As the 2024 presidential election approaches, the Kamala Harris campaign has taken a rightward shift in an attempt to appeal to disaffected Republican voters. Harris has embraced bipartisanship, including teaming up with former Republican Rep. Liz Cheney, and has moved towards more conservative positions on issues like immigration and fracking. However, this strategy has so far failed to gain significant traction with voters. One notable omission from Harris’s campaign messaging is any support for Lina Khan, the chair of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) who has taken an aggressive stance against corporate monopolies. Despite Khan’s popularity with both progressives and some MAGA Republicans, there are rumors that Harris could push for her removal if elected, likely due to pressure from billionaire donors to her campaign who have clashed with Khan. This episode highlights the influence of wealthy corporate interests in U.S. politics, even as Harris tries to fashion herself as a champion of the working class. Ultimately, it seems that whichever candidate wins the presidency, the country’s billionaires stand to benefit, as the “Country Over Party” slogan rings hollow.

  • @Bustedknuckles
    link
    7127 days ago

    I’m a big fan of Khan’s efforts, but I don’t know that I’m ready to judge Harris for not giving her a full-throated defense. Her campaign is extraordinarily disciplined and focused in their topics and messaging, and digressing to FTC appointments could easily not be advantageous. I hope Harris wins and Khan is even more empowered for the sake of our country, but the crap of FPTP reality is that Harris simply Has to win

    • @shalafi
      link
      English
      1226 days ago

      I’m ALL about Kahn. Having said that, why would Harris even be talking about her at this point?

      there are rumors that Harris could push for her removal if elected

      Oh gosh. No one told me there were rumors. Horse. Shit.

  • @anticolonialist
    link
    527 days ago

    All that donor class money comes with strings attached.

    • Em Adespoton
      link
      fedilink
      126 days ago

      Government would need a LOT of reforms for the rich to stop winning. Even if Sanders became President, he’d be virtually powerless to fix the imbalances in an 8 year period.

      But at least he’d get the ball rolling in the right direction.