Democratic (Party) Direction

(by sic or anyone else ... sorry my previous post was hasty and not well edited)

Biden could have assigned her to work on voting rights; he assigned her to work on immigration from Central and South America during the worst of COVID.

I think it would be difficult for anyone to speak extemporaneously on camera on a topic outside their area of expertise and to receive favorable media coverage in a hostile (primed) environment.

I'd say VP Harris, like Rep. Cheney, is a better lawyer than she is a politician. Their skills would both be better utilized in the courtroom, perhaps even on the defense side.

I have no opinion as to whether she is "good at her job" nor do I know what she does day to day, I just think she is extremely bad on camera and that that doesn't bode well for a presidential run

(sic - I figure you thought I was Scandinavian and one of the BROS and knew what swole means if still used.)

Thanks for striking that note, youn. I was having a slight reaction to the whole "she's not leadership material" theme--an analysis of her stated or presumed ideology might be called for but it's also the office, and there's also no neutral way to say things like that about the first Black/bi-racial woman to hold the office.

Regarding her "stated or presumed ideology," she has a decently sized record, and it's not good.

It takes a decent amount of political acumen to work one's way up the system of state politics in a U.S. state the size of California, survive for a decent number of years as the Attorney General, and then make the transition to U.S. Senator. All while being female, Asian and Black in America. Harris did fine in both the Kavanaugh hearing and the impeachment. The criticisms of her public speaking in this thread seem pretty shallow. As Attorney General of California, she showed a decent grasp of how the internet works and took initiatives about making it harder for online scum to harass women and children, for example.

Could you be more specific about her record being "not good." What's your basis of comparison?

Also, hi youn!

FWIW, she was consistently rated as the most liberal Senator (based on her voting record) while she was there.

The dissonance, I think, is squaring the not-liberalism inherent in being attorney general, which made conservative attacks on her laughable. My family considers her a radical b/c she's a Black Democrat, period.

(xpost - I don't know if she has worked on voting rights in the past, but it seems Biden squandered an opportunity and (discoounted) a constituency that would have been receptive to a message from her.)

(He wanted to make the party more like himself? Most people probably want that.)

Here's just a bit of her contradictory and mangled ideology:

A close examination of Harris’s record shows it’s filled with contradictions. She pushed for programs that helped people find jobs instead of putting them in prison, but also fought to keep people in prison even after they were proved innocent. She refused to pursue the death penalty against a man who killed a police officer, but also defended California’s death penalty system in court. She implemented training programs to address police officers’ racial biases, but also resisted calls to get her office to investigate certain police shootings.

More here on her criminal justice record: https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2019/1/23/18184192/kamala-harris-president-campaign-criminal-justice-record

She's also said that she's for LGBTQ rights, but refuses to put trans people in the prisons of their actual gender, keeping them in literal prisons of dysphoria.

Have you ever been a sex worker? Yeah, well she was one of the primary sponsors of FOSTA/SESTA, and also went hard after Backpage and essentially got it taken down, ruining many of my friends' livelihoods (and would have ruined mine if it had been a few years earlier).

Just because it's "intersectional carcerality" doesn't mean that it isn't "carcerality." In fact, that's part of the main contradictions at the heart of her whole being— the fact that she's a Black/bi-racial woman who seems to believe heavily in the enslavement of human beings, because that's what prisons are. Slavery. If you think that's too radical or unrealistic, fine, but it is contradictory, and caping for a cop by using arguments of identity-formed epistemic virtue are completely bankrupt imo, sorry!

I see. Who, in your opinion, is pure enough to lead the Democratic party direction?

(xpost; the question is not addressed to me - I wish Elizabeth Warren would run.)

She was a prosecutor. I suppose you can fault her for taking that job, but on the other hand a lack of diversity in that position is not exactly desirable. Gallons of ink have been spilled on whether or not she successfully navigated that razor's edge.

I see. Who, in your opinion, is pure enough to lead the Democratic party direction?

― felicity, Tuesday, July 5, 2022 5:40 PM (seven minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

Alfred Soto imo

Negronis 4 All

Given who and what I did yesterday afternoon, I suspect my Negroni mixology is the purest thing about me.

I suspect my Negroni mixology is the purest thing about me

I find it just a bit too ... too "Seventeenish" for me.

I see. Who, in your opinion, is pure enough to lead the Democratic party direction?

Biden could have assigned her to work on voting rights

He did! When it became obvious that Manchin and Sinema were going to obstruct voting rights mid-year Biden dumped it on her - it's one of the loser portfolios I think they're purposely sticking Harris with.

It's almost as though adding her to the ticket was a cynical ploy to get more voter turnout.

I see. Who, in your opinion, is pure enough to lead the Democratic party direction?

― felicity, Tuesday, July 5, 2022 10:40 PM (seventeen minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

this question is so funny to me. like, looking at how people in power get there and the history of who has led the democratic party over the last 30 years, you'd think that would lead to ... different questions.

i mean, ruth wilson gilmore, absolutely, but the fact that that isn't even remotely a possibility .. again, different questions lol.

I think Katie Porter would be my choice to run the party, but maybe she is bad for some reason.

Interesting. Is Ruth Wilson Gilmore interested in leading the Democrats, or are you suggesting drafting her into a new career?

(regarding voting rights there could be a ground up states' rights strategy as recently suggested in a NYT article about abortion

EW - financial protection as consumer protection amidst growing inflation and concern about the economy)

I find it just a bit too ... too "Seventeenish" for me.

― Eggs Benedick (Eric H.

Erik, you're a Gibson girl

No cops, no troops and no prosecutors leading the party that's supposed to represent marginalized people is not a big ask I don't think and "purity" talk deserves all the eyerolls it can receive.

Of course she isn’t. You asked me who I wanted, and l responded.

You also continue to cape for a woman who has argued that people who have been proven innocent should stay in prison. MULTIPLE TIMES. Think about that.

No cops, no troops and no prosecutors leading the party

This would be an excellent start.

this question is so funny to me. like, looking at how people in power get there and the history of who has led the democratic party over the last 30 years, you'd think that would lead to ... different questions.

i mean, ruth wilson gilmore, absolutely, but the fact that that isn't even remotely a possibility .. again, different questions lol.

― the cat needs to start paying for its own cbd (map), Tuesday, July 5, 2022 3:06 PM (three minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

It really is funny. Like women shouldn't have any choice over what kinds of careers to have.

I did read the Vox article. It's valid to criticize Harris for not representing the interests you care about. At least we are now criticizing her for being too good at politics, rather than a poor public speaker or saying she should stick to being a lawyer.

have we had a lot of cops leading any political party in the US recently, did I miss this? what is the distinction here of prosecutor from defender or just a person with a JD?

Prosecutors try to put people in jail, defense attorneys do not - seems like a pretty clear cut distinction?

Oh female lawyers are all "cops." Ruth Bader Ginsberg was the biggest cop of all, don't you know.

Oh female lawyers are all "cops." Ruth Bader Ginsberg was the biggest cop of all, don't you know.

she should stick to being a lawyer

I said this not as criticism of her abilities as a politician, but rather as praise for her abilities as a lawyer. She can eviscerate even as canny a witness as Bill Barr. She'd be a formidable defense lawyer.

I mean, sure, she "can" be. Does it matter if she wants to?

i did not know people here were against anyone being "put in jail". ok.

I mean, sure, she "can" be. Does it matter if she wants to?

Of course it matters. I'm just lamenting the loss to the profession.

I've been a supporter of Kamala since before the start of her short-lived presidential run. I still think she'd make an excellent president. Whether she will ever have a shot at the office is another question.

It really is funny. Like women shouldn't have any choice over what kinds of careers to have.

I did read the Vox article. It's valid to criticize Harris for not representing the interests you care about. At least we are now criticizing her for being too good at politics, rather than a poor public speaker or saying she should stick to being a lawyer.

― felicity, Tuesday, July 5, 2022 11:21 PM (fifty-two seconds ago) bookmarkflaglink

....

ok

absolutely not going to attempt any bridge building with people who stan for kamala harris itt because it's a shallow and bad faith position from the get go. i'll save you any inkling to do any either by confirming that yes i'm absolutely sexist, there ya go.

xp oh great now we have the stock market trading expert here to profess wild skepticism about abolitionists even existing.

thought experiment - Would Harris have fared better as VP to Warren?

? yeah that may not have been me, but maybe?

thought experiment - Would Harris have fared better as VP to Warren?

― youn, Tuesday, July 5, 2022 11:31 PM (fifty seconds ago) bookmarkflaglink

definitely!

i did not know people here were against anyone being "put in jail". ok.

― Yerac, Tuesday, July 5, 2022 6:27 PM (four minutes ago)

I can't remember if we have a prison abolition thread, but the "abolish the police" thread is quite active if you're curious where people are coming from. Of course, reading the thread means exposing yourself to a miserable litany of heinous police actions, but it was a bit more debate-y in summer 2020

xp i was referring to you yerac, yes, and it was honestly out of line and i'm sorry, so i'm backing out of this thread for now

Even if you think playing an active role in the American carceral state is a necessity, that doesn't mean we need those people in higher office. If you've decided that putting people in prison for weed is something you can stomach to do other supposedly good things, that should be the terminal point of your political career as a Democrat.

oh yeah, i am pretty sure i have never been pro-police posting here because my go to has always been my brother was a cop and he's an idiot and it was the only job he could get. I thought map was talking about slavery which was a bit...wtf?

LOL as if there are only two choices - "Kamala Harris stan" or "Harris is anathema"

I just said it's valid to criticize Harris. Who is the "stan"?