Democratic (Party) Direction

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"?

no shade at the ILX lawyers who all seem like good folk but hey maybe no more lawyers idk? The Democratic Party is kind of eat up with lawyers. And not the good cool kind who are going to take the fight to fossil fuels, defense contractors, Amazon, etc and not, you know, take money from instead.

money from them*

A party of public defenders, labor organizers and teachers would beat the hell out of former Attorneys General, Apache pilots and commercial landlords.

I mean the law is kind of a traditional path to advancement and wealth for women and people of color who have historically been shut out of other businesses, but . . . ok.

I suppose there is a valid argument to be made that there are too many lawyers in politics in general, but I don't know what other profession is as closely related at least to lawmaking.

Val Demings, running against Rubio, released this campaign ad a few weeks ago. It's played relentlessly. I hate it. But I'm told (passive voice alert) it polls well with African-American voters, and I've no reason to doubt it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SofFXAdM_MM

The Democratic Party is kind of eat up with lawyers

TRIAL lawyers maybe. Both parties are full of lawyers, and the kind who don't practice.

Yikes that Demings ad.

yeah I know

But I'm not the target audience for such things

i think my question about the difference between prosecutor and defender was because where one may be thinking about being put in jail for things like possession, i am thinking about things like violence against certain demographics that often have enough trouble finding parties to listen or assist. That is all; that was my confusion.

Aside from questions of political purity, the other flaw in Democrats running cops/troops/natsec ghouls/prosecutors is that they don't seem to be all that successful in the end.

Well one of them is VP.

The 2006 blue wave of former CIA spooks and people who took part in the Highway of Death pretty much got torched by 2010, IIRC.

I don't exactly understand the turn this discussion took, but more generally I don't really understand personalizing things and making them about "career choices." A politician is a representative public servant and an elected official. Kamala Harris can do whatever she wants with her life, I just think she would make a poor presidential candidate, and her poor showing in the last democratic primary at least somewhat supports that.

I also don't even care that much if I like her as long as she's voting for the right things. But that's as a senator in a safe blue seat.

Oh maybe it's just the fact that women in the US just lost the right to have abortions that is making us take things a little personally.

Being VP isn't very successful, though - since the Civil War we've had one VP immediately elected to the Presidency and two total (without death/assassination). It's a dead-end job.

To me, it's so crazy how the men continue to talk over and not listen to the women in this thread. "Think about that" lol bitch please.

oh and also to clarify to map, my mind went right to abolitionists--- slavery instead of prison because I had focused on Kamala as the subject and I thought you were trying to make some odd comment about race.

I mean the law is kind of a traditional path to advancement and wealth for women and people of color who have historically been shut out of other businesses, but . . . ok.

for Big Law, and I’m talking the kinds of*

love your posts itt thread, felicity! and Yerac's also!

same

That is true. A danger of painting in broad strokes a profession so large as the legal profession and picking and choosing moments is to unintentionally reinforce the structures of power.

Unintentionally, but still reinforcing.

To be clear, I think it is fine to criticize Harris and wish for Democratic leadership that is a little less fascist. I just thought some of the criticisms here were facile, underinformed, and would not be/were not historically leveled at similarly situated white men. TO point that out does not make one a "stan."

Also, wtf at having a go at a female poster for engaging in stock trading? Like we can't have abortions, at least let us make some money.