Kamala Harris is in

[luzribeiro]

The newest addition to the 2020 circus has arrived. Anyone think what some have characterized as her confrontational style of politics can win?

Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) announced her 2020 presidential run and discussed issues that motivate her campaign on ABC's "Good Morning America."

1) I don't think so - and the more they try to suppress opinions that they don't agree with, the stronger Trump's base becomes. Kamala has a tendency towards being confrontational. Do Democrats really want their candidate mud wrestling with Trump down in the muck?

2) Maybe, maybe not. But she's a lot better than anyone the right will offer up, including the current clown in the WH. If she gets the nomination, she'll almost certainly win the GE.

3) She needs some seasoning in the senate and isn’t suited to a national campaign in my current opinion... perhaps she’ll surprise, but I’m liking her more in the senate...

4) Far-right race baiting has done wonders for the political fortunes of the GOP. Why should they have all the fun? Not that I'm sure that criticizing the KKK qualifies as confrontational, but whatever you say, dud!

5) Yeah smart women are confrontational LOL. Man, you Trumpers are really afraid! The members of the clown car, and Trump cult, have been in office for 2 years. It's time for educated, knowledgeable, sane and decent people to return to government! That sure must be scary to Trumpists, so let's watch them squirm!

Comments

[arhalvaztrirjournal]

The Dems did try the alternative approach and it pretty clearly failed. So clearly repeating Hillary's style of campaigning against Trump's is not going to alter the outcome of the first result.

[abomvubuso]

Fighting assholes with assholes? Hmmm. That promises another interesting 4 years.

[arhalvaztrirjournal]

Trying to go high when the other bastards went low guaranteed an all too interesting four years as it is. At a purely Machiavellian level only the Dems playing as dirty as they've been doing will make the Republicans endorse civility.

[abomvubuso]

Do you really believe that?

[arhalvaztrirjournal]

The Machiavellian bit? Yes. Because the Dems are too stupid regularly to capitalize on overwhelming advantages gift-wrapped for them and softballed by excessively moronically stupid opponents, so it's not like they'd be that effective at the gutter stuff beyond what it takes for the GOP to suddenly revert to 50s 'politeness'.

[abomvubuso]

No I mean, do you really believe Republicans would endorce civility? Ever? Under any circumstances? Because it doesn't look very likely, by the look of the folks who are running the shit-train right now.

[arhalvaztrirjournal]

If the option becomes that or losing any grip on power at all? I suspect so, today's Democratic Party after all isn't the monolithic one party system backed by lynch mobs and domestic terrorism that had the lock on power in the South. Today's GOP technically isn't either, it doesn't have the willingness to openly embrace its convictions to be.

[asthfghl]

From what I'm hearing, Kamala is not Hillary. Not even close.

[arhalvaztrirjournal]

'Tis what gives me hope they might actually have learned for a change not to double down on failure and expect that to magically produce success.

[kara_mckay]

I'd vote for her. I also happen to like her, but as things currently stand, I'd vote for Howard the Duck in the next election if he won the Democratic nomination. I think there are plenty of people who'd do the same thing, but I have no idea how many of them there are, and I don't think it's a good thing. It means people feel pushed to a place where looking closely at candidates doesn't matter so much as just going where the momentum is in order to push a blatantly unqualified person out of office.

At this point, I don't know what sort of candidate the broadest swath of Democratic voters finds electable. I understand the frustration of those Dems who are farther to the left who feel that when people talk about an electable liberal candidate, they really mean a toned down Republican. As far as it goes, I don't actually think that's what most Dems are really looking for -- I think a lot of that thinking comes from the right, and is a way of advancing the notion that people just don't want liberal candidates. At the same time, we really do have an abysmal way of indicating that we support candidates who are women or poc... but only if they're otherwise interchangeable with old, white, right leaning men, or behaving in acceptable stereotypical ways (women should be polite and inoffensive) that guarantee they won't be elected. So, who the hell knows.

[airiefairie]

She is looking genuine.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/kamala-harris-will-do-what-cory-booker-cant-say-no-to-super-pacs