American Politics Thread: The Hunt for Blue November

[troutman]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

That said, Kamala Harris is, for me, clearly qualified to be president if Biden were to die. She might be more qualified than any of the other short listed candidates (hard to say about Susan Rice). So from the perspective of the Biden administration, it's a perfectly fine pick. My objections to it are more about what it does to help Biden win the election, and in that regard I guess I'm totally discarding my Platonic ideal of a VP selection process this cycle anyway due to exigent circumstances in the form of Trump needing to lose.

I noticed there were many black women on cable news last night that were very excited about the selection. Their point - black women are the cornerstone of the Democratic party. South Asian women too are excited.

@PreetBharara

The most excited person I talked to today was my Indian mom. Because she cannot wait to vote for Vice President Kamala Devi Harris.

K. Louise Neufeld
@ninaandtito

Ditto. My Indian-American mom was crying with joy when I called her just after the announcement. I wish my Indian immigrant grandparents were still alive to see this. (Though I am thankful both did not have to witness the Trumpist anti-immigrant, racist ####show.)

Part of the calculation is that she will electrify women of color to vote. People that stayed home with Clinton.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Maritime Q-Scout

The hypocrisy of complaining that Harris was chosen because she's a black woman, yet never a peep about Pence being chosen because he's a white evangelical man.

Cards on the table, they're both qualified and have the experience to be Vice President (Pence had it before holding the position).

Harris is qualified, would do a the job to the best of her abilities, and frankly I'm gonna have the popcorn ready for the VP Debate.

Harris v. Pence has the potential to be much better than Biden v. Palin or Bentsen v. Quayle.

Loves me a political slaughter on the debate stage.

I think the difference is the Democrats and the media. We've known it would be a woman for about 5 months now. We've known it would be 99% a black woman for about 1 month now (Wittmer got some headlines late). The Democrats themselves make it a big deal and are open to criticism.


When Pence was named, we had no idea. Ted Cruz named Carly Fiorina his running mate even before he lost the nomination and nobody cared. And even the previous female VP candidates, Ferrero and Palin weren't made such a big deal due to being female. This time, it's been pre-determined and made a big deal for months, therefore the criticism that a white man was never considered, it HAD to be this way. Harris is totally qualified but the setup makes it look bad.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by troutman

I noticed there were many black women on cable news last night that were every excited about the selection. Their point - black women are the cornerstone of the Democratic party. South Asian women too are excited.

@PreetBharara

K. Louise Neufeld
@ninaandtito

Part of the calculation is that she will electrify women of color to vote. People that stayed home with Clinton.

I've never understood this proudness that 'one of us', some stranger, has made it. It's so weird, but that's just me.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

I've never understood this proudness that 'one of us', some stranger, has made it. It's so weird, but that's just me.

Really? It's difficult to understand how somebody you can relate to based on their shared heritage and appearance would be appealing to vote for? I mean, it's literally the exact reason white people have been voting in other white people for hundreds of years.

It's weird you think that's weird. It's weird you couldn't look at that and see how that could be a motivator for young women of colour in the USA seeing that it is possible to aspire to greatness and power. People of colour in the States are rioting in the streets at their powerlessness. At how they're treated unjustly. A person of colour ascending to a powerful position should make them proud. And hopeful.

Odd take, as usual.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Sliver

Really? It's difficult to understand how somebody you can relate to based on their shared heritage and appearance would be appealing to vote for? I mean, it's literally the exact reason white people have been voting in other white people for hundreds of years.

It's weird you think that's weird. It's weird you couldn't look at that and see how that could be a motivator for young women of colour in the USA seeing that it is possible to aspire to greatness and power. People of colour in the States are rioting in the streets at their powerlessness. At how they're treated unjustly. A person of colour ascending to a powerful position should make them proud. And hopeful.

Odd take, as usual.

I know. I'm a women of color. For me it's about personal relationships. If I knew you well, wouldn't I be happier for your success rather than someone far away just because they happened to be the same race? Like i don't care if Chong is the Conservative leader over others. Does Chong being Prime Minister or Clarkson or Jean when they were GG motivate me more?


Did Palin turn Democratic women to go GOP? It's all a strange argument to me.

[ernie]

From my Facebook feed this morning (I’m in the heart of Trump territory):

Posted by a Friend (in there 50s):

My Dad is lifelong Republican and voted for Trump. His comment on Harris
“Joe Biden didn’t pick her because she’s black. He picked her because she’s damn smart”.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by HockeyIlliterate

There are few things that bother me more than someone creating a quote out of thin air and then trying to attribute it to someone.

Nowhere have I said that "this might make me vote for Trump", so you can stop with the false attribution and high-handedness.

There is nothing sexist about stating a fact, namely, that Harris was in a relationship with man who was married at the time. Her doing so makes me think less of her.

As it would for a man who is involved with a woman (or other man or whatever) while he or she is still married to someone else. Arguing against one (Harris) does not mean that I am in favor of the other (a man doing the same thing).

But it is far easier to claim that someone is sexist than it is to actually think and investigate one’s position, and it is even easier to just make up stuff in a post.

To wit, you wrote that I suggested that “she only got the VP pick because she was a woman.“

What I wrote was “ She got the vp pick because she is a woman and is “of color.” Neither of which she had any personal role in doing.“

Do you see the word “only” in my statement? I don’t, but you certainly used it.

And yet you write that I should “stop pretending any time”? I’m not the one making up things here.

Jeeze, you're right, sorry. "Making it hard for me to vote against Trump" was the more accurate quote. My bad, in a two party system where you have two viable options I somehow assumed that not voting against Trump was a double negative that meant voting FOR Trump. You know, because that's the other option. Unless you were just going to sit at home because Harris dated someone 25 years ago. That would be.... silly... right?

And hey, as has been mentioned, Harris and Brown dated when he had been estranged/separated from his wife for nearly 15 years, but sure.

I just think it's really convenient that you think less of Harris because of some fairly sexist views and a complete distortion of what actually happened, even when shown why your interpretation of what happened is sexist and inaccurate, and you come around complaining that people misquoted you.

It's weird, right? If you gave Harris the bare minimum of fair treatment you're asking for here, there'd be no issue. But I guess she isn't deserving of that because....

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

I know. I'm a women of color. For me it's about personal relationships. If I knew you well, wouldn't I be happier for your success rather than someone far away just because they happened to be the same race? Like i don't care if Chong is the Conservative leader over others. Does Chong being Prime Minister or Clarkson or Jean when they were GG motivate me more?

Did Palin turn Democratic women to go GOP? It's all a strange argument to me.

Well, I'm going to be a little cautious about how I tell you, a woman of colour, to feel about this. I will say what I've learned from BLM over the past couple months is POC in the USA can certainly have a more difficult time and face more obstacles than I know I've faced in my life. If parents raising their non-white daughter can point to VP Kamala Harris as somebody they can aspire to be, that could be a motivator for them. It is isn't for you and that's obviously fine, but come on, it's not weird for that to be helpful for somebody.

I know I used the prospect of Hillary being president as a conversation piece with my then 10-year-old daughter in 2016. Kids aren't stupid - she had already clued in that more men seemed to be in powerful positions than women. The idea of a woman being president definitely appealed to her.

[nik-]

It's a significant gap between it not being enough to sway your personal vote and not understanding why it would.

[BoLevi]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

No, Biden said he’d prefer someone of colour, but the only definitive claim he made was that he would choose a woman. Warren was under consideration and she’s White.

We also don’t know that Trump or Biden are the most qualified candidates for President, either, (Trump certainly wasn’t the most qualified when he ran and won) nor do we know if Pence was the most qualified choice for Trump’s VP. It’s not an unfortunate conclusion, it’s literally the way politics has been for decades.

Harris is as qualified as any other VP or Presidential candidate. Not sure what you find unfortunate about that.

You're correct: he was only explicit about the woman part. The race part was only implied/suggested - and strongly pressured by various media outlets. Many pundits thought he would be forced into picking a black woman after his "you ain't black" comments.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by ernie

“Joe Biden didn’t pick her because she’s black. He picked her because she’s damn smart”.

And there it is. Republicans are scared of Harris, because she is smart, because she is tenacious, because she is tough, and because she takes no ####. The fact that she is a female black woman is just a bonus. She's a politician that actually has a spine, learns from her mistakes, will change as issues evolve, and will do the right thing. She may not get everyone excited, but those who do governance look at her as a bright light at the end of a very dark tunnel.

[dobbles]

Originally Posted by Sliver

Well, I'm going to be a little cautious about how I tell you, a woman of colour, to feel about this. I will say what I've learned from BLM over the past couple months is POC in the USA can certainly have a more difficult time and face more obstacles than I know I've faced in my life. If parents raising their non-white daughter can point to VP Kamala Harris as somebody they can aspire to be, that could be a motivator for them. It is isn't for you and that's obviously fine, but come on, it's not weird for that to be helpful for somebody.

I know I used the prospect of Hillary being president as a conversation piece with my then 10-year-old daughter in 2016. Kids aren't stupid - she had already clued in that more men seemed to be in powerful positions than women. The idea of a woman being president definitely appealed to her.

Your comment made me think of the great example of white skinned, blond haired, blue eyed Jesus pictures that hang on everyone's wall. People gravitated to an image that reflected them. It made them more comfortable supporting a god that looked like them. It is something that was mainstream. It was something done even by the majority group in America. So acting as if this is some sort of weird unique phenomenon does come off as a typical girly hot take.

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Originally Posted by ernie

This gets fixed with a good first speech from Harris....they should have some Obama speech writers they can use. Now she won’t deliver it as Obama could but that’s the level of the outrage...say the right things and everyone remembers why this doesn’t matter so much in the big picture.

And I’m sure the GOP will start alienating women as they go after her for being a slut or something.

Why wait for the GOP to do it? Others have started this misogynistic crap already in this thread.

Originally Posted by HockeyIlliterate

Horrible choice. Worst of all the options.

May have “slept around” to get to certain positions, has a questionable record on criminal justice, and—who can forget—holds the same position on an issue that she attacks her opponents’ for holding.

This election is going to suck. I can’t vote for Trump, but Biden is making is very difficult for me to vote against Trump too.

Jesus...we still have a long way to go for equality between the sexes. I can't believe that's even a discussion point for someone as accomplished as Harris.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by dobbles

Your comment made me think of the great example of white skinned, blond haired, blue eyed Jesus pictures that hang on everyone's wall. People gravitated to an image that reflected them. It made them more comfortable supporting a god that looked like them. It is something that was mainstream. It was something done even by the majority group in America. So acting as if this is some sort of weird unique phenomenon does come off as a typical girly hot take.

That's Jesus. Non-white religious people gravitate to Jesus. And dont we often argue that this is bad?

[FanIn80]

Originally Posted by dobbles

Your comment made me think of the great example of white skinned, blond haired, blue eyed Jesus pictures that hang on everyone's wall. People gravitated to an image that reflected them. It made them more comfortable supporting a god that looked like them. It is something that was mainstream. It was something done even by the majority group in America. So acting as if this is some sort of weird unique phenomenon does come off as a typical girly hot take.

Originally Posted by GirlySports

That's Jesus. Non-white religious people gravitate to Jesus. And dont we often argue that this is bad?

[ernie]

Originally Posted by New Era

And there it is. Republicans are scared of Harris, because she is smart, because she is tenacious, because she is tough, and because she takes no ####. The fact that she is a female black woman is just a bonus. She's a politician that actually has a spine, learns from her mistakes, will change as issues evolve, and will do the right thing. She may not get everyone excited, but those who do governance look at her as a bright light at the end of a very dark tunnel.

Yes and they are already starting down the road of essentially: “she’s going to run all over low energy Joe Biden! You’re real president is going to be a WOMAN! A BLACK woman!”

It’s not even dog whistles today from Trump. It’s straight up segregation and racism.

[GirlySports]

How about this? True colors?

https://twitter.com/user/status/1293618745907322880

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Acey

There's no official metric as to what qualifies one to be president aside from being a natural-born 35-year-old 14 year resident of the US. By any objective measure, Kamala Harris or any of the other front runners are better "politically qualified" than Trump was when he entered office.

You speak of qualification as if there is some definitive metric.

The other thing of course, is that she actually has a lot of qualifications.

She's an activist, lawyer, former district attorney, current senator, and not to mention has 55 years of life experience.

If she's not qualified to run for VP, then who is?

[dobbles]

Latino population is 18% according to census bureau. That would be 6/35 instead of 3. Perfect representaiton? Of course not. Big deal? To me, not really.

I do wish the democratic party had more of a youth pipeline. Pelosi, Biden, Warren, Sanders, etc are all very old. Hopefully we can see more like Mayor Pete, AOC, etc in the coming years. But it takes time to groom future leaders, so I honestly peg this more on the Democratic party of 10 or 20 years ago for not seeing this coming. When Pelosi took over the house in 06, she had Hoyer, Clyburn, Lewis, etc as her leadership and they were already pretty aged at the time, and since then, there seems to have been no grooming done for younger leaders to replace them. It's the same debate the party had when dems came back in power last year. Should Pelosi still be the one leading and what is the succession plan.

With all that said, I don't think its some sort of conspiracy or lack of embrace of the progressive wing. It's just the way it is. Hopefully they can start to sort out the problem.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

How about this? True colors?

https://twitter.com/user/status/1293618745907322880

Also:

https://twitter.com/user/status/1293253520200593408

https://twitter.com/user/status/1293221434010083329

Kind of silly he's not there. FFS, There are 35 slots. He doesn't need to be the keynote.