Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Will US Democrats support a WOC as their candidate or will they by pass Kamala Harris?

206 replies

IwantToRetire · 21/07/2024 22:24

Biden Drops Out of Presidential Race and Endorses Harris: Live Updates

After intense pressure from within his own party, President Biden said he was ending his campaign and backing Vice President Kamala Harris to run in his place. Ms. Harris said she would seek the nomination, adding: “Together, we will fight. And together, we will win.”

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/07/21/us/biden-drops-out-election

OP posts:
Thread gallery
8
EasternStandard · 22/07/2024 10:51

Idk what will happen but one thing she has is the funding from the campaigning

Abhannmor · 22/07/2024 10:52

ResisterOfTwaddleRex · 22/07/2024 09:33

"A first woman president only means something if the word woman means something."

x.com/salltweets/status/1815142129276182600?s=46&t=WHoOZ_3Kv5G6-FyQuvE0LQ

Sall being supported there by anti abortionists and some loon who thinks Democrats will shut down all churches. Not a good look. But women are in a bit of a cleft stick : Republicans , no abortion and support for victims of domestic violence. Democrats, Twaw. Is the first issue a more clear and present danger?

TempestTost · 22/07/2024 10:54

RedToothBrush · 22/07/2024 07:45

We are talking about American politics, so yes. Sorry but that's the reality.

Not only that but Harris does have an issue with her own image tbh. Normally the Vice President has 'a cause' to which they attach themselves and promote. Harris hasn't really managed to do this and the argument I've heard is 'what does she actually do, what does she represent and who is she really?'.

She's not really taken ownership of the Vice Presidency and 'made it her own' if you will. The argument is that she incredibly non descript and lacking in presence.

And she's going to go up against Trump. Perhaps this will work in her favour but I very much doubt it.

The US perhaps more than any other western country looks for personality and 'a strong leader' . That's particularly true for anyone who leans slightly right but potentially could swing left for the right candidate.

Historically the younger looking candidate has always won the US election - with two exceptions - the first is Hilary and the second is voting against Trump (I frame Biden's win in this way deliberately as he didn't carry enthusiasm - it's similar to Keir Starmer's election in that the main motivating factor was a vote for competency at the last election not voting for Biden).

You also have to factor in the mentality of Christian America which is deeply patriarchal to a degree that Western Europe finds totally alien. There are many women who feel strongly that their role in life is mother and wife before career. (Career women are a coastal thing and goes hand in hand with atheism which is also deeply associated with the Democrats).

It's women, much more than men who make up swing voters. Trust will be important. Do they think they can trust Harris with their daughters. So abortion rights and women's rights are going to be pushed really heavily if Harris gets the nomination. That may entrench and alienate a whole bunch of men too. And honestly, stuff like the Title X stuff is going to be problematic for Harris rather than a help. I think women voters will trust a male democrat more than a female one, if they aren't deeply associated with the likes of Dylan Mulvaney.

I actually think that being a woman is more problematic than being black when it comes to US politics.

I think Harris is a deeply problematic candidate, and that will be seized on by Trump and his team. He will be delighted if she is the Democratic candidate.

But I say all this, mindful I've not spoken to a single person including Americans who are staunchly Democrat who hasn't said Biden is past it, he needs to go and he can't win. Not one. That's the problem and the lens that everything must be seen through.

Even if you think race and sex is relevant, the implication, which people make again and again, that if voters don't like her it's down to her sex, is bollocks. The same as it was with Hilary. Massive campaign fails, a historic inability to connect on a personal level, an identification with Wall Street bankers, and I think also a sense of entitlement, are what lost Hilary the presidency. She is still going on about it being because she is a woman. Bullshit.

There are many many successful female political figures in the US. And many many black ones. There has been a black president. I think the insistence on seeing those as the main issues likely to determine the fate of a candidate is reductive and unrealistic.

I suspect that gender issues may play with moderate Americans more than abortion. Trump has played that in quite a canny way and very much left it aside since the court decision - he's made it clear that he sees this as a state issue, and that pro-life and pro-choice campaigners should be working at the state level to see the kinds of laws they want. It makes it difficult for the pro-choice lobby to pin him down, especially because their constitutional argument has always been weak. Whether voters are women are men is pretty irrelevant on this issue, in the US women are a little more likely to be pro-life than men are - the feminist claim that they represent the views of American women on this, in my experience, actually turns off a lot of women who feel their views are being co-opted, or that it implies "real women" all think one way.

I have no doubt that gender ideology I'll be a hard issue for Harris to do anything with. She is, as another poster indicated, very much associated with identity politics, and they are imploding in the US. I don't see her getting as much of the black vote as Obama either because of that, black Americans tend to be more conservative. Obama was seen as a very moderate Democrat, whether or not that's fair, and Harris is not.

ResisterOfTwaddleRex · 22/07/2024 10:54

Didn't know about the Frank Biden interview but that seems to pose a brand new, and very big problem for the Dems. Is he well enough to continue as POTUS? If not then should he stand down now? And then what happens?

Collexifon · 22/07/2024 10:59

ResisterOfTwaddleRex · 22/07/2024 10:54

Didn't know about the Frank Biden interview but that seems to pose a brand new, and very big problem for the Dems. Is he well enough to continue as POTUS? If not then should he stand down now? And then what happens?

Probably

Sloejelly · 22/07/2024 11:01

ResisterOfTwaddleRex · 22/07/2024 10:54

Didn't know about the Frank Biden interview but that seems to pose a brand new, and very big problem for the Dems. Is he well enough to continue as POTUS? If not then should he stand down now? And then what happens?

Harris becomes president

EasternStandard · 22/07/2024 11:04

If Harris runs as vice with someone else who’s new for President do they get to keep the campaign funds?

ResisterOfTwaddleRex · 22/07/2024 11:14

Thank you @Sloejelly. Would she just then be POTUS until the elections? They wouldn't/couldn't hold them sooner?

BloodyHellKenAgain · 22/07/2024 11:24

As I understand it Kamala Harris has to run because of the rules around fundraising. Funds raised so far were on a Biden/Harris ticket and those funds can only be allocated if either Biden or Harris run.

I think it's unlikely she'll win as from what I hear from US people I know she isn't very popular amongst Democrats, let alone swing voters.

I'm keeping my gingers crossed Trump has to stand down.

Sloejelly · 22/07/2024 11:25

ResisterOfTwaddleRex · 22/07/2024 11:14

Thank you @Sloejelly. Would she just then be POTUS until the elections? They wouldn't/couldn't hold them sooner?

She just steps up. I think she then appoints her own VP. Elections continue are normal.

NewtGuineaPig · 22/07/2024 11:27

Would Harris stand a better chance if Biden stood down as president now and she was running as the incumbent president?

RedToothBrush · 22/07/2024 11:29

TempestTost · 22/07/2024 10:54

Even if you think race and sex is relevant, the implication, which people make again and again, that if voters don't like her it's down to her sex, is bollocks. The same as it was with Hilary. Massive campaign fails, a historic inability to connect on a personal level, an identification with Wall Street bankers, and I think also a sense of entitlement, are what lost Hilary the presidency. She is still going on about it being because she is a woman. Bullshit.

There are many many successful female political figures in the US. And many many black ones. There has been a black president. I think the insistence on seeing those as the main issues likely to determine the fate of a candidate is reductive and unrealistic.

I suspect that gender issues may play with moderate Americans more than abortion. Trump has played that in quite a canny way and very much left it aside since the court decision - he's made it clear that he sees this as a state issue, and that pro-life and pro-choice campaigners should be working at the state level to see the kinds of laws they want. It makes it difficult for the pro-choice lobby to pin him down, especially because their constitutional argument has always been weak. Whether voters are women are men is pretty irrelevant on this issue, in the US women are a little more likely to be pro-life than men are - the feminist claim that they represent the views of American women on this, in my experience, actually turns off a lot of women who feel their views are being co-opted, or that it implies "real women" all think one way.

I have no doubt that gender ideology I'll be a hard issue for Harris to do anything with. She is, as another poster indicated, very much associated with identity politics, and they are imploding in the US. I don't see her getting as much of the black vote as Obama either because of that, black Americans tend to be more conservative. Obama was seen as a very moderate Democrat, whether or not that's fair, and Harris is not.

Women are held to higher standards than men.

Hence why Trump's divorces and sexual conduct are overlooked.

You have to compare what is overlooked and tolerated in Trump's behaviour and consider whether that would be the case for any woman.

Indeed your point here is that Harris and Clinton's performance and personal manners is used when deciding whether they are suitable.

Yet these things are as rock bottom as it gets when it comes to Trump.

A Republican woman who wasn't whiter than white wouldn't ever make the nominations. They have to be wholesome - any hint of there being something perfect and it's fully used against them. Even Sarah Palin had issues when stuff came out about her daughter. She had to say her daughter would have the baby and marry the father (the daughter didn't in the end).

Don't forget as I say, there's different values systems at play here. A republican woman must be pure and wholesome. A democratic woman must be a good career woman with an excellent track record. Arguably men from their respective parties don't have to display the same qualities. And equally this issues have cross over. An American who is left leaning will not value a republican female candidate who is religious and does the whole pure thing unless they have the career track record. And an American who is right leaning will not value even an excellent democratic candidate as highly unless they have the right values and respect for religion. But the same can not be said for male candidates. There's less weight put on the problems with male candidates who have had affairs and don't have the best track record as long as they are perceived as 'good strong leaders'.

Again it comes back to the stereotypes of weak not being as strong and capable as leaders and having to demonstrate significantly more than a male candidate in the same position.

So I stand by what I said.

Sloejelly · 22/07/2024 11:30

As I understand it Kamala Harris has to run because of the rules around fundraising.

She doesn’t have to, but they might have to return the funding if she doesn’t. Though if funds were raised for a Biden/Harris ticket then the funders might say that it wasn’t given for a Harris/ANOther ticket and ask for it back?

Sloejelly · 22/07/2024 11:33

NewtGuineaPig · 22/07/2024 11:27

Would Harris stand a better chance if Biden stood down as president now and she was running as the incumbent president?

I would guess if you step up because the President has a stroke or heart attack then yes, assuming you are any good. But it you step up after the president was finally forced from office for a medical condition that was obvious to everyone but that you had been trying to hide then perhaps not.

ResisterOfTwaddleRex · 22/07/2024 11:42

Interesting and very messy by the sounds of it. The issues with Biden have been obvious for such a long time - and denied and denied for such a long time too. If they did drop Harris, it would have to be for someone who wasn't involved in all those lies.

CantDealwithChristmas · 22/07/2024 11:44

ResisterOfTwaddleRex · 22/07/2024 11:42

Interesting and very messy by the sounds of it. The issues with Biden have been obvious for such a long time - and denied and denied for such a long time too. If they did drop Harris, it would have to be for someone who wasn't involved in all those lies.

I think it's got to be Kamala because of the donors. George Soros has come out last night and endorsed Kamala - he control so much of the flow of funds into the Dems, that it has to be her.

She'll just have to pick a really good VP who as you say can reasonably distance themselves from the lies. Maybe Adam Schiff or Chuck Schumer?

Someone upthread mentioned Clooney which would be a flashy pick but would definitely distract from Kamala, which could only help the Dems at this point.

SheilaFentiman · 22/07/2024 11:44

There’s not really enough time for Kamala (or anyone) to prove themselves as President ahead of November so I don’t think it makes a difference

GenderlessVoid · 22/07/2024 11:54

The main thing the Democrats need is someone who will do well in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin (toss up states) and, to a slightly lesser extent, Georgia, North Carolina, Arizona, Minnesota, Nevada, and New Hampshire. So, from a D perspective: Philadelphia (somewhat Pittsburgh), Detroit, Milwaukee/Madison, Atlanta (somewhat Savannah), Research Triangle/Charlotte, Phoenix/Tuscon, Minneapolis/St Paul, and Las Vegas/Reno, They don't need to worry about most voters. Bc of the Electoral College, both parties can ignore most voters, even most swing voters.

BloodyHellKenAgain · 22/07/2024 12:06

Sloejelly · 22/07/2024 11:30

As I understand it Kamala Harris has to run because of the rules around fundraising.

She doesn’t have to, but they might have to return the funding if she doesn’t. Though if funds were raised for a Biden/Harris ticket then the funders might say that it wasn’t given for a Harris/ANOther ticket and ask for it back?

Sorry, yes, that's what meant. The funds might have to be returned as they were donated on a Biden/Harris ticket.

BloodyHellKenAgain · 22/07/2024 12:09

CantDealwithChristmas · 22/07/2024 11:44

I think it's got to be Kamala because of the donors. George Soros has come out last night and endorsed Kamala - he control so much of the flow of funds into the Dems, that it has to be her.

She'll just have to pick a really good VP who as you say can reasonably distance themselves from the lies. Maybe Adam Schiff or Chuck Schumer?

Someone upthread mentioned Clooney which would be a flashy pick but would definitely distract from Kamala, which could only help the Dems at this point.

Clooney, an actor with no political experience?! That has to be a joke suggestion surely?

It would be like Keir Starmer appointing Hugh Grant to office 😂

RedToothBrush · 22/07/2024 12:16

BloodyHellKenAgain · 22/07/2024 12:09

Clooney, an actor with no political experience?! That has to be a joke suggestion surely?

It would be like Keir Starmer appointing Hugh Grant to office 😂

Ronald Regan became President.

Donald Trump became President.

Why do you think it implausible.

I think it's worth pointing out that Harris could still run for VP with someone else for President. Equally if she does go for President then there's still a space for VP. So either way there will be someone else who gets picked and who that it is matters.

Theres actually a lot to be said for the idea of George Rooney on the ticket for VP for that reason because of the lack of time available.

Sloejelly · 22/07/2024 12:29

Ronald Regan became President.

Reagan was governor of California before he became president

CantDealwithChristmas · 22/07/2024 12:33

What's weird to me is the announcement itself.

Always with an announcement of this magnitude one would expect the Pres to make a live statement from the WH.

But this was a statement on Twitter and it was so rushed that there's a glaring grammatical error in the final sentence.

Does JB even know he's dropped out? If not, who's in charge at the WH? And if it's KH, shouldn't she also now invoke the 25th amendment?

RedToothBrush · 22/07/2024 12:34

Sloejelly · 22/07/2024 12:29

Ronald Regan became President.

Reagan was governor of California before he became president

And Trump?

Sloejelly · 22/07/2024 12:36

RedToothBrush · 22/07/2024 12:34

And Trump?

Trump wasn’t an actor. He ran a large business empire (of disputed value)

Swipe left for the next trending thread