships to prevent an alliance of ex slaves and white workers from advancing their goals.

You really have to understand that its freakishly hard to pass good legislation at a national level.

Kennedy is a total outlier who says all kinds of crazy stuff. He doesn't have the authority to speak for his ancestors who anyone who understands American history knows would choose Harris over Trump

Thank you, @user556453 This article is interesting.

I don’t agree with 100% of what Kamala Harris has done in the past but she had also got an unfair rap on several things. And on Trump’s side, we haven’t recently mentioned the way he’s cosied up to Putin and the praise he’s showered on other dictators around the world.

Nor the way his supporters have been quietly changing election procedures in Republican-controlled states these past 4 years. The NY Times has a truly horrifying article by Rachel Maddow (sp?) of CNBC yesterday explaining the possible consequences of a law recently passed in Georgia. Trump and his supporters do not believe in democracy.

To return to my earlier point, it really is that simple. I am so glad I have a vote in this election and, frankly, that certain people on this thread do not

I see thar Kennedy wanted to throw his lot in with the Harris campaign, in exchange for a senior government position - then got rebuffed so is now courting Trump.

A man of great principle.

Trump will take him on—he has to and he plans on running a spoils based administration anyway so its basically his modus operandi. But the people who were RFK curious may, in the end, not vote. Or perhaps f his name is on the ballots still vote for him.

Is Kamala still not doing press interviews? So much for Trump is scared to debate me. What a joke!

What about all the damaged already inflicted by Democrats like Chesa Boudin.

She is rather busy this week. She has said she will do an interview this month

This has been going on for a longer than this week. 😂

I would be extremely interested in a well-presented argument explaining the damage inflicted by Chesa Boudin - actual damage, with supporting statistics. Thanks!

It was announced 12 days ago that the debate originally planned between Trump and Biden on 10 September on ABC would take place between Trump and Harris.

https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/when-is-second-presidential-debate-2024/

There are two other debates planned after that: another one between Trump and Harris on NBC and one between Walz and Vance, can't remember dates (if indeed they've been confirmed)

I know Trump has said he wants a debate on 4 September on Fox, without decent moderation. Harris would be a fool to change her mind and do the Fox one, as Trump would abuse the lack of moderation and then cancel the subsequent (properly moderated) debates

She did d approach the press on the tarmac of one of her flights but they failed to ask her anything substantive and just asked her about Trump and his assertions.

The idea that the candidate must hold a press conference while they are barnstorming the country and meeting with voters and local press is just odd. Obviously as a former prosecutor and Senator she can hold a press conference and answer questions. But is it to her advantage to answer lickspittle/horserace questions like “when did you first become black?” Or whatever else the washington press corps decides to ask?

The press corps has not coveted itself in glory for the past twenty years with respect to coverage of democratic candidates. Both Obama and Biden had to go around a hostile press corps to local and non traditional media to get their message out. You might not like it but its a shrewd snd calculated move.

Yeah. Getting a little sick of the 'but what about policy' handwringing from the media. The Republican ticket's only policy is Project 2025 which they're trying to disavow as fast as they can scurry. I'll weep and wail about Harris's lack of interviews/specific policy platforms when Trump et al are held to the same standard.

I read somewhere today that Harris and Hilary Clinton have become very close and that Clinton's become a very trusted advisor and confidante. I recall seeing HRC interviewed after 2016 and her saying something like, I kept waiting for the moment the election was going to become about policy, and that moment never came. Maybe Harris and her team are smart enough to have taken a lesson from that.

Scraping the barrel still for inaccurate things to be outraged about I see

Yes—HRC had policies available on everything and she was dinged by the press corps for being “if anything, too prepared.” The point is that the stakeholders in the election are the voters, not the press or their corporate owners.

Yes. Clinton had detailed policies for everything and it all became about nasty women and emails. I know so many Democrats who are very disillusioned by media outlets, including me. They whipped up a fury about whether or not Biden has dementia but wave off Trump's complete incoherence and lies. The press should take a long look and ask why Harris doesn't want to talk to them. It's not like she's not answering questions from anyone.

Totally agree.

Look at the furore when HRC was exhausted and ill after a gruelling schedule and stumbled getting out of a car. The media were awful and carried on targeting her on this in all sorts of ways.

Let alone the live debate where Trump was like a predator pacing up and down around her as she was answering questions. His behaviour was intimidating yet he can't answer a question coherently

I have seen clips of some nonsense from him at a car dealership or something today. He is rambling absolute nonsense and to be honest sounds drugged up. Even Fox are cutting him off because it's embarrassing.