She has some criticisms for her past as an attorney, but I’m not sure why she’s so disliked now. What has she done to engender such distaste from the public?

  • Cylinsier@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    The single biggest problem standing between the left and sustained and meaningful control of the federal government is the complete lack of ability of voters to circle around a consensus candidate. There are several valid reasons to be critical of Harris just as there are pretty much every single Democratic Presidential decade basically of my lifetime. But Republicans vote consistently for candidates they dislike or even hate just to beat Democrats. Every single candidate for the Democratic nomination in 2016, 2020, and undoubtedly in 2028 will have some vocal subset of registered Democrat voters telling you exactly why they will never in a million years vote for them. I saw it constantly on Reddit and I don’t see any reason why it won’t continue.

    Until somebody drops the magic “consensus candidate” name that somehow pleases everyone, Democratic voters are always going to be a major hurdle to their own success. And frankly I don’t think that “consensus candidate” name exists. Such is the curse of being the big tent party opposite the GOP. Republicans know they can continue winning elections for at least a little longer thanks to Democratic infighting alone.

    • Ethereal87@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Democrats fall in love. Republicans fall in line.

      It’s reductive, but look at the Christian Right and Trump. Trump is nowhere close to the picture of a Christian. It’s astounding he can safely cross the threshold of a church. But he promises to make sure abortion is illegal and men can’t pretend to be women to steal kids, so they vote for him. Replace the abortion issue with guns and you get another set of voters who will vote Republican regardless of what they might personally feel.

      Meanwhile and to your point on the left, each candidate’s worst flaws are held as some kind of uncrossable line by people who are terminally online (which isn’t helpful) and the Democratic Party does what they can to feed this and make sure they don’t have to enact meaningful change. They just want to maintain the status quo but they get to do it with a pride flag waving behind them. If the Party establishment would just stop putting a thumb on the scale (not just against Bernie but ANYONE remotely progressive/left of the neoliberal center) and let the primary process shake out the most popular candidate, they might actually find themselves winning elections.

  • StrayCatFrump@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    She’s a racist, classist noeliberal and a fucking cop (or close enough).

    Her political career has been chock-full of attacking public institutions like schools, protecting white-collar crime which destroyed countless lives, protecting child molesters in the church, implementing policy against the poor, and protecting prison slavery. I’m not sure where exactly the confusion lies.

      • Deceptichum@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        At some point you need to take a degree of personal responsibility and research things for yourself. This isn’t a debate, you don’t get the luxury of being spoon-fed everything.

        • yunggwailo@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Asking people to research things themselves is how you have genius’ like op spreading fox news smears but from the left

          • rackmountrambo@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            But like this is all common knowledge if you want to have something of use to offer to this conversation. She was the California AG, literally the top policing position. Before that she was San Francisco’s DA and ran on a platform of Tough On Crime. She’s literally is cop and many would argue by extension, racist, as in systematic.

            As for her neoliberal status, I don’t think that needs to be explained.

            I hate when people say “do your own research” as much as the next guy, but there is a certain degree of familiarity with the subject matter that should be expected to participate, even ACAB dude up there knows what he’s talking about.

            • ChemicalRascal@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Well, her being a cop is self-evident, but let’s review the entire comment:

              She’s a racist, classist noeliberal and a fucking cop (or close enough).

              Her political career has been chock-full of attacking public institutions like schools, protecting white-collar crime which destroyed countless lives, protecting child molesters in the church, implementing policy against the poor, and protecting prison slavery. I’m not sure where exactly the confusion lies.

              I would argue that, frankly, her being a neoliberal should be explained, for the sake of discussion, but her being racist and classist should be. The details of her career being “chock-full” of various acts should be coupled with specific citations to reporting of those acts. And so on.

              I don’t like Harris, mind, but the comment being discussed could have established its evidence in a more convincing manner.