Kamela Harris' first rally

thaiboxerken said:
She looks good, physically. I had no idea she is almost 60.

Another line of attack, which happened on this forum, is that she isn't "really black" because she had no slave ancestors. So, black people, the next time a racist is coming strong at you, just tell them that you're from Jamaica, they'll leave you alone.........
Click to expand...

Only thing I've seen is she's not African American, not that she isn't black.
 
Very good speech. Can someone from the US explain why she is so unpopular? As an outsider I just don't get it.
 
simper said:
Very good speech. Can someone from the US explain why she is so unpopular? As an outsider I just don't get it.
Click to expand...

I don't think she is unpopular, I just think she has somewhat of a bad rap from the pundits because she did not perform well in the 2020 primaries. And personally I wasn't crazy about her back then, I thought she came off as a bit snarky. Then, rightfully or not, she got a lot of flack for not addressing the immigration issue adequately. But 4 years as VP is gonna give anyone some good experience in politics, and I think that will give her a major edge over alternative choices. So far she is doing what needs to be done--a no-holds barred approach to dealing with a bully.
 
Venom said:
Only thing I've seen is she's not African American, not that she isn't black.
Click to expand...
I would have thought that if people claim Columbus discovered America when he landed in the Caribbean, the Caribbean would still have been sort of American when Kamela's ancestors landed there. Or is the problem that her ancestors weren't enslaved enough to satisfy the neo-bootstrappers?
 
simper said:
Very good speech. Can someone from the US explain why she is so unpopular? As an outsider I just don't get it.
Click to expand...
She is not, generally speaking. There ARE, however:

* A bunch of conservatives here who fabricate ways to rationalize racism / sexism / political biases; some of which try to erroneously cast themselves as "independent" or of some other political affiliation in an effort to avoid being held accountable for their misanthropic beliefs.

* Masses of the gullible who imagine that a handful of cherrypicked gaffes can be generalized into some sort of deficiency; usually in stark disregard of mistakes shown by any other living human being.

* Progressives who are suspicious if not outright hostile toward anything endorsed by the more "establishment" aligned members and partisans of the Democratic party.

To be fair, Harris has yet to articulate many of her policy positions in particular detail. There will be reasonable reservations regarding how she might govern as a President until she does so. There are also some who have concerns about the nature of her selection process, sering as how the Democratic party did not go through a full multi-candidate campaign process during the primaries.

Most of the US population just... doesn't know her very well as of yet.
 
Last edited:
Shadowdweller said:
She is not, generally speaking. There ARE, however:

* A bunch of conservatives here who fabricate ways to rationalize racism / sexism / political biases; some of which try to erroneously cast themselves as "independent" or of some other political affiliation in an effort to avoid being held accountable for their misanthropic beliefs.

* Masses of the gullible who imagine that a handful of cherrypicked gaffes can be generalized into some sort of deficiency; usually in stark disregard of mistakes shown by any other living human being.

* Progressives who are suspicious if not outright hostile toward anything endorsed by the more "establishment" aligned members and partisans of the Democratic party.

To be fair, Harris has yet to articulate many of her policy positions in particular detail. There will be reasonable reservations regarding how she might govern as a President until she does so. There are also some who have concerns about the nature of her selection process, sering as how the Democratic party did not go through a full multi-candidate campaign process during the primaries.

Most of the US population just... doesn't know her very well as of yet.
Click to expand...

Actually, she has. As the VP or VP candidate the press typically pays little attention.
 
jt512 said:
Her approval rating is 38%.

How clever the Democrats to pick her for their nominee.
Click to expand...

That means nothing. Less than nothing. Now that she is the presumptive nominee, the world will start paying attention. Let's see where she's at in two weeks, a month from now.
 
acbytesla said:
That means nothing. Less than nothing. Now that she is the presumptive nominee, the world will start paying attention. Let's see where she's at in two weeks, a month from now.
Click to expand...


Actually, it means everything. It is the public's opinion of her after nearly three years in office. It might improve now that she is the presumptive nominee, it might stay the same or might get worse. Since the future trajectory of her popularity is unknown, her currently popularity is the number that matters, and the one the Democratic party ignored (as well as the polls showing her an underdog to trump and the polls showing four other possible Democratic candidates ahead of him).
 
stanfr said:
I don't think she is unpopular, I just think she has somewhat of a bad rap from the pundits because she did not perform well in the 2020 primaries. And personally I wasn't crazy about her back then, I thought she came off as a bit snarky. Then, rightfully or not, she got a lot of flack for not addressing the immigration issue adequately. But 4 years as VP is gonna give anyone some good experience in politics, and I think that will give her a major edge over alternative choices. So far she is doing what needs to be done--a no-holds barred approach to dealing with a bully.
Click to expand...

Ok, in the UK she was seen as the great hope for the Democrats when Biden was elected. Years later, she was just known as an unpopular VP. Journalists and broadcasters ask this question of American correspondents. I think describing him as a just a bully is very flattering of you though!
 
Shadowdweller said:
She is not, generally speaking. There ARE, however:

* A bunch of conservatives here who fabricate ways to rationalize racism / sexism / political biases; some of which try to erroneously cast themselves as "independent" or of some other political affiliation in an effort to avoid being held accountable for their misanthropic beliefs.

* Masses of the gullible who imagine that a handful of cherrypicked gaffes can be generalized into some sort of deficiency; usually in stark disregard of mistakes shown by any other living human being.

* Progressives who are suspicious if not outright hostile toward anything endorsed by the more "establishment" aligned members and partisans of the Democratic party.

To be fair, Harris has yet to articulate many of her policy positions in particular detail. There will be reasonable reservations regarding how she might govern as a President until she does so. There are also some who have concerns about the nature of her selection process, sering as how the Democratic party did not go through a full multi-candidate campaign process during the primaries.

Most of the US population just... doesn't know her very well as of yet.
Click to expand...

* A bunch of conservatives here who fabricate ways to rationalize racism / sexism / political biases; some of which try to erroneously cast themselves as "independent" or of some other political affiliation in an effort to avoid being held accountable for their misanthropic beliefs.

We had that in the UK, led to a disaster for the ruling party. In the UK the farther to the right you go simply exposes you to the centre, and oblivion.

Don't think she has had time to make a case for how she would govern as President. Attacking him for his views on reproductive rights was a good move though. Not sure if she needs to focus on one or two things or go after his whole legacy. January 6th?
 
thaiboxerken said:
The racism is just starting, it is going to get very nasty. White Surpremacy is on the ticket and they don't know how to deal with a black person being the top of their opposition.
Click to expand...
The racism and misogony both. Knowing Drumpf, he is probably going to spew a lot of **** himself. Hopefully it'll at least help drive voters away from the GOP.

I saw how furious they were when Obama was elected, though. I know this will probably piss them off even more.
 
Harris has a less than stellar record, but by not making any waves for nearly four years, Democrats are probably willing to give her the benefit or the doubt and hope that she learned some lessons.
 
RolandRat said:
It provides context which is important when discussing approval ratings.
Click to expand...


Well, ok, then in that context, the Democrats want to nominate a candidate with an even lower approval rating than who her opponent will be.

But that's not the context that matters. The context that matters is that there are at least four other Democrats who had better chances of beating Trump, and thus presumable would have higher favorability ratings.
 
Last edited:
psionl0 said:
How many potential nominees have a higher approval rating?
Click to expand...


As I just wrote, there were at least four other Democrats that polled better against Trump than Harris did. We can infer from that that they would have higher approval ratings. Again, not really relevant in the context of the claim that was made: that she is not unpopular.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom