To win working-class voters — and possibly today’s election — Democrats need to attack economic elites. But the Kamala Harris campaign hasn’t consistently offered an anti-elite counter to Donald Trump’s right-wing populism.
Not by her though. It’s the risk of running a candidate that’s part of a current administration. They can’t even pretend to promise they’ll make radical changes; they have to align with the current policy position.
That was her choice though. But some of those same breaks could have potentially hurt her Never Trump coalition. She made some space with Biden during her Elipse speech, but that was a bit late. That was probably her one misstep in the campaign. Regardless, the day isn’t over, very few counts are in. I think she did well in her campaign all things considered.
She didnt “have to” align with Biden as much as she did. That was a clear mistake and a missed opportunity.
She also didnt have to support the far right wing israeli genocide.
She didnt have to spend the entire last month of her ground game trying to appeal to disaffected repiblicans, losing dem base support every single day in the process.
She didnt have to do so poorly on the economy issue either.
Lets face it, she was a flawed candidate. She’s a political noob who by her past performance appears hesitant to take policy positions.
I’m saying as a subordinate in the Whitehouse she cannot largely deviate from the official position
She absolutely can. VP is an elected position, whats he going to do, fire her? cut her out of decisions? Decisions already literally werent her job. And he could read a poll the same as the rest of us. He should have understood that she needed to play to win. You’re confusing loyalty with her inability to grab the ring and lead.
Sticking your head in the sand and downvoting whatever you disagree with is how you make good policies and candidates, right?
If she wins today, that’s good. If she loses, I have to laugh because I’ll cry that it could have been prevented but choose to ignore it.
Not by her though. It’s the risk of running a candidate that’s part of a current administration. They can’t even pretend to promise they’ll make radical changes; they have to align with the current policy position.
That was her choice though. But some of those same breaks could have potentially hurt her Never Trump coalition. She made some space with Biden during her Elipse speech, but that was a bit late. That was probably her one misstep in the campaign. Regardless, the day isn’t over, very few counts are in. I think she did well in her campaign all things considered.
She didnt “have to” align with Biden as much as she did. That was a clear mistake and a missed opportunity. She also didnt have to support the far right wing israeli genocide. She didnt have to spend the entire last month of her ground game trying to appeal to disaffected repiblicans, losing dem base support every single day in the process. She didnt have to do so poorly on the economy issue either.
Lets face it, she was a flawed candidate. She’s a political noob who by her past performance appears hesitant to take policy positions.
I’m saying as a subordinate in the Whitehouse she cannot largely deviate from the official position to the degree and outside candidate could.
Lots of other failings, as you point out. But on the topic of Israel there is little that could have been said, even if there was the desire.
I’m not excusing her of anything, I think it was a flaw of picking her as the candidate.
She absolutely can. VP is an elected position, whats he going to do, fire her? cut her out of decisions? Decisions already literally werent her job. And he could read a poll the same as the rest of us. He should have understood that she needed to play to win. You’re confusing loyalty with her inability to grab the ring and lead.