Let’s be honest. The Democrats have never wanted to be dependant on progressives, liberals, and young people to be elected to office. Kamala Harris is not a progressive, liberal, or young person, and is still somewhat of an establishment politician.
While it is clear that the establishment Democrats have given up on pursuing the centrist vote with Biden’s retirement, and it might seem like the Democrats are doubling down on maintaining the status quo by “ordaining” Kamala Harris as the new Democrat presidential candidate, her history Kamala Harris - Wikipedia actually tells us that she might be more likely to fight for the “common” person than maintain the status quo.
Kamala Harris has a notable record of progressive accomplishments throughout her career. As District Attorney of San Francisco, she launched initiatives such as “Back on Track,” a reentry program aimed at reducing recidivism among first-time drug offenders by providing education and job training instead of incarceration. During her tenure as Attorney General of California, Harris created the Mortgage Fraud Strike Force, which helped secure a landmark settlement for California homeowners affected by the foreclosure crisis. She also championed criminal justice reform by supporting the introduction of body cameras for police officers and establishing an implicit bias training program for law enforcement. As a U.S. Senator, Harris has been a vocal advocate for healthcare reform, and has pushed for criminal justice reform at the federal level Harris has also been a strong proponent of civil rights, advocating for the protection of Dreamers and the advancement of LGBTQ+ rights.
There is a very real possibility that the Democrats are pushing a presidential candidate that could very well be on the side of Americans.
I don’t know why the nomenclature developed this way, though TYT has been part of the muddling of the terms since the show began… progressives and liberals are not the same thing. An easy way to remember the distinction: Hillary Clinton is a liberal; Bernie Sanders is a progressive.
Sanders made this explicit during the 2016 campaign. Probably the confusion continued because Clinton also called herself a progressive, though she didn’t object to being called a liberal. But the factional distinctions were clear then, and so should be clear now. The liberal establishment has held sway over the Democratic Party going back for at least 40 years. Bill Clinton and Barack Obama are also liberals, as is Joe Biden.
“Democrats” is an umbrella term that encompasses a wide swathe of the left. So when one suggests Democrats are doing something as a whole, as Ana does, it leaves the impression every person affiliated with the Party, from its politicians to its voters, is implicated in its actions. I think this is obviously misleading, but apparently not everyone agrees because the misstatement continues without any pushback, as far as I can tell. So I couldn’t pass up the opportunity to voice my objection here. Thanks for the opportunity.
As for Harris’ ideological tendencies, I think it’s too early to tell. So I’m reserving judgment unless and until she gains the power of the presidency.
I have heard she has had a 90% turnover under her, both as a prosecutor and as a VP. A reporter tried to spin that as “she’s a tough taskmaster…” -but NINETY PERCENT?! That’s chaos. Maybe ~60% could be a little more credible. [interview discussing the turnover -link]
I’m just as skeptical as Cenk is on what her Israel+Gaza policy will be. She’s welcome to pleasantly surprise us, but to date we have only seen commitments to a failed policy of enablement. It’s all well and good to say you expect the war to be concluded, but if you keep sending arms while there is no serious effort to have as few civilian fatalities as possible, it’s just more of the same. Where’s discussion of a two-State by Harris? Sure, I know NUTanyahoo says that’s a non-starter for him, but clearly the U.S. needs to look beyond the existence of his faction of thugs.
Be all that as it may be, I’ll still take her over a dictatorship; but it’s a real shit-sandwich choice for America. After this rushed election is over, we need an accounting for the concealment of Biden’s condition. Cenk has said it was obvious to anyone he was in physical decline, but I’m sorry: his performance at the State of the Union showed that he had his wits about him then. They were only showing unstable mounting of plane stairs after the debate AND the absurd Stephanopolous interview, when they knew they couldn’t hide it anymore.
You can’t help but conclude that this coronation is all about preserving the deal$ that The Owners of the DNC had with Biden…
It’s not too early to tell, behaviour is consistent, and while Kamala is pretty esablishment, her history also shows behaviour that while toeing the establishment line, she has demonstrably established programs and policy that are beneficial to Americans.
I do not actually think so. Kamala may be pressured to preserve and enact policy to support the status quo, but she is not going to win without strong coalition building. This will result in pressure from democrats, liberals, and progressives to qualitatively address serious issues and problems in a propitious and beneficial manner.
If Kamala and the Democrats do not do such, they will suffer in the next midterms (depressed turnout) in the same way as they did in the last midterm.
We need an accounting of the people around him who were well aware of his lapses, and how THEY actively concealed it. Him? I doubt if he has the capacity to sense at this point his lapses…
With both Pelosi and Schumer saying they have had their fill of NUTanyahoo (and more to the point: his faction…), the runway has been cleared for her to talk about a revival of a two State solution. Oh, NUT is not down with that? That’s a great way to say we’re done with Israel if they keep up that crap…
AT THE BARE MINIMUM, exposing them for not having done their job to alert America to a possibly dangerous situation can wreck their reputation(s) -a well deserved consequence!
When it’s keeping your job versus protecting the country, which one do you think takes precedence??
For openers, the Chief of Protocol had to have known, given that they would change public appearances by Biden.
Maybe the Chief of Protocol got hosed; OK: WHO WAS DOING THE HOSING??
But given we now have an election on a tight timetable, and the issue is likely to be politicized, it can wait until after the election.
If they think we’ll just forget that an entourage did not alert us to a possibly dangerous situation, they got another thing coming.
It was not Jill or Hunter Biden’s job responsibility to alert us; but it was the responsibility of a number of other cabinet members who pull a paycheck.
What’s the point? To discourage it from being done again!
Until I hear mention of the revival of two-state, I can’t get psyched about what I see that the Harris/Shapiro Israel policy will likely be; under NUTanyahoo (more to the point: his damn-the-torpedos faction…), Israel has become a liability that the US can no longer afford…
So Cenk: has Shapiro stated he would support a 2 State? Or Harris for that matter?? Haven’t heard it!
Just merely saying it’s possible; that would be enough for them to be taken seriously. They would need to do that BEFORE the election, so there’s none of this: “Where’s this peace initiative shit coming from??” from people expecting the Israeli chaos status quo, after they were to take office.
I agree with your thesis that Shapiro COULD do the most for the Israeli peace process; but unless he says “2 State” before Election Day, he is just not going to help bring about a peace process in a serious way.
I still think that we are forced to block a dictator; but this is going to be a pretty crappy presidency should Harris prevail, what with likely Israeli policies, her pattern of 90% departmental turnover, and her lackluster communication skills
