The reality on Harris is that she is the perfect liberal candidate for your average vote blue Democrat. For most of the electorate it's all about aesthetics. Joe's campaign was mostly aesthetics, Sweet Ol' Grampa Joe here to bring tough love and common sense. Hers will be the same.
She's a cop, facing down a criminal, she's a girl boss (the KHive is buzzing), she's a mother, she's an ally, shes "youthful", she's the perfect surrogate for the corporate Dem platform. We arrived here due to a multitude of factors. Not the least the uncommitted vote in the primary and the low turnout for states that had them. The debate simply finished the equation that was already looking bad for Joe.
The mass movement to vote uncommitted was never going to manifest into a principled stance that would follow through to the election. The solidarity vote will dry up now that biden is out. People who voted uncommitted will feel unburdened, knowing now they can vote blue no matter who in November, regardless of the actual policy slate. They did their part, the time for critical thought is over. People who are apathetic will feel energized by change, and feel less inclined to doom scroll. Any dissenting opinion will be ignored, as the "adults in the room" already did their part getting Biden out, regardless of how valid the criticisms of Harris are. We're back to our regularly scheduled program, where you better get in line or be the heel.
I think the typical "well meaning" democrat lib sees this as the light at the end of the tunnel. They will be able to put blinders on until November. Whatever momentum was gained for the left through principled action, organizing, and agitation will see these fair weather allies evaporate. Harris might have an equivalent stance on geopolitics to Joe, she might not, but the electorate will not entertain a second referendum on the matter. Been there, done that, this is the most important election of our lives sweety, time to vote.
Accurate.
Kamala is a total nothingburger, which is perfect for the Dems. All criticism will fall on deaf ears as they project their political desires onto her without fear of contradiction by any pesky facts.
She might even win if the DNC picks an electable-enough VP. And then politics is over until it's time to start winding up to 2028.
it would be so fucking funny if it turns out hillary really was the only person able to lose to trump
regardless of her VP, i think if she plays her cards right after some time in the spotlight she'll have a solid chance. her speech today was not just competent but actually pretty good i'll give her that, has that obama era hopeful empty rhetoric feel. she's very coherent when she needs to be unlike trump, and she's gonna keep milking the fact she went after big banks and prosecuted predators and fraudsters like orange man. libs are going to be very annoying
she could probably crush the debate seeing she can string a sentence together, is more human than hillary, and facing a decaying broken record who isn't allowed to interrupt anymore
Just given the whole coasting on being a black (woman) president thing despite still following through on all the racist policies that exist against black people is giving huge Obama vibes. This is Obama 2: The Girlbossining. She probably won't do anything about abortion rights being taken away either, because doing anything material for women would also invalidate the Obama 2 prophecy.
People who voted uncommitted will feel unburdened
By what has been.
kamala harris is going to simultaneously be the most and least likely president of all time
She's a cop, facing down a criminal, she's a girl boss (the KHive is buzzing), she's a mother, she's an ally, shes "youthful", she's the perfect surrogate for the corporate Dem platform.
🎶She's a cop, she's a mother, she's a brat, like no other. 🎶
🎶The libs wouldn't have it any other waaaaayyy.🎶Yeah. American voters are so childish. Politics starts and ends at needing someone to cheer for and needing someone to boo.
I think the methods of controls involved with maintaining each party ensures total lock in for their respective electorate. There is no way for the electorate to see beyond the next 4 years. Voters rarely switch parties, and the pool of "undecided" voters is a shrinking class. However, the pool of non-voters changes with the level of perceived stability. When times are "good", economically, socially, geopolitically, the non-voter class grows.
When times are not "good", however, the non-voter class shrinks. In those stable times, there is no need to question the system at large for most of the electorate, but crisis creeps up on them, leaving them little time to consider anything else. I think, however, the closer these crisis points are to each other, the more likely the electorate will be pushed to seek alternative answers. I think from 2016 onward, we've been in a state of near perpetual crisis, and I think the events of our recent past are an indication of that.
To call it childish I think is to assume a level of self awareness that the American electorate does not have. They are ideologically stunted, and rarely have opportunities to build a more just and cohesive world view. If times keep moving like they are, we could truly see some weeks when decades happen.
I agree with you but that's what I meant by childish. As in no awareness of why they're supporting the candidate they are or opposing the candidate they are. They literally see red or blue and their autonomic nervous system kicks in with no conscious thought. Trained to a pavlovian degree.
This is when Trump steps down and names a replacement. It's not like he really wants to be president anyways
See this I think has the opposite effect for Republicans. There isn't traditionally a lot of in fighting, and this would really rock their base. Trump might not want to be president again, but here needs to be to avoid any real consequences. He likely has a lot of favors that need to be reconciled under his second term, and not being able to do that makes you a target.
The mass movement to vote uncommitted was never going to manifest into a principled stance that would follow through to the election. The solidarity vote will dry up now that biden is out. People who voted uncommitted will feel unburdened, knowing now they can vote blue no matter who in November, regardless of the actual policy slate.
This is far too pessimistic. I don't think a lot of people who've accepted we're supplying an active genocide are going to back off that position. It's not going to help that Harris won't back off Biden’s record or U.S. support of Israel even an inch.
The bigger problems are that the principled anti-genocide crowd is a small subset of Democratic voters, and there isn't even a universal anti-genocide candidate. These could be improved with organization before November, though.
I think the people with real stakes will abstain from the vote or vote 3rd party, I think a small % of people without stakes will do the same, but a larger majority of that demo will return to the Democrats.
Swing state voters will feel the pressure hardest. I think the threat of Trump, plus the aesthetics of Harris make it a far more alluring flame for the fair weather activists. Biden's age and visible decline and lack of opposition made it easy for these voters to be uncommitted. Now the slate is clean and I can bet they will attempt to paint Harris as "critical" of Israel, which will be enough.
I'll gladly be wrong.
Harris is less zionist than biden or trump at least. Biden seemed to have some sort of personal principled defense of israel. Harris is just a feckless goon thatll toe the party line (which is still genocide)
I hate that anyone who makes less that one million dollars a year has a positive opinion of Joe Biden. Mass Incarceration, opposition to desegregation and what was left of the New Deal when he got into power, lifelong corporate bagman. Stalwart champion of Israel. Just sucks. Just what a fucking asshole. But years of decent press as Vice President, and a mostly friendly media as President, and pretending like he's a champion of American Labor and it seems like everyone just forgets or ignores what this guy stood for his entire career to date.
The weirdest thing about Harris for me so far is a bunch of leftists on Twitter suddenly coming out as shooters for Kamala. Clearly some of these people are left libs, not meaningfully anticapitalist in any way, who call themselves leftists. But where it gets confusing is that some of these I've seen are from bigger accounts that are popular on actual left twitter. I've been seeing a lot of talk about her perfect left voting record or just about how they think she has the right stuff to beat Trump or otherwise uncritically praising her. As if she wasn't just another neoliberal. Isn't she literally the one who said, back in like 2019, that she was in favor of tax incentives given to small businesses that operate in underprivileged communities for at least two years or whatever the terrible quote was. Idk, maybe that was Warren or one of the others, I can't remember now Even if it wasn't her that quote sums up her politics, from what I've seen (I haven't poured over her whole voting record or anything, just read a few articles). I mean it was just a debate!
If she was leading the charge for a return to, like, New Deal era Kennedy style plans for making America into a soft welfare state I could get why nominally leftist people would be excited for her. Sure, that welfare would be predicated upon global empire, but it would make many people's lives here better, so I could at least see the logic. But she's not even offering something like that.
The only positive thing I can say for Harris is that her public persona comes off as so dorky and strange that it makes her seem like a genuine person, which is a welcome change after Joe Biden's soulless platitudes or the madness of Donald Trump or the faux profundity of Obama. But even then, I'd say something similar about George W. Bush so it's not exactly a compliment.
friends and family are back on the damage reduction voting train. I don't know how to feel about this. They seem genuinely scared of Vance getting into office. It feels callous to dismiss them even though I know Harris or any other Democrat is just as bad as any Republican, just with varying degrees of subtlety. It feels worse to capitulate to them considering we're talking about tacitly endorsing genocide by approving of Biden's murder-butcher line when it comes to innocent Palestine people and sending money to
. So I'm stuck on how to even react. Do I just endorse their decision so they can be more radicalized when Harris does nothing good?I think the thing that will really push some people is if Harris loses (a coin flip IMO) or Harris wins, but the supreme court remains unchanged after 4 years (barring death) and there is zero movement on reproductive rights. The contradiction will come to a head at that point. A woman in office, who gets nothing done on reproductive rights, should be a fracturing moment for the Democratic Party. Hard to say though.
Wonder if they'll just pass some bare minimum legal protection for abortion so their party doesn't implode
They've gotten away with it so far, they might foolish enough to do it again.
I hope if they manage to falsely convince everyone that the Dems are actually good again somehow that they at least include legalizing weed in that
