Kamala Harris and VP expectations

[Anonymous]

I think she’s a good VP, especially given that VP is a make work job unless POTIS dies. I think she is very capable and was impressed with her on the Senate judiciary committee. But, for one reason she isn’t connecting with voters. She underperformed in 2020 and is not winning hearts and minds as VP. That’s two shots. Maybe the “some reason is “back woman”. But with the Dem base, I don’t think that’s the whole issue. It’s the “would you have a beer with her” thing.

IMO, two strikes and she’s out. Unelectable and disliked is unelectable and disliked.

My dream ticket is a combo of Buttigieg-Klobacher. They are both relatively young for politicians, so either order is fine. I’m fiscally moderate and moderate to liberal on social issues. And want substance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve never seen so much consistent attention on a VP. Most get ignored.

Yes, it’s because she’s a black woman and they are unfairly judged harsher than white men. Black men and women have to work harder, make fewer mistakes, and never be in a bad mood or have a bad day. It’s wrong.

She has more attention focused on her than the typical VP because of Biden’s age. If something happens to him, which is entirely possible, Harris would be our next president. With Biden saying he’s running again, people are extremely concerned about his VP pick. Stop with the racism claim already.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have had many of the same thoughts. We kind of expect VPs to be less than optimal. I think the problem- at least my problem-- is that I bought the line that Kamala was going to be more of an asset to this administration. I was saying things like, "well Biden might be basically dead but even more out of touch than a dead person, but at least we get Kamala out of this deal." She's been a disappointment precisely because we had higher expectations for her vs other VPs.

Interesting. I can’t say I had high expectations for her from a results perspective (what results can a VP really deliver?). I was really pumped about her selection because I thought she checked a lot of boxes, but was a little wet behind the ears and still too much the “smug attorney.” I just wanted her to be a diplomat who made us proud by traveling the globe, shaking hands and kissing babies, and in the process building up her presidential bona fides. I think they tried to give her projects that were, frankly, impossible (I think the border was her first task? Ouch). She learned too late that scoffing and laughing are not a good look for the stage she’s now on, even though they worked for her before. She can’t overcome both the republican smears (she’s a woman and she’s black: too easy a target) and her early missteps.

Harris is following the progressive agenda playbook. Unite your side with political identity tropes and scoff at the other side. Don't worry about actual accomplishments, just hype. Biden's a moderate dem, not a progressive, so she's out there playing at this lunacy on her own.

I disagree that racism is the reason for her lack of popularity. Lots of dems just got turned off with the progressive bs the last couple of years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
My dream ticket is a combo of Buttigieg-Klobacher. They are both relatively young for politicians, so either order is fine. I’m fiscally moderate and moderate to liberal on social issues. And want substance.

The problem with both of those is that they fail to connect with Black voters, which is necessary to win as a Dem. There's a reason Clyburn endorsed Biden instead of one of them.

[Anonymous]

Isn’t it odd that younger White Dem candidates seem less able to connect with Black votes than earlier generations? Biden and Bill Clinton did well. Hillary Clinton was more progressive like younger Dems but did not connect as well as her husband did. Even Harris did not bring in minority votes as well as was expected.

What is going on there?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Isn’t it odd that younger White Dem candidates seem less able to connect with Black votes than earlier generations? Biden and Bill Clinton did well. Hillary Clinton was more progressive like younger Dems but did not connect as well as her husband did. Even Harris did not bring in minority votes as well as was expected.

What is going on there?

Is it a centrist/experienced vs. progressive/thin resume based on the latest PC trends thing? I'm not black, but I imagine that most black voters care about more issues than the college campus cause celebre.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn’t it odd that younger White Dem candidates seem less able to connect with Black votes than earlier generations? Biden and Bill Clinton did well. Hillary Clinton was more progressive like younger Dems but did not connect as well as her husband did. Even Harris did not bring in minority votes as well as was expected.

What is going on there?

Is it a centrist/experienced vs. progressive/thin resume based on the latest PC trends thing? I'm not black, but I imagine that most black voters care about more issues than the college campus cause celebre.

That’s kinda what I’m thinking. I think B Clinton and Biden have deeper connections with people in general not just because they are old/experienced.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have had many of the same thoughts. We kind of expect VPs to be less than optimal. I think the problem- at least my problem-- is that I bought the line that Kamala was going to be more of an asset to this administration. I was saying things like, "well Biden might be basically dead but even more out of touch than a dead person, but at least we get Kamala out of this deal." She's been a disappointment precisely because we had higher expectations for her vs other VPs.

Interesting. I can’t say I had high expectations for her from a results perspective (what results can a VP really deliver?). I was really pumped about her selection because I thought she checked a lot of boxes, but was a little wet behind the ears and still too much the “smug attorney.” I just wanted her to be a diplomat who made us proud by traveling the globe, shaking hands and kissing babies, and in the process building up her presidential bona fides. I think they tried to give her projects that were, frankly, impossible (I think the border was her first task? Ouch). She learned too late that scoffing and laughing are not a good look for the stage she’s now on, even though they worked for her before. She can’t overcome both the republican smears (she’s a woman and she’s black: too easy a target) and her early missteps.

Harris is following the progressive agenda playbook. Unite your side with political identity tropes and scoff at the other side. Don't worry about actual accomplishments, just hype. Biden's a moderate dem, not a progressive, so she's out there playing at this lunacy on her own.

I disagree that racism is the reason for her lack of popularity. Lots of dems just got turned off with the progressive bs the last couple of years.

She is more moderate than you think. She was a prosecutor after all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Buy or don’t buy. A governor (Granholm was floated back then) would be a better choice bc of executive experience. Whitmer, another Mitten state governor, might be better now. Also, a midwesterner would help Biden with some independents. Harris did not help add to Biden’s numbers as expected. Of course, I’m not sure that Whitmer would want to be a VP when she may have a real shot as President in 2028. Tying herself to Biden as VP might hurt her chances.

President of what?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have had many of the same thoughts. We kind of expect VPs to be less than optimal. I think the problem- at least my problem-- is that I bought the line that Kamala was going to be more of an asset to this administration. I was saying things like, "well Biden might be basically dead but even more out of touch than a dead person, but at least we get Kamala out of this deal." She's been a disappointment precisely because we had higher expectations for her vs other VPs.

Interesting. I can’t say I had high expectations for her from a results perspective (what results can a VP really deliver?). I was really pumped about her selection because I thought she checked a lot of boxes, but was a little wet behind the ears and still too much the “smug attorney.” I just wanted her to be a diplomat who made us proud by traveling the globe, shaking hands and kissing babies, and in the process building up her presidential bona fides. I think they tried to give her projects that were, frankly, impossible (I think the border was her first task? Ouch). She learned too late that scoffing and laughing are not a good look for the stage she’s now on, even though they worked for her before. She can’t overcome both the republican smears (she’s a woman and she’s black: too easy a target) and her early missteps.

Harris is following the progressive agenda playbook. Unite your side with political identity tropes and scoff at the other side. Don't worry about actual accomplishments, just hype. Biden's a moderate dem, not a progressive, so she's out there playing at this lunacy on her own.

I disagree that racism is the reason for her lack of popularity. Lots of dems just got turned off with the progressive bs the last couple of years.

She is more moderate than you think. She was a prosecutor after all.

If she is, then I wish that she would let that part of her show through more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Buy or don’t buy. A governor (Granholm was floated back then) would be a better choice bc of executive experience. Whitmer, another Mitten state governor, might be better now. Also, a midwesterner would help Biden with some independents. Harris did not help add to Biden’s numbers as expected. Of course, I’m not sure that Whitmer would want to be a VP when she may have a real shot as President in 2028. Tying herself to Biden as VP might hurt her chances.

President of what?

Hardy-har-har.

That brings us back to the original VP conundrum: anyone worth his/her salt doesn’t want the job. It’s for the nobody who is trying to get the golden ticket to the national stage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have had many of the same thoughts. We kind of expect VPs to be less than optimal. I think the problem- at least my problem-- is that I bought the line that Kamala was going to be more of an asset to this administration. I was saying things like, "well Biden might be basically dead but even more out of touch than a dead person, but at least we get Kamala out of this deal." She's been a disappointment precisely because we had higher expectations for her vs other VPs.

Interesting. I can’t say I had high expectations for her from a results perspective (what results can a VP really deliver?). I was really pumped about her selection because I thought she checked a lot of boxes, but was a little wet behind the ears and still too much the “smug attorney.” I just wanted her to be a diplomat who made us proud by traveling the globe, shaking hands and kissing babies, and in the process building up her presidential bona fides. I think they tried to give her projects that were, frankly, impossible (I think the border was her first task? Ouch). She learned too late that scoffing and laughing are not a good look for the stage she’s now on, even though they worked for her before. She can’t overcome both the republican smears (she’s a woman and she’s black: too easy a target) and her early missteps.

Harris is following the progressive agenda playbook. Unite your side with political identity tropes and scoff at the other side. Don't worry about actual accomplishments, just hype. Biden's a moderate dem, not a progressive, so she's out there playing at this lunacy on her own.

I disagree that racism is the reason for her lack of popularity. Lots of dems just got turned off with the progressive bs the last couple of years.

She is more moderate than you think. She was a prosecutor after all.

DP. Being a prosecutor is not evidence of one’s political positions. Some are conservative. Some are progressive. Some are moderate. Some are politically-minded careerists buiding a resume. Some are hacks. Some are not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have had many of the same thoughts. We kind of expect VPs to be less than optimal. I think the problem- at least my problem-- is that I bought the line that Kamala was going to be more of an asset to this administration. I was saying things like, "well Biden might be basically dead but even more out of touch than a dead person, but at least we get Kamala out of this deal." She's been a disappointment precisely because we had higher expectations for her vs other VPs.

Interesting. I can’t say I had high expectations for her from a results perspective (what results can a VP really deliver?). I was really pumped about her selection because I thought she checked a lot of boxes, but was a little wet behind the ears and still too much the “smug attorney.” I just wanted her to be a diplomat who made us proud by traveling the globe, shaking hands and kissing babies, and in the process building up her presidential bona fides. I think they tried to give her projects that were, frankly, impossible (I think the border was her first task? Ouch). She learned too late that scoffing and laughing are not a good look for the stage she’s now on, even though they worked for her before. She can’t overcome both the republican smears (she’s a woman and she’s black: too easy a target) and her early missteps.

Harris is following the progressive agenda playbook. Unite your side with political identity tropes and scoff at the other side. Don't worry about actual accomplishments, just hype. Biden's a moderate dem, not a progressive, so she's out there playing at this lunacy on her own.

I disagree that racism is the reason for her lack of popularity. Lots of dems just got turned off with the progressive bs the last couple of years.

She is more moderate than you think. She was a prosecutor after all.

DP. Being a prosecutor is not evidence of one’s political positions. Some are conservative. Some are progressive. Some are moderate. Some are politically-minded careerists buiding a resume. Some are hacks. Some are not.

I recall during the election that she started touting her record as a prosecutor as being “tough on crime” (since, you know, the R’s entire platform was essentially “trump is the only man who can keep us safe” from the rampant crime coming from blue cities to invade the beautiful suburbs). Then it was turned around on her by radical left (or R’s being clever) as disproportionately incarcerating people of color.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have had many of the same thoughts. We kind of expect VPs to be less than optimal. I think the problem- at least my problem-- is that I bought the line that Kamala was going to be more of an asset to this administration. I was saying things like, "well Biden might be basically dead but even more out of touch than a dead person, but at least we get Kamala out of this deal." She's been a disappointment precisely because we had higher expectations for her vs other VPs.

Interesting. I can’t say I had high expectations for her from a results perspective (what results can a VP really deliver?). I was really pumped about her selection because I thought she checked a lot of boxes, but was a little wet behind the ears and still too much the “smug attorney.” I just wanted her to be a diplomat who made us proud by traveling the globe, shaking hands and kissing babies, and in the process building up her presidential bona fides. I think they tried to give her projects that were, frankly, impossible (I think the border was her first task? Ouch). She learned too late that scoffing and laughing are not a good look for the stage she’s now on, even though they worked for her before. She can’t overcome both the republican smears (she’s a woman and she’s black: too easy a target) and her early missteps.

Harris is following the progressive agenda playbook. Unite your side with political identity tropes and scoff at the other side. Don't worry about actual accomplishments, just hype. Biden's a moderate dem, not a progressive, so she's out there playing at this lunacy on her own.

I disagree that racism is the reason for her lack of popularity. Lots of dems just got turned off with the progressive bs the last couple of years.

She is more moderate than you think. She was a prosecutor after all.

DP. Being a prosecutor is not evidence of one’s political positions. Some are conservative. Some are progressive. Some are moderate. Some are politically-minded careerists buiding a resume. Some are hacks. Some are not.

I recall during the election that she started touting her record as a prosecutor as being “tough on crime” (since, you know, the R’s entire platform was essentially “trump is the only man who can keep us safe” from the rampant crime coming from blue cities to invade the beautiful suburbs). Then it was turned around on her by radical left (or R’s being clever) as disproportionately incarcerating people of color.

Did you see the op piece in WaPo this week or last about how law students do every thing they can to get out of having to argue in class as the prosecution. Being able to argue both sides is a valuable skill. How do you find a way to win a debate if you can’t (or won’t) allow your self to think like the other side?

[Anonymous]

What does a VP do?

Seriously.

There were like 50 white guys before Harris, but she gets the media harassment from questionable media sources.