2020 US Elections | Biden certified as President | Dems control Congress

Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't understand this momentum Harris has built suddenly.

She's hired Clinton staffers, got a few party endorsements, has already got 2 major tv slots, and and has good ties with corporations and the party.

edit - didn't Obama sort-of hint that she'll be president ~6 years back, when she was a DA or something?
 
That's my hope. Biden and/or Clinton, Harris and Bernie, with Warren dropping out early is the possible road.

Oh please, not Clinton. She may win the primary and lose the Generals. I'm not ready for another 2 years of 'She's worse than Trump you know' posts from you and E) boue. Warren isn't all that bad and Bernie somehow doesn't seem like the great choice he was last time. Maybe with all this metoo nonsense, it may be the time for a woman. Better Warren than Harris. At least, we aren't seriously debating Tulsi Gabbard or Nikki Haley
 
Oh please, not Clinton. She may win the primary and lose the Generals. I'm not ready for another 2 years of 'She's worse than Trump you know' posts from you and E) boue. Warren isn't all that bad and Bernie somehow doesn't seem like the great choice he was last time. Maybe with all this metoo nonsense, it may be the time for a woman. Better Warren than Harris. At least, we aren't seriously debating Tulsi Gabbard or Nikki Haley

Harris is basically the new Hillary - the establishment choice after they were deprived of it in 2016. Warren is far and away the better candidate and doesn't have the over-ambitious, power hungry vibe that Harris does.
 
Oh please, not Clinton. She may win the primary and lose the Generals. I'm not ready for another 2 years of 'She's worse than Trump you know' posts from you and E) boue. Warren isn't all that bad and Bernie somehow doesn't seem like the great choice he was last time. Maybe with all this metoo nonsense, it may be the time for a woman. Better Warren than Harris. At least, we aren't seriously debating Tulsi Gabbard or Nikki Haley

I don't mind Warren much but neither her primary nor (especially) her general numbers looks good. She's quite famous, and unlike the other two famous candidates (Biden/Bernie), her H2H numbers vs Trump are always a little uncomfortable.
 
Locking up single mothers for truancy isnt progressive. Arguing for the death penalty isnt progressive. Opposing transgender rights isnt progressive. Fighting against releasing low level offenders because it would reduce the amount of inmates who can be paid $1 per day isnt progressive.


Kamala Harris is not a progressive. Shes a cop and has spent her career ruining countless lives to advance her own political ambitions.

Yes, it takes a special kind of mindset to think that truant children will benefit from incarcerated parents. It's a bit eye opening as to just how far and hard the American society has shifted to the right that this woman can get away with calling herself a progressive.
 
jyijddxo8hd21.png
 
It depends on what exactly the law says, and on how you apply the law. In general, I agree with Kamala Harris on this. If the parents cannot bother to send their kids to school, they probably cannot take proper care of their kids in general, and in this case the state should be able to take the kids from these parents and find them better homes. This is better for the kids than staying with parents that don't give a fart about them.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/kamala-harris-truancy-initiative_us_5c50b08ee4b0f43e410bcbc4

“I believe a child going without an education is tantamount to a crime,” Harris says in the video. “So I decided I was going to start prosecuting parents for truancy.”
 
If it possibly came down to her or Trump, then I’m voting her her. I aso like that she supposedly doesn’t take corporate PAC donations and is adamant about Medicare for All, at least verbally. Even though I wish she would stay as far away from the presidency as possible, there are at least some positive factors. Though the more I learn about her, the less I like her.

I stand by my original post.

If she’s the best alternative the system can find, the country deserves Trump.
 
It depends on what exactly the law says, and on how you apply the law. In general, I agree with Kamala Harris on this. If the parents cannot bother to send their kids to school, they probably cannot take proper care of their kids in general, and in this case the state should be able to take the kids from these parents and find them better homes. This is better for the kids than staying with parents that don't give a fart about them.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/kamala-harris-truancy-initiative_us_5c50b08ee4b0f43e410bcbc4

“I believe a child going without an education is tantamount to a crime,” Harris says in the video. “So I decided I was going to start prosecuting parents for truancy.”

Or.... perhaps solve the problem that sees these things manifest.

It’s lazy point scoring politics. It’s clever in those terms. But it’s every bit as bad as 90% of the things that Trump is doing.

Again. Jail time for truant parents is less sensible than a wall to prevent immigration.
 
Yeah I'm also failing to understand how putting the parents in jail is going to keep those kids in school. I'd also be interested to see if that policy was applied across the borad or only in certain neighbourhoods. Don't see her going into rich neighborhoods and prosecuting parents there if their kids skipped school.
 
This will likely be a central focus of the Dem economic platform battle going into this cycle - the establishment middle class tax cut idea as championed by Harris (and probably Biden as well) vs the idea of raising revenue through taxing extreme wealth.

 
When did Harris become the establishment choice? I didn't even hear about her before Kavanaugh's hearing. She was very good at it, actually.
 
This will likely be a central focus of the Dem economic platform battle going into this cycle - the establishment middle class tax cut idea as championed by Harris (and probably Biden as well) vs the idea of raising revenue through taxing extreme wealth.

Is there any reason we can't have both?
 
Is there any reason we can't have both?

It's not impossible to have both but I would be weary of any candidate who can make such lofty promises, especially since there's a clear divergence in terms of how they are framing the problem. One is framing it that the wealthy are getting away with paying far too little tax, that could otherwise be used to generate a lot of services and jobs for the lower 99%. The other is framing it in a way suggesting that raising less revenue for the state (by way of tax cuts) will incentivize more middle class spending, and thus more economic growth. One side is privileging security through greater services while the other is privileging prosperity through economic expansion. This is more or less the dilemma between voting progressive or establishment this cycle.
 
This will likely be a central focus of the Dem economic platform battle going into this cycle - the establishment middle class tax cut idea as championed by Harris (and probably Biden as well) vs the idea of raising revenue through taxing extreme wealth.



Nobody is going to vote for her. To pretend they will is crazy.
 
Huh?!? Bernie Sanders is Charismatic as all hell.

You're confusing charisma with passion. He's about charismatic as a low grade bank clerk. There are probably a plethora of reasons people may vote for the Bern, and charisma ain't anywhere near the top of the list.
 
We don't know yet. At this stage 12 and 4 years ago, Obama and Trump were both longshots.
Exactly, Warren was the darling of the progressives before 2016 so, I really don't understand why She is so disliked now. People on the left would rather have centrist candidates who throws occasional olive branch to the progressives over actual progressive who's moved slightly towards the centre to stand a fighting chance in a country where the term Socialist is used as an insult.
 
It depends on what exactly the law says, and on how you apply the law. In general, I agree with Kamala Harris on this. If the parents cannot bother to send their kids to school, they probably cannot take proper care of their kids in general, and in this case the state should be able to take the kids from these parents and find them better homes. This is better for the kids than staying with parents that don't give a fart about them.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/kamala-harris-truancy-initiative_us_5c50b08ee4b0f43e410bcbc4

“I believe a child going without an education is tantamount to a crime,” Harris says in the video. “So I decided I was going to start prosecuting parents for truancy.”
While I'd theoretically agree with you one needs to look at the realities these kids are faced with. I'm not up to date, maybe the foster care system has improved dramatically in the past 10 years, but from my experience and knowledge about it I'd use it as an absolute last resort. In the vast majority of cases children are better off with their parents, unless they're abused etc. of course. As a last resort I'm all for removing the child from the family (for extreme truancy too) but even then I don't see any point in incarcerating the parents, who'll benefit from it?

Also she's effectively saying not being capable of making sure your child is at school is criminal, which will inevitably hit single parents working 2 or 3 jobs and poor ones who can't just go out and buy another car if their current one breaks down etc. Considering the amount it costs to lock someone up I'd almost say it's a waste of taxpayer money.


Also calling yourself progressive and advocating/enforcing extremely punitive policy seems insincere.
 
You're confusing charisma with passion. He's about charismatic as a low grade bank clerk. There are probably a plethora of reasons people may vote for the Bern, and charisma ain't anywhere near the top of the list.

Must disagree.

People who speak to the truth are passionate and connect with people.
Thus he Is charismatic.

I see the post by Eboue above about Harris statement for Medicare for All.
She does not get my vote.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.