The vide president is always going to be the butt of jokes (see, e.g., Alexander Throttlebottom in "Of Thee I Sing") but it's instructive to compare the veeps of two parties. In my lifetime the GOP has elected Richard Nixon, Spiro Agnew, George H. W. Bush, Dick Armey, and Mike Pence. With the possible exception of Bush these were crooks, fools or, in Armey's case, Machiavellian warmongers. The Democrats, in contrast, elected Lyndon Johnson, Hubert Humphrey, Walter Mondale, Al Gore, and Joe Biden. Whatever their flaws, these were certainly in the pantheon of significant American politicians of the last half century who made a positive difference for the country.
Given that context, the vilification of Kamala Harris is par for the course for Republicans and just as inappropriate.
I'm not sure I would consider this a "dirty little secret." American sexism and racism are not little or secret, though I admit they are dirty and ugly. Also, even if someone thinks this situation has nothing to do with racism or sexism but is unique to Kamala Harris (I do not agree with them), it still doesn't seem like a secret.
Maybe what's weird about it is that it's never said out loud -- it's instead "the obvious (but always unspoken) reason"? I have a theory about why it's never said out loud. Because, given that we're all mortal, she's one heartbeat away from the presidency, so she just might be the Dem nominee. In which case, I personally think she would reset and do just fine -- and we'd all be remembering just how much we like her very appealing husband, too.
I just don't think the ONLY reason that Harris is unpopular is because she is a black woman. I am not naive enough to think that has NO impact, of course. But to ascribe all of her problems to that seems like a reach to me.
So if she was a 50-ish white man who had settled into the job by now -- not great, not terrible, just a VP in their first term -- whose policies naturally mirror Biden's policies, would a Republican challenger be using "if you vote for Joe Biden, you're actually voting for KAMALA HARRIS to be a President!!!" (paraphrasing)? I honestly don't think so. Haley has been asked point-blank why this particular choice of VP is so especially scary that it will activate voters, as every president has a VP who has the same policies -- and she doesn't really have an answer.
On a personal note, the vagueness does remind me of canvassing for Obama early in the 2008 primary, when some Dem voters (yes, Dem voters) were telling me there was "something I don't like about him, I'm not sure of how to put it, it's just different than other candidates," a vague response I've never gotten before or since. (Needless to say, I'm sure all of the same voters were enthusiastically making history by voting for him that fall and had no memory of these early doubts. People change.) At the time, I had a clear impression of what they "couldn't put into words" and Haley's response feels the same way.
Chris, I agree. If Harris' retail political skills were on par with, say, Nikki Haley*, I think Biden would be looking more seriously at stepping down in favor of Harris.
*Or to use a Democrat as an example, say Val Demings.
I wish I could articulate, even in my own mind, just why I can't get behind Kamala Harris. It's not because she's a black female. I'd get behind Stacey Abrams in a hot minute. It's not because she's an attorney (so am I). It's not because she's a Democrat (so am I). I've thought and thought and just can't pin it down. Of course I'd vote for her over Trump or anyone who might replace him on the ticket in today's world. But that's pretty lukewarm support.
The thing is: one has to--must BE--very ambitious to take on either leadership role such as Vice President or President. And, unfortunately, ambition in a female is not considered attractive--at least, not in this racist, misogynistic country. It is never said, but I'll bet a month's SS that that is not a small piece of the reluctance to get behind Kamala. Personally, I think she is a very smart, very capable woman who knows what she wants and is quite ambitious. Well, good on her, I say. But it does put some folks off.
It doesn't put me off, because MEN who want that job must be ambitious, too. Why else would anyone put up with the relentless glare of the combined spotlight and microscope that the media and the voters turn upon the candidates and the people who win those positions?
The MSN don't talk about Trump's age and apparent senility because they want him back for their ratings. Some of them are honest about that fact but some are not. They pretend that they are honest and objective.
And the management teams of MSM companies absolutely refuse to over-ride their short term lust for profit with some careful thought about what happens if they do get Drumpf elected. Things would NOT go well for the Fourth Estate, I think. Look to Putin's Russia for hints on what would happen to reporters, writers and librarians (just for starters).
The media of today is motivated, or forced to be motivated, by profitability. Having panels of "experts" giving speculative opinions is NOT Journalism. IT IS A "talk show" . As much as I may like some of the anchors, it is not Journalism.
👍🏽👍🏽👍🏽👍🏽🩷 Thank you. I get very tired of the media's obsession with this one facet of President Biden--one that he cannot do much about since we have not yet invented the Fountain of Youth (despite how much we worship youth) or time travel.
People,please don't get carried away by Chris' OPINION/ VIEW that Biden is running because of one "dirty little secret".Now, in my opinion/view, the CLEAN LITTLE SECRET why Biden is running is because he has achieved so much in his first term and he was to complete his achievements for the country and to prevent a Fraudster from winning on November.And guess what people, Biden is going to win in November. Never mind what the talking and writing heads are saying. Did you guys see the Fund raising numbers for tge DNC this morning?. That's what the talking and writing heads should be talking about. This thing about Biden's age stale now. Nobody cares.
Maybe we should wait to see whom Donald J Trump nominates before we decide about Kamala Harris’ electability . Trump is a mere few years younger than president Biden, and his VP choice will be consequential. It will probably be someone hair-raisingly awful. Harris was popular with Democrats in the 2020 primary, and she would be if Biden had to exit the race. Nate Silver was spectacularly wrong in 2016, the polls have been wrong since then(red wave, ha!) Biden can beat Trump, he has beaten Trump, and rather than the chattering media predicting his demise, factual analysis of Biden’s success and Trump’s utter unsuitability for any elected office would be welcome.
...but she WAS popular as Biden's running mate. I didn't like it at the time, because I remember her aggressively pursuing Pot Smokers and Single Moms with Truant Kids, while letting Steve Mnuchin (Trump's future Secretary of the Treasury!) go free in exchange for campaign contributions(!!!). But to paraphrase John Wayne, "I didn't vote for her, but she's still my Vice President, and I hope she does a good job."
I think the real problem is that for most of Biden's first term, it's been a case of "Kamala WHO?" I occasionally hear how she might have bumbled some event or another, and read thumbsuckers about "Why isn't she more popular?"—but I see less of her than I saw of Mike Fucking Pence, who has even LESS charisma, principles (he was going to walk away from the Fake Electors count until his Marine son injected him with a backbone!), or courage than she has! It feels like Biden, or his handlers, are trying to sabotage her as Biden's replacement should, Gods Forbid, he be unable to continue his duties as President—while I think they've done an excellent job for the most part, not putting Harris out there makes a strong case that THEY don't think she's capable.
How can we decide if Harris can step into Biden's shoes if need be if we never really see her?
I think we all are constantly faced with trying to parse out how much of Hillary's unpopularity was because she was a woman, and how much of Kamala's is because she is a minority and a woman. But it's hard to tease out why Michelle Obama is so popular then. She is certainly not weak. Is it because she isn't a politician? Or is there something else in Hillary and Kamala's political persona that is disliked? Especially because Democrats were generally fans or Hillary, but aren't of Kamala. I'm actually not a fan of Kamala, and I definitely have reasons that have nothing to do with her being a woman or minority.
It's not a mystery. Multiple political science studies have shown that a woman can be extremely popular up until the moment she reaches for power. Hillary is a textbook example. Prior to declaring her candidacy for President, she had the highest favorablility and highest approval ratings. We're talking 70+% approvals in multiple polls! But the week after she declared, her approvals dropped below 50%. The only thing that changed was that she was running for office. Michelle Obama is hugely popular now precisely because she isn't running. Hillary is popular again, because she's made it clear she's done.
This approval drop happens to all politicians to some extent. Any politician's popularity will drop once hypothetical becomes actual candidacy/office, but the size of the drop is much more dramatic with women. In general, a black man will drop more than a white man, but a woman will drop much more than either man. So a black woman reaching for power will usually take the biggest popularity hit for both her gender and her race.
As a black woman, Kamala is viewed with suspicion and is unpopular *because* she ran for President and is the VP. If she weren't a heartbeat away from the Presidency, then her favorability rating would probably soar. If she (unwisely) stepped down from VP and Biden plugged in the most popular Democrat he could find, then a week later everyone would be second-guessing because her approval would be up, and whoever replaced her would be down. And that shouldn't surprise any political veteran.
Also, if you check the crosstabs of reputable polls, Kamala is popular with young Millenials and Zoomers compared to other Democrats. So, maybe there's hope that younger generations are shrugging off the automatic dislike of any woman who dares to want to be in charge. We'll have to see if that trend holds up over time.
Thanks for sharing some great insights. There's a lot here that I completely agree with. I have also followed Hillary Clinton's roller coaster ride in the polls. And I took note when she reached the highest popularity of any political figure when she was SofS and the Republicans blatantly put their cross hairs on her at that moment to keep her from the presidency. I never wavered in my support for Hillary, even when she reached for power. And there is a fair possibility I am still bitter about her loss and therefore can't get excited about a younger less experienced woman as president. But not because she isn't a man!
Sorry! I didn't want to hijack the thread with my personal opinions. My issues with Kamala Harris started at the first democratic debate. I understood her to be a friend of the Biden family, and I was appalled that she went after Joe Biden so directly and (imo) unfairly. I've just always gotten a feel that she is driven by ambition, not a true desire to lead the country in a good direction making changes that matter. I never felt that Hillary Clinton was just ambition. She cared so much about so many important issues, starting with her healthcare attempt as First Lady. She cemented my unending support when she agreed to be President Obama's Secretary of State after being shoved aside yet again by a man with far less experience. I've never seen those more personal and sacrificial sides of Kamala Harris. To be clear, however, I do not intensely dislike our VP and would absolutely vote for her if she were the Democratic candidate. I also am not in any kind of panic that she would be our president if something happened to Biden.
As much as it pains me to admit this, I’m afraid you nailed it. I believe she is highly capable of doing the job and doing it well, but the combination of racism and sexism makes her even less likely to win than Biden. Now if voters are given the stark choice between Harris and Trump, assuming he is convicted at least once, and preferably twice before November, she may be able to pull it off. But I can see Biden being unwilling to take that risk.
Oh yeah, the old “sexism and racism” argument is the only reason that VP Harris wouldn’t get elected. Completely glossing over the fact that almost 66 MILLION people voted for Sec. Clinton in 2016. The mental gymnastics it takes to overlook that fact while still playing the “sexism” card is phenomenal. No one wants former Pres. Trump. No one wants Pres. Biden. And no one wants VP Harris. And yet, here we are. What a time to be alive.
Chris, Mostly I agree with you, but occasionally you and I occupy vastly different fields in the space/time continuum. One aspect of 2024 America is that there is a very loud and concerted effort by some Americans and lots of Russians to besmirch, discourage, and misinform Americans, especially Democrats and liberals. Their loudspeakers include Fox and Sinclair along with quite a number of what used to be MSM papers and web sites. Kamala Harris has been one of their targets, but she is what she always has been, a very smart, capable, and hard-nosed woman. You’re right that the VP job is so screwed up in this country that virtually no one can do it right, but, you know who did get it right in a big way? Joe Biden. He may have been the most effective VP ever. Harris, who has been a student of Biden’s, right now is moving forward and is establishing herself as an excellent campaigner and is displaying some of the expertise she has been quietly amassing over the last 3+ years. No political candidate walks into the fray without blemishes and no one wins without great effort, but if she’s in the ring, Harris is a powerful opponent for anyone. She’s better prepared than she ever has been. No, Joe won’t step out, and he shouldn’t. One reason he can campaign with confidence is that he has a great partner in Harris, one who can succeed him in ‘28. -Ron
The first time Kamala Harris came into my conciousness, was when she confronted Brett Kavanaugh during his confirmation hearing. I had never heard her name before. But it was love at first sight. I think she would be a great President, given the opportunity.
As I've said for a while, the only way that Uncle Joe can withdraw is if there's a pre-packaged deal to retain Ms. Harris as V.P. Would she accept that? She's got to know that she can't win on her own, based on current perceptions, and there's not enough time to change them, if she could. I think she would be a basically competent President. But she doesn't have the charisma and gravitas needed to compete with a born salesman supported by a loyal media ecosystem. Sidelining her would blow off the African-American and immigrant vote, enough to re-elect Trump. And it's too late for her to solve the problem by returning to the Senate.
Warren Buffet isn’t running to the be leader of the free world. Certainly there are older people than Pres. Biden. And if Pres. Biden was a private citizen, his age would be of no concern. But he’s not. He’s the oldest President in history and looking to break his own record (H/T Jon Stewart).
Warren Buffet obviously due to his stellar track record. As opposed to former Pres. Trump who had no real landmark legislation, nor Pres. Biden whose real legacy is a cure for the Iraq war, the Defense of Marriage act, and the Tough on Crime Act, and yet somehow he’s convinced tons of Democratic voters that he’s some liberal bastion.
Biden’s age is not disqualifying , but it is a relevant consideration. Doing the job of POTUS well requires enormous energy. One requirement of being POTUS is being able to use the “bully pulpit” to unite or rally the country. IMO, opinion Joe is not up to that task. He’s done a great job given the challenges. He is , of course, far superior to Trump, and I vote for him. But I think that others given the time to win support in a primary season would have been more likely to win and more able to do the job.
Oh I don’t know. Perhaps the fact that during a press conference which was solely focused on proving how mentally acute he is, he botched Egypt and Canada. And these gaffes just keep coming. Are the verbal slips by former Pres. Trump “nothing” as well?
And since you mistook Canada for Mexico in your silly example, you must be unqualified to comment. We’re talking about governing....you know, negotiating, promoting policies, having a vision, solving problems, dealing with adversaries.
The problems in our government are by people much younger than Biden.
Well, Biden's "verbal slips" are such a part of him that they were being joked about when he was young! I don't get how, despite having the Internet at their fingertips, so few people check back to read how people were seen back in the 1980s and 1990s.
I remember Democrats during the Clinton years, including Bill Clinton himself, laughing at "Malaprop Joe"'s verbal gaffes as much as they praised him for his ability to "reach across the aisle" and get bipartisan legislation passed.
Nuts. Of course Harris is not well liked! She is a Black woman in America and a mountain of Republicans press, Russian and Chinese bots, and even people like you are taking that statement seriously as though she has earned it. Trump disses her every day, probably hoping one of his followers will kill her as they have attacked so many people that he mentioned derisively. For God’s sake. Joe Biden’s age and experience have put him where he is. He is a good president. Compared to the nightmare grift and treason if Trump he is a fabulous president. He is doing a good job RIGHT NOW. I’m beginning to wonder why I paid for a subscription to read this drivel.
Thank you, Chris. I tend to agree with you and wish Biden had selected a different VP in 2020, not because of being a woman or POC. I just wasn’t sure she would be the strongest candidate that would be able to become President if a crisis came. I did not think she’d be the strongest candidate to take the mantle in 2024, either. However, it is what it is at this point and to change course now, selecting Whitmer, for example, could damage the ticket for a variety of reasons, weakness as on of them.
The vide president is always going to be the butt of jokes (see, e.g., Alexander Throttlebottom in "Of Thee I Sing") but it's instructive to compare the veeps of two parties. In my lifetime the GOP has elected Richard Nixon, Spiro Agnew, George H. W. Bush, Dick Armey, and Mike Pence. With the possible exception of Bush these were crooks, fools or, in Armey's case, Machiavellian warmongers. The Democrats, in contrast, elected Lyndon Johnson, Hubert Humphrey, Walter Mondale, Al Gore, and Joe Biden. Whatever their flaws, these were certainly in the pantheon of significant American politicians of the last half century who made a positive difference for the country.
Given that context, the vilification of Kamala Harris is par for the course for Republicans and just as inappropriate.
Mr. Kimmel did you mean Dick Cheney? (who most certainly IS a Machiavellian warmonger).
Good point
Dick Armey was House Majority Leader, not VP.
Many of the Republicans' losing tickets have had VP nominees who I would consider significant, respectable politicians. E g., Jack Kemp and Paul Ryan.
I meant Dick Cheney. And I also omitted Danforth Quayle.
I'm not sure I would consider this a "dirty little secret." American sexism and racism are not little or secret, though I admit they are dirty and ugly. Also, even if someone thinks this situation has nothing to do with racism or sexism but is unique to Kamala Harris (I do not agree with them), it still doesn't seem like a secret.
Maybe what's weird about it is that it's never said out loud -- it's instead "the obvious (but always unspoken) reason"? I have a theory about why it's never said out loud. Because, given that we're all mortal, she's one heartbeat away from the presidency, so she just might be the Dem nominee. In which case, I personally think she would reset and do just fine -- and we'd all be remembering just how much we like her very appealing husband, too.
I just don't think the ONLY reason that Harris is unpopular is because she is a black woman. I am not naive enough to think that has NO impact, of course. But to ascribe all of her problems to that seems like a reach to me.
So if she was a 50-ish white man who had settled into the job by now -- not great, not terrible, just a VP in their first term -- whose policies naturally mirror Biden's policies, would a Republican challenger be using "if you vote for Joe Biden, you're actually voting for KAMALA HARRIS to be a President!!!" (paraphrasing)? I honestly don't think so. Haley has been asked point-blank why this particular choice of VP is so especially scary that it will activate voters, as every president has a VP who has the same policies -- and she doesn't really have an answer.
On a personal note, the vagueness does remind me of canvassing for Obama early in the 2008 primary, when some Dem voters (yes, Dem voters) were telling me there was "something I don't like about him, I'm not sure of how to put it, it's just different than other candidates," a vague response I've never gotten before or since. (Needless to say, I'm sure all of the same voters were enthusiastically making history by voting for him that fall and had no memory of these early doubts. People change.) At the time, I had a clear impression of what they "couldn't put into words" and Haley's response feels the same way.
Chris, I agree. If Harris' retail political skills were on par with, say, Nikki Haley*, I think Biden would be looking more seriously at stepping down in favor of Harris.
*Or to use a Democrat as an example, say Val Demings.
I wish I could articulate, even in my own mind, just why I can't get behind Kamala Harris. It's not because she's a black female. I'd get behind Stacey Abrams in a hot minute. It's not because she's an attorney (so am I). It's not because she's a Democrat (so am I). I've thought and thought and just can't pin it down. Of course I'd vote for her over Trump or anyone who might replace him on the ticket in today's world. But that's pretty lukewarm support.
The thing is: one has to--must BE--very ambitious to take on either leadership role such as Vice President or President. And, unfortunately, ambition in a female is not considered attractive--at least, not in this racist, misogynistic country. It is never said, but I'll bet a month's SS that that is not a small piece of the reluctance to get behind Kamala. Personally, I think she is a very smart, very capable woman who knows what she wants and is quite ambitious. Well, good on her, I say. But it does put some folks off.
It doesn't put me off, because MEN who want that job must be ambitious, too. Why else would anyone put up with the relentless glare of the combined spotlight and microscope that the media and the voters turn upon the candidates and the people who win those positions?
Not having a reason you can pinpoint, is a a weak arguments.
Does she intimidate you?
I know, wish I could verbalize. I don't think she'd intimidate anyone.
Exactly!
Biden's not stepping down, no matter how many times you in the MSM help Trump out by saying "He's OLD!"
Yeah, so's Trump—worse, Trump IS demonstrably senile, but you Mainstream Media types NEVER talk about that.
The MSN don't talk about Trump's age and apparent senility because they want him back for their ratings. Some of them are honest about that fact but some are not. They pretend that they are honest and objective.
And the management teams of MSM companies absolutely refuse to over-ride their short term lust for profit with some careful thought about what happens if they do get Drumpf elected. Things would NOT go well for the Fourth Estate, I think. Look to Putin's Russia for hints on what would happen to reporters, writers and librarians (just for starters).
The media of today is motivated, or forced to be motivated, by profitability. Having panels of "experts" giving speculative opinions is NOT Journalism. IT IS A "talk show" . As much as I may like some of the anchors, it is not Journalism.
👍🏽👍🏽👍🏽👍🏽🩷 Thank you. I get very tired of the media's obsession with this one facet of President Biden--one that he cannot do much about since we have not yet invented the Fountain of Youth (despite how much we worship youth) or time travel.
People,please don't get carried away by Chris' OPINION/ VIEW that Biden is running because of one "dirty little secret".Now, in my opinion/view, the CLEAN LITTLE SECRET why Biden is running is because he has achieved so much in his first term and he was to complete his achievements for the country and to prevent a Fraudster from winning on November.And guess what people, Biden is going to win in November. Never mind what the talking and writing heads are saying. Did you guys see the Fund raising numbers for tge DNC this morning?. That's what the talking and writing heads should be talking about. This thing about Biden's age stale now. Nobody cares.
I love your comments, Dr. Ibrahim. Thank you for making some excellent points.
Thanks T L Mills!
Maybe we should wait to see whom Donald J Trump nominates before we decide about Kamala Harris’ electability . Trump is a mere few years younger than president Biden, and his VP choice will be consequential. It will probably be someone hair-raisingly awful. Harris was popular with Democrats in the 2020 primary, and she would be if Biden had to exit the race. Nate Silver was spectacularly wrong in 2016, the polls have been wrong since then(red wave, ha!) Biden can beat Trump, he has beaten Trump, and rather than the chattering media predicting his demise, factual analysis of Biden’s success and Trump’s utter unsuitability for any elected office would be welcome.
...but she WAS popular as Biden's running mate. I didn't like it at the time, because I remember her aggressively pursuing Pot Smokers and Single Moms with Truant Kids, while letting Steve Mnuchin (Trump's future Secretary of the Treasury!) go free in exchange for campaign contributions(!!!). But to paraphrase John Wayne, "I didn't vote for her, but she's still my Vice President, and I hope she does a good job."
I think the real problem is that for most of Biden's first term, it's been a case of "Kamala WHO?" I occasionally hear how she might have bumbled some event or another, and read thumbsuckers about "Why isn't she more popular?"—but I see less of her than I saw of Mike Fucking Pence, who has even LESS charisma, principles (he was going to walk away from the Fake Electors count until his Marine son injected him with a backbone!), or courage than she has! It feels like Biden, or his handlers, are trying to sabotage her as Biden's replacement should, Gods Forbid, he be unable to continue his duties as President—while I think they've done an excellent job for the most part, not putting Harris out there makes a strong case that THEY don't think she's capable.
How can we decide if Harris can step into Biden's shoes if need be if we never really see her?
I think we all are constantly faced with trying to parse out how much of Hillary's unpopularity was because she was a woman, and how much of Kamala's is because she is a minority and a woman. But it's hard to tease out why Michelle Obama is so popular then. She is certainly not weak. Is it because she isn't a politician? Or is there something else in Hillary and Kamala's political persona that is disliked? Especially because Democrats were generally fans or Hillary, but aren't of Kamala. I'm actually not a fan of Kamala, and I definitely have reasons that have nothing to do with her being a woman or minority.
It's not a mystery. Multiple political science studies have shown that a woman can be extremely popular up until the moment she reaches for power. Hillary is a textbook example. Prior to declaring her candidacy for President, she had the highest favorablility and highest approval ratings. We're talking 70+% approvals in multiple polls! But the week after she declared, her approvals dropped below 50%. The only thing that changed was that she was running for office. Michelle Obama is hugely popular now precisely because she isn't running. Hillary is popular again, because she's made it clear she's done.
This approval drop happens to all politicians to some extent. Any politician's popularity will drop once hypothetical becomes actual candidacy/office, but the size of the drop is much more dramatic with women. In general, a black man will drop more than a white man, but a woman will drop much more than either man. So a black woman reaching for power will usually take the biggest popularity hit for both her gender and her race.
As a black woman, Kamala is viewed with suspicion and is unpopular *because* she ran for President and is the VP. If she weren't a heartbeat away from the Presidency, then her favorability rating would probably soar. If she (unwisely) stepped down from VP and Biden plugged in the most popular Democrat he could find, then a week later everyone would be second-guessing because her approval would be up, and whoever replaced her would be down. And that shouldn't surprise any political veteran.
Also, if you check the crosstabs of reputable polls, Kamala is popular with young Millenials and Zoomers compared to other Democrats. So, maybe there's hope that younger generations are shrugging off the automatic dislike of any woman who dares to want to be in charge. We'll have to see if that trend holds up over time.
Thanks for sharing some great insights. There's a lot here that I completely agree with. I have also followed Hillary Clinton's roller coaster ride in the polls. And I took note when she reached the highest popularity of any political figure when she was SofS and the Republicans blatantly put their cross hairs on her at that moment to keep her from the presidency. I never wavered in my support for Hillary, even when she reached for power. And there is a fair possibility I am still bitter about her loss and therefore can't get excited about a younger less experienced woman as president. But not because she isn't a man!
So, why not spell it out? What is it about her that turns you off??
Sorry! I didn't want to hijack the thread with my personal opinions. My issues with Kamala Harris started at the first democratic debate. I understood her to be a friend of the Biden family, and I was appalled that she went after Joe Biden so directly and (imo) unfairly. I've just always gotten a feel that she is driven by ambition, not a true desire to lead the country in a good direction making changes that matter. I never felt that Hillary Clinton was just ambition. She cared so much about so many important issues, starting with her healthcare attempt as First Lady. She cemented my unending support when she agreed to be President Obama's Secretary of State after being shoved aside yet again by a man with far less experience. I've never seen those more personal and sacrificial sides of Kamala Harris. To be clear, however, I do not intensely dislike our VP and would absolutely vote for her if she were the Democratic candidate. I also am not in any kind of panic that she would be our president if something happened to Biden.
As much as it pains me to admit this, I’m afraid you nailed it. I believe she is highly capable of doing the job and doing it well, but the combination of racism and sexism makes her even less likely to win than Biden. Now if voters are given the stark choice between Harris and Trump, assuming he is convicted at least once, and preferably twice before November, she may be able to pull it off. But I can see Biden being unwilling to take that risk.
No evidence she could do the job.
I am convinced, with or without evidence, that she is very capable.
What makes you think Vice President Harris would be unable to handle the job of President???
Oh yeah, the old “sexism and racism” argument is the only reason that VP Harris wouldn’t get elected. Completely glossing over the fact that almost 66 MILLION people voted for Sec. Clinton in 2016. The mental gymnastics it takes to overlook that fact while still playing the “sexism” card is phenomenal. No one wants former Pres. Trump. No one wants Pres. Biden. And no one wants VP Harris. And yet, here we are. What a time to be alive.
Chris, Mostly I agree with you, but occasionally you and I occupy vastly different fields in the space/time continuum. One aspect of 2024 America is that there is a very loud and concerted effort by some Americans and lots of Russians to besmirch, discourage, and misinform Americans, especially Democrats and liberals. Their loudspeakers include Fox and Sinclair along with quite a number of what used to be MSM papers and web sites. Kamala Harris has been one of their targets, but she is what she always has been, a very smart, capable, and hard-nosed woman. You’re right that the VP job is so screwed up in this country that virtually no one can do it right, but, you know who did get it right in a big way? Joe Biden. He may have been the most effective VP ever. Harris, who has been a student of Biden’s, right now is moving forward and is establishing herself as an excellent campaigner and is displaying some of the expertise she has been quietly amassing over the last 3+ years. No political candidate walks into the fray without blemishes and no one wins without great effort, but if she’s in the ring, Harris is a powerful opponent for anyone. She’s better prepared than she ever has been. No, Joe won’t step out, and he shouldn’t. One reason he can campaign with confidence is that he has a great partner in Harris, one who can succeed him in ‘28. -Ron
The first time Kamala Harris came into my conciousness, was when she confronted Brett Kavanaugh during his confirmation hearing. I had never heard her name before. But it was love at first sight. I think she would be a great President, given the opportunity.
As I've said for a while, the only way that Uncle Joe can withdraw is if there's a pre-packaged deal to retain Ms. Harris as V.P. Would she accept that? She's got to know that she can't win on her own, based on current perceptions, and there's not enough time to change them, if she could. I think she would be a basically competent President. But she doesn't have the charisma and gravitas needed to compete with a born salesman supported by a loyal media ecosystem. Sidelining her would blow off the African-American and immigrant vote, enough to re-elect Trump. And it's too late for her to solve the problem by returning to the Senate.
What evidence is there that Biden is too old other than the news reports that started before 2020. (Don’t give me the verbal slips. They are nothing)
Stop repeating this simplistic BS and feeding this story.
Is Warren Buffett too old? He’s in His 90’s. I can give you many more examples of people older than Biden that we don’t think are too old.
Warren Buffet isn’t running to the be leader of the free world. Certainly there are older people than Pres. Biden. And if Pres. Biden was a private citizen, his age would be of no concern. But he’s not. He’s the oldest President in history and looking to break his own record (H/T Jon Stewart).
Mr. James P, would you invest your retirement savings with Warren Buffet or with Donald Trump or with Joe Biden. Please be honest in your answer
Warren Buffet obviously due to his stellar track record. As opposed to former Pres. Trump who had no real landmark legislation, nor Pres. Biden whose real legacy is a cure for the Iraq war, the Defense of Marriage act, and the Tough on Crime Act, and yet somehow he’s convinced tons of Democratic voters that he’s some liberal bastion.
* a vote for the Iraq war not a cure 🤦🏻♂️
So what is wrong with being older or oldest.
The point about Buffett is that he is plenty capable at his age. Tell me one thing that makes Biden’s age relevant to doing his job.
I’ll wait.
Biden’s age is not disqualifying , but it is a relevant consideration. Doing the job of POTUS well requires enormous energy. One requirement of being POTUS is being able to use the “bully pulpit” to unite or rally the country. IMO, opinion Joe is not up to that task. He’s done a great job given the challenges. He is , of course, far superior to Trump, and I vote for him. But I think that others given the time to win support in a primary season would have been more likely to win and more able to do the job.
Oh I don’t know. Perhaps the fact that during a press conference which was solely focused on proving how mentally acute he is, he botched Egypt and Canada. And these gaffes just keep coming. Are the verbal slips by former Pres. Trump “nothing” as well?
And since you mistook Canada for Mexico in your silly example, you must be unqualified to comment. We’re talking about governing....you know, negotiating, promoting policies, having a vision, solving problems, dealing with adversaries.
The problems in our government are by people much younger than Biden.
You get to try again.
Touché!!
Well, Biden's "verbal slips" are such a part of him that they were being joked about when he was young! I don't get how, despite having the Internet at their fingertips, so few people check back to read how people were seen back in the 1980s and 1990s.
I remember Democrats during the Clinton years, including Bill Clinton himself, laughing at "Malaprop Joe"'s verbal gaffes as much as they praised him for his ability to "reach across the aisle" and get bipartisan legislation passed.
Uncle Joe missed his chance when he had the SOCTUS slot and didn't send up Kamala as the nominee. She has the legal cred by being:
~ Deputy district attorney in Alameda County, California,
~ Assistant district attorney of San Francisco with portfolio as the chief of the Career Criminal Division,
~ District Attorney of San Francisco
~ Atty General of California
~ U.S. Senator
Biden could then have played kingmaker by bringing in his hand chosen successor as replacement VP.
That would have given the "chosee" to have doing the spade work to shore-up moving into running this year.
Good point! Killing >=2 birds!
Nuts. Of course Harris is not well liked! She is a Black woman in America and a mountain of Republicans press, Russian and Chinese bots, and even people like you are taking that statement seriously as though she has earned it. Trump disses her every day, probably hoping one of his followers will kill her as they have attacked so many people that he mentioned derisively. For God’s sake. Joe Biden’s age and experience have put him where he is. He is a good president. Compared to the nightmare grift and treason if Trump he is a fabulous president. He is doing a good job RIGHT NOW. I’m beginning to wonder why I paid for a subscription to read this drivel.
Thank you, Chris. I tend to agree with you and wish Biden had selected a different VP in 2020, not because of being a woman or POC. I just wasn’t sure she would be the strongest candidate that would be able to become President if a crisis came. I did not think she’d be the strongest candidate to take the mantle in 2024, either. However, it is what it is at this point and to change course now, selecting Whitmer, for example, could damage the ticket for a variety of reasons, weakness as on of them.