Kamala Harris 2020 campaign megathread

[DrScholl]

The path to winning is through Democratic trending suburbs and Harris is one of the candidates who can do that. Democrats who won statewide in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin by running up score in heavily Democratic areas and chipping away are suburban margins. No matter who the nominee is they have to adapt to the new map.

[DrScholl]

Very sad when Joe Walsh of all people is being more reasonable than some people here.

https://twitter.com/WalshFreedom/status/1087373777296674817

It becomes less cool when you consider that she chose the day because she knows she won't get support for any reasons other than being a black woman.

This why Republicans lost control of the House. Assumptions that everyone will vote based on race and gender, not the issues.

[DrScholl]

Very sad when Joe Walsh of all people is being more reasonable than some people here.

https://twitter.com/WalshFreedom/status/1087373777296674817

It becomes less cool when you consider that she chose the day because she knows she won't get support for any reasons other than being a black woman.

This why Republicans lost control of the House. Assumptions that everyone will vote based on race and gender, not the issues.

When it comes to someone like Kamala Harris, it's just the truth.

It's true that profiles do appeal to people's voting preferences, but do not assume that Trump would automatically defeat her if she was the nominee because he's a great white man that she is trying to rob of the Presidency.

[DrScholl]

The thing that is overlooked is that Trump ran a clearly racist campaign that played on resentment. That was not the case when Obama was running. There were a lot of apathetic racist voters who showed up just to vote for Trump in addition to Obama voters who switched to Trump.

[DrScholl]

Let's be completely honest here, if she gets a decent amount of support, it'll ONLY be because of the boxes she checks for sjw Democrats, not because of anything she's done in her career.

Let's be completely honest here, any woman who runs for anything is ONLY winning because she's an SJW female Democrat who didn't work hard at all for where she is at now.

Not in 2008 , Obama was clearly considered the more SJW candidate compared to Hillary and if Amy Klobacher for example runs this year she wouldn’t be a SJW candidate either .

Notice Klobuchar is the woman everyone cites. Why? Maybe because she's midwestern and that's the type of identity politics everyone likes, as opposed to the dirty identity politics of women on the coasts (especially black ones)?

There's a strong chance I'll support Gillibrand, (see sig) and I think Harris is a trash candidate.

You went from supporting a white man in the 2016 primary to initially supporting that same white man for this cycle’s primary to supporting a different white man from Texas to now supporting a white woman.

In the long run people like that poster are pretty much irrelevant to who will get the nomination, so there's no use even trying to figure them out.

[DrScholl]

Here in Georgia with a bunch of organizers and party people on my social media (more of them white than black I might add) and this announcement by far has gotten the biggest and most fervent reaction. She’s sweeping the South.

Same story in CA — word I’m getting is that her organizer and donor support here is nearly unanimous. And CA + the South + black support elsewhere is the nomination.

Couple problems:
1.CA is going to be heavily contested by everyone. She isnt likely to get a simple majority there.
2. The Black vote will be divided between other candidates like Booker, Biden, and Sanders
3. The South is only influential if she can get crazy margins out of it like Clinton/Obama did. See point 2 on how this would be difficult.

That plan, IMO, is highly risky, and requires no mistakes or losses for the Harris campaign.

Sanders is not going to get much of the black vote, so he is not even a factor. If he did abysmally with black voters against a white candidate, he's not going to do much better against a black candidates.

[DrScholl]

Here in Georgia with a bunch of organizers and party people on my social media (more of them white than black I might add) and this announcement by far has gotten the biggest and most fervent reaction. She’s sweeping the South.

Same story in CA — word I’m getting is that her organizer and donor support here is nearly unanimous. And CA + the South + black support elsewhere is the nomination.

Couple problems:
1.CA is going to be heavily contested by everyone. She isnt likely to get a simple majority there.
2. The Black vote will be divided between other candidates like Booker, Biden, and Sanders
3. The South is only influential if she can get crazy margins out of it like Clinton/Obama did. See point 2 on how this would be difficult.

That plan, IMO, is highly risky, and requires no mistakes or losses for the Harris campaign.

Sanders is not going to get much of the black vote, so he is not even a factor. If he did abysmally with black voters against a white candidate, he's not going to do much better against a black candidates.

He got around 35% of the Black Vote. Thanks to the power of math, we can see that, if the field is split evenly by 4 candidates(Harris, Booker, Biden, Sanders), then yes, he is a threat.

It also should be mentioned that, in a primary, winning states isnt the objective, its getting the most amount of delegates. The difference between Harris winning AL by 80% and 40% is crucial.

Harris and Booker probably take up most of the black vote in that scenario, with Biden taking up the most of the remainder leaving Sanders probably with less than 35%. Getting 35% in a two way race is a lot easier than a four way.

And of course delegates are what really matters, but even there Sanders is not much of a threat when it comes to the black vote.

[DrScholl]

Has Harris every actually done anything to connect with the black community?

They might consider her but Booker has been much more a pro black candidate.

She comes from San Francisco/Bay area which is mostly white and asian. Only a few black people are there. Meanwhile Booker comes from heavily black Newark so he has some idea on how to connect to black candidates

On criminal justice issues she was not a great candidate for the black community as she had many harsh policies as AG. Meanwhile Booker was one of the largest proponents of CJ reform working strongly with Rand Paul

Booker has also shown much more aptness to visit deep south states atm so this also helps him.

And no having an affair with Willie Brown does not count as connecting with the black community

She attended Howard University, which is one of the best HBCUs in the country. Anyways, Kamala is from Oakland.

Oakland has a sizable Black population. Also, The Black Panther Party started in Oakland.

She was born in Oakland, but raised in the very white Quebec by her single Indian mother. Sure she went to Howard, but her career as a prosecutor and her interracial marriage will get her a lot more questions about her connection to the black community than Barack Obama who was a former community organizer with a black family.

If this is the sort of campaign "progressives" for Bernie or for whoever plan on running they are only going to make themselves look bad. Questioning who blackness is a recipe for helping her more than anything.

[DrScholl]

I knew this thread would be frustrating. Can we give the woman a chance to actually campaign? Hell, she's having a town hall on CNN next week. It's ridiculous to already dismiss her as an "unelectable, neoliberal, SJW, identity politics-loving, coastal elitist, *insert other nebulous, arbitrary, buzzword of your choice here.*

I for one am definitely inclined to support her and Gillibrand the most, so far. I'm a bit torn between them, but I'll make up my mind as the primary campaign trudges on, I'm sure...or at least until (or if) Beto starts campaigning for the nomination.

A lot of people feel like they need to tear down other candidates in order for their candidate to win or feel as if their candidate is entitled to the nomination. Logic does not apply with those people.

[DrScholl]

Kamala Harris would probably have one of the better chances, out of the candidates who have a serious shot at winning the Democratic nomination, of defeating Trump in the general election. However, she is not the most impressive or the best candidate who could be nominated. Her decision to announce her run on MLK Day was deliberate, part of her effort to become the "female Obama".

Criticism has been made of her record as California Attorney General, and she would continue the Democratic Party's trend towards social liberalism and identity politics, sacrificing what should be a more substantive focus on matters of policy and of governance. There's also the matter of how she got to her political position. Overall, my hope is that Democrats nominate someone other than her, someone who can appeal to the electorate and present the best counterargument against Trump.

What exactly does that mean? I have an idea, but I want to see if you are bold enough to actually sacrifice your "moderate" profile to say it.

[DrScholl]

Kamala Harris would probably have one of the better chances, out of the candidates who have a serious shot at winning the Democratic nomination, of defeating Trump in the general election. However, she is not the most impressive or the best candidate who could be nominated. Her decision to announce her run on MLK Day was deliberate, part of her effort to become the "female Obama".

Criticism has been made of her record as California Attorney General, and she would continue the Democratic Party's trend towards social liberalism and identity politics, sacrificing what should be a more substantive focus on matters of policy and of governance. There's also the matter of how she got to her political position. Overall, my hope is that Democrats nominate someone other than her, someone who can appeal to the electorate and present the best counterargument against Trump.

What exactly does that mean? I have an idea, but I want to see if you are bold enough to actually sacrifice your "moderate" profile to say it.

You know what I'm talking about. She's done things that people like Hillary Clinton overlooked, to advance her own political career. Women who degrade themselves in such a manner are not due our respect.

You, sir, are trash.

That's putting it mildly.

[DrScholl]

Why were my posts deleted? Is it out of place to point out the flaws inherent with this woman's candidacy. Or are we not allowed to do that? I guess not.

Because of what you were implying. I had a post deleted for referencing the line of attack that some people are planning to use against Harris, because it was deemed inappropriate. It is clearly an inappropriate line of attack.

[DrScholl]

Why were my posts deleted? Is it out of place to point out the flaws inherent with this woman's candidacy. Or are we not allowed to do that? I guess not.

Because of what you were implying. I had a post deleted for referencing the line of attack that some people are planning to use against Harris, because it was deemed inappropriate. It is clearly an inappropriate line of attack.

Is it really? Given what was said about both Clintons (and justly so), and given Trump's controversies, it's not far-fetched, But I guess that such criticisms can't be levied against the favorite candidate of the moment.

If someone were to say that about a Republican woman running for office you were be singing a totally different song. Rumors like that have no place in political discussion unless there is actual evidence.

[DrScholl]

Why were my posts deleted? Is it out of place to point out the flaws inherent with this woman's candidacy. Or are we not allowed to do that? I guess not.

Because of what you were implying. I had a post deleted for referencing the line of attack that some people are planning to use against Harris, because it was deemed inappropriate. It is clearly an inappropriate line of attack.

Is it really? Given what was said about both Clintons (and justly so), and given Trump's controversies, it's not far-fetched, But I guess that such criticisms can't be levied against the favorite candidate of the moment.

If someone were to say that about a Republican woman running for office you were be singing a totally different song. Rumors like that have no place in political discussion unless there is actual evidence.

Not true. Everything should be laid out on the table, regardless of the party. And Harris's relationship with Willie Brown is no secret.

This is exactly why Trump will lose.

[DrScholl]

Everyone else who has reservations about Harris pointed to actual policy issues or even regional issues, which are fair assessments even if everyone doesn't agree. What is not appropriate is cheap gossip that is rooted in nothing.

[DrScholl]

Another random fact: If she's elected, we would have one President of the United States born on the exact same date than another one died: Kamala Harris was born on October 20, 1964. On this day, Herbert Hoover, another president from California, passed away.

Hopefully not Hoover reborn

She could be. We will have to see. My hope is that Harris gets defeated in the Democratic primary. As I've outlined above, she is not deserving of the highest office in the land.

I think you've said enough, troll.

[DrScholl]

https://freebeacon.com/politics/kamala-harris-stacks-presidential-campaign-with-hillary-clinton-alums/

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yeah, a hard pass on Hillary's favorite candidate.

And hard pass here on Bernie if he somehow makes the general.

[DrScholl]

If Clintons want her as a frontrunner, that is good.

You really want that second term for Trump?

Being in California it's not like voting for Sanders would really make any difference to the electoral college.

[DrScholl]

So now white people being at a rally is a problem? The hypocrisy is stunning. Oakland is changing and is a lot whiter than it was even just 10 years ago.

[DrScholl]

So now white people being at a rally is a problem? The hypocrisy is stunning. Oakland is changing and is a lot whiter than it was even just 10 years ago.

Oakland is still only 27.3% non Hispanic white in the 2018 estimates.

So you can Google, good to know. Your whining about the crowd being too white still makes no sense.

[DrScholl]

The statewide races in 2018 showed that the white working class in several states is irrelevant to a Democrat actually winning. It's the larger urban counties and suburban counties that will be decisive and Harris can win those areas.

[DrScholl]

The right wing hate machine is currently screaming that Kamala Harris slept her way to the top of the political food chain by having sex with San Francisco Mayor, power broker, and CA Assembly Speaker Willie Brown during her time as a prosecutor. The two did date in the early 2000s.

It's not just the right-wingers, it's the Sanders people as well.

[DrScholl]

The right wing hate machine is currently screaming that Kamala Harris slept her way to the top of the political food chain by having sex with San Francisco Mayor, power broker, and CA Assembly Speaker Willie Brown during her time as a prosecutor. The two did date in the early 2000s.

Brown's the one claiming that, not the "right wing hate machine"

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/former-san-francisco-mayor-addresses-past-relationship-with-sen-kamala-harris

You obviously haven't seen the right-wingers on Twitter and that is definitely a hate machine.

[DrScholl]

I'd like to note that Harris' campaign chairwoman is the person in charge of crafting a policy agenda (so-called) for Hillary's 2016 campaign.  Talk about failing upward

Well it’s also her sister.

Hooray for nepotism

Many campaigns do that. It's really about having people you can trust on your campaign.

[DrScholl]

I saw parts her speech. It was a good speech and I hope she continues to address criminal justice in a proper way.

She's my likely choice as of now.

I mean, she fought to keep an innocent man behind bars for pretty much no reason

Who cares? No one is voting based on that when there are far bigger issues at stake.