The media have decided on a narrative for her that’s highly biased (every powerful female politician is tarred as a terrible manager, either bitchy or too soft; have you ever seen an article about a male senator’s management style?), so it’s hard to know what she’s doing or capable of. The office holds no power. But we saw her as a Senator and on her presidential campaign. She’s not an idiot like other VPs we’ve seen, and her assignments have given her opportunities to establish relationships around the world. I think she demonstrates toughness and empathy, and whatever baggage she might have has surely been uncovered. I think she’s an asset. Who knows what a person would do in the role once they’re there? It’s always a risk. But we’ve seen her for almost 4 years and she’s not as ill qualified as Pence or Spiro Agnew who used the office for grand grift. Consider the risk when he was VP and Nixon was on his way out. He had to be taken down first.
I think its strange that we believe that a highly qualified lawyer (DA, California AG) and former Senator is an unqualified idiot. VPs are by the nature of the role boxed in by the Administration they serve in.
Perhaps I have underestimated Dworkin’s gaslighting skills - which I can also objectively view as his over compensating for the hatchet job legacy media and the GOoP’s have done to Harris’s character and credibility, framed by plenty of misogyny. It doesn’t, however, address the first question I asked but was not answered…do you trust her with the nuclear football?
It’s annoying as fuck how we continue to provide the widest of error margins for our highest government position, concluding we won’t know until we know (that smells like Rumsfeld invading Iraq logic). It is almost as juvenile as going to the store, purchasing a blouse, but wearing it as workout clothing to the gym, and are mystified by people’s reaction…but you knew what you were wearing when you left the damn house.
Pence and Agnew don’t even come to mind as comparative fodder. Pence can’t be trusted to keep track of his fucking spine, and Agnew was a thug and a criminal. And not a very good one, as he got caught.
Let’s also not forget Harris’s staff turnover pace nearly matched#45s. It appears to have slowed down after folks started to take notice. Ostensibly. But having been a part of my fair share of staffs, both military and civilian, that type of management style does not change. It’s like herpes. It never goes away and flares up at the most inopportune time, usually as a serious habitual character flaw.
Harris had a presidential campaign? I wouldn’t follow Wile E. Haley to happy hour, but she did run a decent presidential campaign. It was memorable. Influential to the largest voting base (Independents). Haley is still a threat to Harris and Biden, especially if #45 dies, and Haley sells her soul to the devil again (which she will always do). The only thing Harris’s presidential campaign enabled was her interview for VEEP.
Please re-read what I wrote, to include the links - especially from Steve Schmidt pertaining to the Harris staff’s mis-proportioned focus on Harris POTUS 2028. Which is political party standard operating procedure for a VEEP, but remind me again what’s the margin of error with an octogenarian in the oval this time around? Especially in comparative tone to Dworkin’s hard sell on Kamala as more than the VEEP legislators make no effort to speak with when she visits the Capitol.
During her very brief time as a senator (brief as referenced to other previous and current California Senators - which could actually be a positive thing if Harris were advocating term limits) she advocated for healthcare reform, federal de-scheduling of cannabis, a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, the DREAM Act, a ban on assault weapons, and progressive tax reform. All dossiers every other legislative DEM has been pushing uphill, which makes Harris average. Efforts applauded. But as a resume to run for VEEP, did she have the Stacey Abrams accomplishment of turning Georgia from red to purple, giving the DEMS a majority in our Senate? Breaking voter turnout records in Georgia to prevent a dictator from becoming prez for life? But of course Abrams would not have been good on a Biden ticket, given the brown paper bag test. Just as it is unimaginable that Obama would have won the first time around with Samuel L. Jackson’s tone(s).
Additionally, after I have spent some significant time here in California, I have found Harris is not really a part of any legal hall of fame, or sought after as the golden child of Cali. Progressives in California chide her for assuming their title. Northern and southern. I doubt Kamala knew who Fat Joe was until she became VP. Her Senate record was okay, especially considering the short length of time she spent there. Her record with the California legal system was, meh.
Harris’s most remarkable accent as VEEP has been to break the centuries-old record for the most tiebreaking votes cast by a vice president in the Senate. Underscoring Democrats' tenuous hold on the majority and the deep polarization gripping Congress. WOW!! That passes as a fucking record? It’s more reflection on how fucked up our legislators are (especially Repugnantcans), but…it’s a record I guess…someone award Harris a Block M on her letter jacket for lettering in mediocrity.
Think of it this way, Todd Ressel. How many full Colonel’s have we known that were excellent Colonels, but would make or did make horrible Generals, which is the next rung up. VEEP is Colonel. POTUS is a four star general. We can perhaps agree Harris is a great Colonel, but general officer material?
🏈!!
And we continue the slow roll to 6 January.
I will vote for Harris. And if we are still here on the planet, I will vote for her in 2028.
I just want us all to be clear what we are getting as extra when we order the Biden #47. There are no menu substitutes or refunds. And Harris as a POTUS option is certainly not gaslighting material…at least it shouldn’t be. Travel with her is in a Volkswagen, not a Cadillac. Honesty.
My original question still stands, unanswered. Would you trust Kamala with the football? I will go first. I don’t know…which, given the level of critical importance, I may as well just have said no.
If I understand your position, the reporting on her staff turnover (and her AG history) are reasons to disqualify her from controlling nuclear codes? That test is one of temperament and ability to reason and make command decisions. She isn’t obviously deficient in those areas to me. I discount rumours about management because 1) the facts are thin and 2) this is a standard attack against women holding power.
I like Stacy Abrams a lot too, but she failed twice to win the Governor’s chair (yes, Kemp stole it from her the first time). That doesn’t position her well; politically she wasn’t the best choice.
I doubt Harris would win a presidential campaign, but I also don’t see her as a liability. Presidents never choose VPs that are stronger than them. I’m fine with the odds on this ticket. It’s clear you’re not, and I appreciate your advocacy for criticism of the status quo.
You are right in saying Harris won’t win a presidential campaign. However, I don’t believe it will stop partisan DIMS from taking the chance of her losing in the general election to a Repugnantcan and therefore will nominate her to run and probably win DEM primaries as the incumbent (of sorts). 2016 all over again. Yay?
I have to laugh- when I typed my sentence that you called out I actually thought about Cheney and reconsidered my word choice. ‘Stronger’ only in the sense of candidate. Cheney couldn’t have won. Hell, W. didn’t win the first time.
I agree that we need to be clear eyed and call it straight. Too much is on the line to fall in behind boosterism that redirects the eye away from the flaws they want to hide.
And yet, this is an election year and voters need to get behind this ticket or it will be the last vote for a very long time. I don’t want to see election events like we just saw in Russia played for our viewing pleasure in 2028.
Cheney wasn’t stronger than Bush? That’s news to me.😜🤪
Abrams was only used as an example of someone achieving significant milestones in order to be better qualified than Harris. The brown paper bag analogy serves as our agreement that “politics” would preclude her from the ticket. As unfortunate as it sounds, Harris’s biggest and most important qualification was politics - and little else, it would appear. The right woman of color to get the job, to get the votes. This unfortunate fact gets swept under the virtue signal rug and really is more of a reflection upon how shitty our politics are, not reflective of her character (in this aspect, at least). But does Putin care about that? No. In fact he and the Soviet Empire will take advantage of it.
The closest that Harris has come to a command decision scenario could be her time as Cali AG. I invite you to peel the onion back on her performance there a little more. It’s overrated. The Vox article I provided is not mainstream media, and is only a start. I also refer back to what you yourself said about the unknown. Which is it? It can’t be both ways. That’s why I have stated, even ignoring all or any disqualifiers, I don’t know how she would handle the most important qualifier as the commander-in-chief.
I well understand the misogyny framing. I am not mainstream media. When you are in charge, man or woman, staff turbulence to the degrees demonstrated by both Jackolantern and Harris is always reflective of flaws in character traits and is always cause for concern. Misogyny or not. Just as groupthink and mission creep is always a demoralizing and dysfunctional pattern; and always finds foundation in dysfunctional staff management.
Liability. Agreed. Not an issue so long as Joe lives 4 MORE YEARS! Well, except for the sucky polling. But yes. I would have never started this project if a heart-beat-away never became an issue. Just as Biden’s age wouldn’t be an issue if there were more confidence in Harris as POTUS.
I recently came across another essay that broke the Harris Uncertainty down like this:
50% racist misogyny
20% VP office as an anchor
30% Harris’s unforced errors
The outlook is more lie this:
55% racist misogyny (I believe white men tend to underestimate this.)
15% VP as an anchor (Is the office really more burdened than this? After all, doesn’t the Biden empathy kicks in as a previous occupant)
30% Harris’s unforced errors
In conclusion. Sure…I will buy a fake Rolex (Romex), and probably even manage to fake being proud of it…but I will be pissed when gaslighted to pay full price. That’s what I see with Dworkin and other DIMS submissions about Harris POTUS potential. They are selling us a fake Rolex.
The media have decided on a narrative for her that’s highly biased (every powerful female politician is tarred as a terrible manager, either bitchy or too soft; have you ever seen an article about a male senator’s management style?), so it’s hard to know what she’s doing or capable of. The office holds no power. But we saw her as a Senator and on her presidential campaign. She’s not an idiot like other VPs we’ve seen, and her assignments have given her opportunities to establish relationships around the world. I think she demonstrates toughness and empathy, and whatever baggage she might have has surely been uncovered. I think she’s an asset. Who knows what a person would do in the role once they’re there? It’s always a risk. But we’ve seen her for almost 4 years and she’s not as ill qualified as Pence or Spiro Agnew who used the office for grand grift. Consider the risk when he was VP and Nixon was on his way out. He had to be taken down first.
I responded en masse on this thread….
I think its strange that we believe that a highly qualified lawyer (DA, California AG) and former Senator is an unqualified idiot. VPs are by the nature of the role boxed in by the Administration they serve in.
I responded en masse on this thread….
Definitely trust her so much more than the convicted rapist, con artist, tax evasionist, and traitor Trump
Ok?
My response to Dionne Dumitru and Todd Ressel :
Perhaps I have underestimated Dworkin’s gaslighting skills - which I can also objectively view as his over compensating for the hatchet job legacy media and the GOoP’s have done to Harris’s character and credibility, framed by plenty of misogyny. It doesn’t, however, address the first question I asked but was not answered…do you trust her with the nuclear football?
It’s annoying as fuck how we continue to provide the widest of error margins for our highest government position, concluding we won’t know until we know (that smells like Rumsfeld invading Iraq logic). It is almost as juvenile as going to the store, purchasing a blouse, but wearing it as workout clothing to the gym, and are mystified by people’s reaction…but you knew what you were wearing when you left the damn house.
Pence and Agnew don’t even come to mind as comparative fodder. Pence can’t be trusted to keep track of his fucking spine, and Agnew was a thug and a criminal. And not a very good one, as he got caught.
Let’s also not forget Harris’s staff turnover pace nearly matched#45s. It appears to have slowed down after folks started to take notice. Ostensibly. But having been a part of my fair share of staffs, both military and civilian, that type of management style does not change. It’s like herpes. It never goes away and flares up at the most inopportune time, usually as a serious habitual character flaw.
Harris had a presidential campaign? I wouldn’t follow Wile E. Haley to happy hour, but she did run a decent presidential campaign. It was memorable. Influential to the largest voting base (Independents). Haley is still a threat to Harris and Biden, especially if #45 dies, and Haley sells her soul to the devil again (which she will always do). The only thing Harris’s presidential campaign enabled was her interview for VEEP.
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/3572304-revolving-door-creates-questions-and-complications-for-kamala-harris/#:~:text=More%20than%2013%20high%2Dprofile,in%20the%20vice%20president's%20office.
Please re-read what I wrote, to include the links - especially from Steve Schmidt pertaining to the Harris staff’s mis-proportioned focus on Harris POTUS 2028. Which is political party standard operating procedure for a VEEP, but remind me again what’s the margin of error with an octogenarian in the oval this time around? Especially in comparative tone to Dworkin’s hard sell on Kamala as more than the VEEP legislators make no effort to speak with when she visits the Capitol.
During her very brief time as a senator (brief as referenced to other previous and current California Senators - which could actually be a positive thing if Harris were advocating term limits) she advocated for healthcare reform, federal de-scheduling of cannabis, a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, the DREAM Act, a ban on assault weapons, and progressive tax reform. All dossiers every other legislative DEM has been pushing uphill, which makes Harris average. Efforts applauded. But as a resume to run for VEEP, did she have the Stacey Abrams accomplishment of turning Georgia from red to purple, giving the DEMS a majority in our Senate? Breaking voter turnout records in Georgia to prevent a dictator from becoming prez for life? But of course Abrams would not have been good on a Biden ticket, given the brown paper bag test. Just as it is unimaginable that Obama would have won the first time around with Samuel L. Jackson’s tone(s).
Check out the article below:
https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2019/1/23/18184192/kamala-harris-president-campaign-criminal-justice-record
Additionally, after I have spent some significant time here in California, I have found Harris is not really a part of any legal hall of fame, or sought after as the golden child of Cali. Progressives in California chide her for assuming their title. Northern and southern. I doubt Kamala knew who Fat Joe was until she became VP. Her Senate record was okay, especially considering the short length of time she spent there. Her record with the California legal system was, meh.
Harris’s most remarkable accent as VEEP has been to break the centuries-old record for the most tiebreaking votes cast by a vice president in the Senate. Underscoring Democrats' tenuous hold on the majority and the deep polarization gripping Congress. WOW!! That passes as a fucking record? It’s more reflection on how fucked up our legislators are (especially Repugnantcans), but…it’s a record I guess…someone award Harris a Block M on her letter jacket for lettering in mediocrity.
Think of it this way, Todd Ressel. How many full Colonel’s have we known that were excellent Colonels, but would make or did make horrible Generals, which is the next rung up. VEEP is Colonel. POTUS is a four star general. We can perhaps agree Harris is a great Colonel, but general officer material?
🏈!!
And we continue the slow roll to 6 January.
I will vote for Harris. And if we are still here on the planet, I will vote for her in 2028.
I just want us all to be clear what we are getting as extra when we order the Biden #47. There are no menu substitutes or refunds. And Harris as a POTUS option is certainly not gaslighting material…at least it shouldn’t be. Travel with her is in a Volkswagen, not a Cadillac. Honesty.
My original question still stands, unanswered. Would you trust Kamala with the football? I will go first. I don’t know…which, given the level of critical importance, I may as well just have said no.
That’s a problem.
☮️🇺🇸🇵🇸🇮🇱☯️
If I understand your position, the reporting on her staff turnover (and her AG history) are reasons to disqualify her from controlling nuclear codes? That test is one of temperament and ability to reason and make command decisions. She isn’t obviously deficient in those areas to me. I discount rumours about management because 1) the facts are thin and 2) this is a standard attack against women holding power.
I like Stacy Abrams a lot too, but she failed twice to win the Governor’s chair (yes, Kemp stole it from her the first time). That doesn’t position her well; politically she wasn’t the best choice.
I doubt Harris would win a presidential campaign, but I also don’t see her as a liability. Presidents never choose VPs that are stronger than them. I’m fine with the odds on this ticket. It’s clear you’re not, and I appreciate your advocacy for criticism of the status quo.
If I may be permitted one last point of order.
You are right in saying Harris won’t win a presidential campaign. However, I don’t believe it will stop partisan DIMS from taking the chance of her losing in the general election to a Repugnantcan and therefore will nominate her to run and probably win DEM primaries as the incumbent (of sorts). 2016 all over again. Yay?
I have to laugh- when I typed my sentence that you called out I actually thought about Cheney and reconsidered my word choice. ‘Stronger’ only in the sense of candidate. Cheney couldn’t have won. Hell, W. didn’t win the first time.
I agree that we need to be clear eyed and call it straight. Too much is on the line to fall in behind boosterism that redirects the eye away from the flaws they want to hide.
And yet, this is an election year and voters need to get behind this ticket or it will be the last vote for a very long time. I don’t want to see election events like we just saw in Russia played for our viewing pleasure in 2028.
Boosterism…that’s a great word. Adjective and a verb.
Cheney wasn’t stronger than Bush? That’s news to me.😜🤪
Abrams was only used as an example of someone achieving significant milestones in order to be better qualified than Harris. The brown paper bag analogy serves as our agreement that “politics” would preclude her from the ticket. As unfortunate as it sounds, Harris’s biggest and most important qualification was politics - and little else, it would appear. The right woman of color to get the job, to get the votes. This unfortunate fact gets swept under the virtue signal rug and really is more of a reflection upon how shitty our politics are, not reflective of her character (in this aspect, at least). But does Putin care about that? No. In fact he and the Soviet Empire will take advantage of it.
The closest that Harris has come to a command decision scenario could be her time as Cali AG. I invite you to peel the onion back on her performance there a little more. It’s overrated. The Vox article I provided is not mainstream media, and is only a start. I also refer back to what you yourself said about the unknown. Which is it? It can’t be both ways. That’s why I have stated, even ignoring all or any disqualifiers, I don’t know how she would handle the most important qualifier as the commander-in-chief.
I well understand the misogyny framing. I am not mainstream media. When you are in charge, man or woman, staff turbulence to the degrees demonstrated by both Jackolantern and Harris is always reflective of flaws in character traits and is always cause for concern. Misogyny or not. Just as groupthink and mission creep is always a demoralizing and dysfunctional pattern; and always finds foundation in dysfunctional staff management.
Liability. Agreed. Not an issue so long as Joe lives 4 MORE YEARS! Well, except for the sucky polling. But yes. I would have never started this project if a heart-beat-away never became an issue. Just as Biden’s age wouldn’t be an issue if there were more confidence in Harris as POTUS.
I recently came across another essay that broke the Harris Uncertainty down like this:
50% racist misogyny
20% VP office as an anchor
30% Harris’s unforced errors
The outlook is more lie this:
55% racist misogyny (I believe white men tend to underestimate this.)
15% VP as an anchor (Is the office really more burdened than this? After all, doesn’t the Biden empathy kicks in as a previous occupant)
30% Harris’s unforced errors
In conclusion. Sure…I will buy a fake Rolex (Romex), and probably even manage to fake being proud of it…but I will be pissed when gaslighted to pay full price. That’s what I see with Dworkin and other DIMS submissions about Harris POTUS potential. They are selling us a fake Rolex.