Kamala Harris 2020 campaign megathread

[Progressive Pessimist]

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.

[Progressive Pessimist]

First Kamala's 20,000+ crowd didn't count because it was too white and now it doesn't count because it's in Oakland. Yet the same people went nuts when Ojeda announced in front of 10 people in a cafeteria.

So people are attacking Kamala because she may have dated the mayor of San Fransico 20 years ago?

Honestly, if that's the best they can do I might just end up supporting her.

Yeah and let's not forget that meanwhile she'll run in the general election against a notorious adulterer and confessed sexual assaulter.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Beto is most definitely not "consensus unifying" on a national level.

Why are people so excited about a candidate whose crowning achievement is losing an election to the most-hated man in congress after outspending him by a 2:1 margin?

Because he's an excellent campaigner who managed to come closer than expected in a state where no Democrat should have any business doing that well, and because he is as relevant as he'll ever be. If he doesn't run, his current high profile basically becomes moot.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Does Abrams sudden interest indicate that some politicos think that Kamala's campaign and numbers are weaker than expected?  And I'm not saying this is the case... I'm genuinely wondering is this may be the case?

(granted although I actually think Abrams is a better politician & comes across as more authentic than Kamala & connects with voters better than Kamala... but having not yet been elected to (Senate/Congress/Governor/Cabinet/Big City Mayor) - her path in 2020 is that of Senator... which I think she can win)

Well, with Messam running and Gillum possibly running too, she might as well at this rate. I'd prefer that she runs for the Senate though and not let her ambition get the better of her.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Beto's my first choice right now, but Kamala is my second. I love them both tbh. Whatever happens, I want the two of them together on the Democratic ticket for 2020 in either formation.

Thirded.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Kamala's policy proposal have been pretty solid so far. First the LIFT act and now this.

But she's just the identity politics candidate.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Kamala's teacher pay policy has even received the endorsement of Klobuchar lol
https://mobile.twitter.com/amyklobuchar/status/1110640493912829952

I've seen a trend of the women candidates sticking together so far and complimenting each other I think this is apart of that. I can see them making some sort of pact to not attack each other and go after the men instead.

This is an outrage! Did Brie Larson give them that advice!?

In all seriousness, Klobuchar prides herself on her pragmatism, so that's probably a good indication of how feasible this policy of Harris' is.

[Progressive Pessimist]

https://twitter.com/CNNPolitics/status/1110675491357368322

She's a policy wonk at heart, though the media would like to focus on her as being the "identity politics"(civil rights) candidate, when she's so much more than that valid description. Above all this shows Kamala as being the champion of the working class.

But she can't be that because she isn't a white man, and furthermore she's a "coastal elitist!" There aren't any working class people on the coasts, you know!

[Progressive Pessimist]

https://twitter.com/CNNPolitics/status/1110675491357368322

She's a policy wonk at heart, though the media would like to focus on her as being the "identity politics"(civil rights) candidate, when she's so much more than that valid description. Above all this shows Kamala as being the champion of the working class.

But she can't be that because she isn't a white man, and furthermore she's a "coastal elitist!" There aren't any working class people on the coasts, you know!

Nice strawman.

No, people do say that about her and it's ignorant.

I was under the impression that the post was an attempt at strawmanning Bernie supporters.

If not, then I apologise for a false assumption

Not necessarily. It's kind of an assertion made against politicians from certain states by both the right and left. It can apply to and by anyone, really.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Not sure why people are pushing that Kamala is a national figure. Yes, is she one of the better known national dems? Sure, but still not a lot. Just look at all of the polls going on -- even her score of "Don't Know" is still pretty high among even DEMOCRATS, let alone all voters.

Her candidacy and supposed popularity is more of a media creation than anything else.  Besides being an identity politics candidate from the most "coastal elitist" city in the country (besides NYC of course), what does she have to offer as a future President?

Is anyone who’s not a white male going to be referred to as an identity politics candidate? Are non-white, non-male candidates not supposed to speak about how their experience as a part of a historically marginalized community has shaped their perspectives on issues?

[Progressive Pessimist]

First Scrooge McSanders, now Yosemite Kam!

The Hill: Kamala Harris: 'I am a gun owner' for personal protection

If she is indeed being truthful about this, maybe it could be a decent tactic. It would demonstrate that there are in fact Americans (who aren't always NRA lackeys) who begrudgingly own guns for the express purpose of protection but would still prefer not to have to in an ideal world and as such simultaneously support gun control measures. On top of that, Harris has been targeted by far right would-be terrorists on more than one occasion, so can you really blame her?

[Progressive Pessimist]

Identity politics is civil rights.  Dismissing it means you don't have an understanding of marginalized groups. Senator Harris lays it all down in this beautiful video.

https://twitter.com/KamalaHarris/status/1119271106576363521?

I'm glad to hear a candidate actually confront this worthless buzzword and not embrace it out of some sort of desperation to not alienate people who would never even vote for them in the first place.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Beto and Harris dont have the bold agenda that Joe and Sanders have. Sanders have an agenda of Medicare for all.

You like Sanders now?

[Progressive Pessimist]

Beto and Harris dont have the bold agenda that Joe and Sanders have. Sanders have an agenda of Medicare for all.

You like Sanders now?

Sanders has proven doubters wrong, and Dems had they anti-Sanders candidate in 2016, Hilary still lost.

I disagree with both of those points. But if you're supporting him now, more power to you.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Beto and Harris dont have the bold agenda that Joe and Sanders have. Sanders have an agenda of Medicare for all.

You like Sanders now?

Sanders has proven doubters wrong, and Dems had they anti-Sanders candidate in 2016, Hilary still lost.

I disagree with both of those points. But if you're supporting him now, more power to you.

You may think Joe is savior, I dont, he invaded women's personal space and women are supposed to forget about it, just because he roles out his campaign?

Females are watching Joe. As far as Beto is concerned, he's done

I have been very vocal about not being much of a Biden supporter either. Not being a Sanders supporter doesn't automatically make me a Biden loyalist. If the primary came down between the two of them only, I might actually go with Sanders to be honest.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Other than some of the "this is a conversation we need to have" stuff, I thought she did really well. Answers on gun control, impeachment, healthcare were all great. And honestly the "conversation" line worked for felons voting and reparations, because those are things that will need a little more time and research and studies to look at.

I agree. Though she also needs to find another word to use other than "unconscionable." It's a small nitpick, but you could have made a drinking game out of how many times she used that word.

[Progressive Pessimist]

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2019/04/26/kamala-harris-owns-handgun-unacceptable-2020-democratic-race-column/3567371002/?fbclid=IwAR0c4YI5TYW96-TEZNvAx2SgVRU_m6VRLfk0nONEVzyz6fyHU9s0ZPXrWl8#_=_

I can't believe I am defending Harris, but this is beyond parody.

I made a post about this a few pages back and why it isn't a big deal too. Harris really can't do anything without hyperbolic criticism.

[Progressive Pessimist]

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2019/04/26/kamala-harris-owns-handgun-unacceptable-2020-democratic-race-column/3567371002/?fbclid=IwAR0c4YI5TYW96-TEZNvAx2SgVRU_m6VRLfk0nONEVzyz6fyHU9s0ZPXrWl8#_=_

I can't believe I am defending Harris, but this is beyond parody.

I made a post about this a few pages back and why it isn't a big deal too. Harris really can't do anything without hyperbolic criticism.

There are legitimate things to criticise her for. Owning a gun (and a handgun at that) is not one of them.

Sure, I don't oppose every criticism of her. It's just that there tend to be a lot of inconsequential ones coming up like her being anachronistic over what kind of music she listened to in college. I'll never get over that one.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Did anyone else notice that Harris misused the word "inferred" during her questioning of Barr?

She also got the music she listened to in college wrong! Burn the witch!

[Progressive Pessimist]

Anyone else beside me watch her Rachel Meadow appearence?

lol no

Nothing to laugh about appearing on a respected journalist program. I know people on here have knives against her but just think for a moment, how many journalist with a program would open their shows by tracing a educational approach of history, with connecting the dots between the events in the past with the major events that are ongoing? People can opted to think she's an hack, what they can't deny is her intellect and her style of manner in analyzing the complexity that goes behind the stories that aren't dumbed down to a two-minute clip.

Respected? Hahahahahahahah good one.

She's actually won accolades from respected organizations.

Trump has won accolades from respected organizations.

The Golden Raspberry Awards are a respected organization?

[Progressive Pessimist]

The shade of it all!

https://twitter.com/NBCNews/status/1128708209315864577

That's a pretty great response.

[Progressive Pessimist]

I'm done worrying about the female candidates' "electability." We need one of the women to be our nominee, they are miles better than most of the male candidates.

[Progressive Pessimist]

https://twitter.com/VaughnHillyard/status/1145466787225571328

She'll distance herself from this in a general election, unless she wants to see if she can lose Virginia and Illinois

Stop trying to make red Illinois happen.

Illinois is a hyperbole but running a campaign based around reintroducing forced busing is a great way to lose all your recent gains in wealthy suburbs while picking up no new voters

Who said her campaign was going to make busing a central issue? Besides, I HIGHLY doubt that if Trump were to win re-election, busing would ever be the reason why.

I agree. The media's focus on busing, as if Harris wants to make a cornerstone of her campaign, is infuriating! Busing was just an example of how civil rights policy affected her life and how politicians like Biden can disappoint in that regard. It doesn't mean that she is going to re-litigate the issue. It will not come up as a policy discussion in the contemporary United States or in its elections. The media needs to stop muddying the waters on this. It's nothing but a distraction.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Wanting to prioritize that authoritarian regimes are held to a better standard when it comes to human rights does not make one a neocon especially as Trump's administration is rife with real ones. Trump's policy of mutual flattery only helps the autocrats he likes to pal around with. A Democrat is not going to go to war with North Korea or Russia. We can pursue diplomacy with them while still holding them accountable for their abuses and expecting better out of them. That better serves our interests and the world's. These will probably be the basics of any Democrat's foreign policy and it's all because Trump s*** the bed so badly.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Newt Gingrich said that Harris will be nominee, get ready for Harris-Castro

Is Newt Gingrich particularly prescient?