I like the claim that the Democratic Party electorate is racist because black voters liked Biden (Warren/Sanders for younger AAs) more than they did Harris.
This has been what's cracking me up all day about this quasi-conspiratorial Twitter stuff. The bulk of Harris's supporters were rich white people, as is the case for Booker and (possibly) Castro. I wouldn't be surprised if their supporters were whiter than the Democratic primary electorate overall. Whites have pretty consistently backed candidates of color in this race at higher rates than non-whites. This reminds me a lot of the mathematically and factually-challenged Sanders Twitter users from 2016. At least it's yet another good reminder that the Twitterverse for a candidate or ideology looks nothing like their support base overall.
As far as media coverage of Harris, given her aggregate performance throughout the campaign, she actually got considerably more coverage than I would have expected for somebody dawdling in the 6-8% range throughout most of this campaign.
If a particular immutable characteristic is essential or important in terms of embodying a "change agent" who will improve the lives of those with similar backgrounds, then it stands to reason that - even in the Democratic Party - the first step is building a coalition with respectable support levels among those individuals. If you can't do that - or even come anywhere close to it - then you were never going to be a transformative figure anyway. That's the fundamental difference between somebody like President Obama and the candidates of color in this cycle: Obama was able to build strong base support while assembling a multi-faceted coalition bit by bit as the primary progressed (but, to be fair, even he was mostly propped up by a bunch of yuppie whites until Clinton began faltering).
