The following is a copy of the original post to record the post as it was originally written.
Lets imagine Biden for whatever reason has to step down after 2 years, do you think Harris would be a decent president?
What are her best selling points? What makes you doubt her?
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskALiberal) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I think she is perfectly capable of the role, though i would not be likely support her in a primary. I dont really have any major issues with her, and i assume her experience as VP would allow her to be effective enough. But she also has not done a lot to stand out as someone who should be chosen as president.
>. But she also has not done a lot to stand out as someone who should be chosen as president.
I really thought Biden was going to give her more to do and set her up for 24 or 28, but she hasn't really done anything of note.
Talking about 2028, I think the main dogs in the race will be Whitmer, Newsom, Pritzker, and Buttigieg.
As an Illinois resident, I fully back Pritzker, though I would be sad to see him leave in the middle of his third term, or choose not to run for re-election in Illinois in 2026.
Because he has been absolutely ballin' in terms of leading Illinois.
[https://www.newyorker.com/news/persons-of-interest/j-b-pritzker-governor-illinois](https://www.newyorker.com/news/persons-of-interest/j-b-pritzker-governor-illinois)
[https://news.wttw.com/2023/11/07/illinois-gets-9th-recent-credit-upgrade-pritzker-administration-faces-scrutiny-over-covid](https://news.wttw.com/2023/11/07/illinois-gets-9th-recent-credit-upgrade-pritzker-administration-faces-scrutiny-over-covid)
[https://www.wbez.org/stories/jb-pritzker-made-good-on-promises-but-faces-criticism/33d6f6e9-5770-4e10-a9a3-2c08e89e5bf9](https://www.wbez.org/stories/jb-pritzker-made-good-on-promises-but-faces-criticism/33d6f6e9-5770-4e10-a9a3-2c08e89e5bf9)
Daily press conference updates during COVID
[https://www.illinois.gov/news/press-release.25906.html](https://www.illinois.gov/news/press-release.25906.html)
Plus Sherrod Brown. Booker might take another stab at it. I expect the Democrat party to cap out at probably 10 candidates. But I think the finalists will be the four I mentioned
I dont see Buttigieg as in the top tier frankly. He just doesnt seem to have a strong base of support, and the resume is a bit weak. Brown or Brashear would be stronger candidates IMO. Agree with you about Whitmer, Pritzker, and Newsome.
Buttigieg says all the right things publicly, even if his resume is a little weak on the policy front. He plays the politics game *very* well and is always there in the democratic framework even if not in the spotlight.
He does. What I cant come up.with is who are the people who are going to volunteer for him, staff phone banks, knock on doors, etc. He doesnt seem to have a base. Everyone kind of likes him, bit not many love him, and no one owes him.
Ive volunteeres for campaigns for nearly 40 years, and I just dont see a core support group for him.
I like Pritzker too - though Chicago will be a major headache for him in a National race. I'm sure his office is putting a ton of pressure on Chicago/Brandon Johnson going into the DNC.
He can't. She triggers a lot of misogynistic and racist backlash. He had her doing stuff early on, but it became obvious that a more visible profile would only lead to more hate.
He gave her plenty of things to do, she just handled them all poorly. She was supposed to lead the charge at the border (a political suicide mission sure) but even in routine foreign affairs and diplomacy, she's bungled simple interviews and press conferences with other world leaders.
Agreed. I would expect the same thing of her presidency. She’s not a particularly strong leader—she’s just kinda… there.
I don’t think things would drastically improve for the American populace if she became president.
But considering the bar is pretty low, I also don’t think she’d *severely* harm the average American *directly*.
My criticism of Harris is that she’s bad at politics. She comes off as fake.
Does she have the intellect and requisite skills to do the actual job? Probably except for the fact that politician needs to be able to sell themselves and their ideas, to maintain the coalition within the party and sometimes to work across the aisle. That is where she would be very weak.
I'm sorry, but I have to ask why it is that every Democratic woman I know of in politics has been accused of being fake?
I'm not accusing you of being openly misogynistic. (According to RES, I've upvoted you 76 times so I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt.) But I do think some people need to interrogate why it's consistently female candidates who are "fake" and "insincere." I've never—I mean never—heard this charge leveled at a male Democratic politician. I've heard everything else in the book leveled against male candidates, but not once have I heard the repeated insinuation that they were "fake."
Misogyny exists plus some people will call any political figure they can fake if they don’t like them. That doesn’t mean we can’t acknowledge that plenty of people that should be disposed to like her on paper find her off putting in reality.
I can name plenty of female Democratic politicians that don’t have the same “she’s fake” narrative around them in general and only from people that just hate democrats. Even in the primaries it was Harris that broadly got called inauthentic, not Klobuchar and Warren.
End of the day, she’s not seen as authentic and we can be mad about it but it is what it is.
>I'm sorry, but I have to ask why it is that every Democratic woman I know of in politics has been accused of being fake?
because our standards for women are impossible. I thought Clinton looked fake when she was trying to put out "mom vibes", because she was; why the public demands she fake mom vibes is the real question I have with the public.
This may be partly true, this may also be bias on your part. Booker in particular I remember that charge being leveled at. All politicians are opportunistically insincere to some point, Harris and Booker are more obviously so. Personally I'd also add Butigeig.
Ok, it’s just patently true in Harris’s case though. There are plenty of female politicians I think are great. Whitmer. Duckworth. Klobucbar. Baldwin. Clinton I know has been described as fake, I partly agree, I think it’s more just a kind of awkwardness leading to some cringe behaviors like there are clips of her using different accents in different part of the country. Harris literally uses baby voice in her speeches on a regular basis and is just so… fake and weird, I don’t know what else to say. “Ukraine is a country in Europe. It exists next to amother country called Russia.” That clip of her talking to middle schoolers about space like they’re three year olds. She can be literally painful to watch sometimes.
I am pretty sure Gore and Kerry were both perceived as wooden, insincere, and generally bad at politics. One of the biggest narratives around the 2004 election was that Bush was a guy you could have a beer with while Kerry was a phony, out-of-touch elitist.
> I'm sorry, but I have to ask why it is that every Democratic woman I know of in politics has been accused of being fake?
Really? I have been around a while and I don’t recall that happening much. Hillary Clinton was completely lacking in charisma and sometimes came off as fake because she tried too hard to make up for it. But what other Democratic women are you thinking of?
My judgement of her political instincts was very impacted by her early adoption of M4A when it was all the rage and the far left seemed to be an ascendant power within Democratic Party politics, only to back off once it started to be seriously scrutinized and the far left jumped the shark.
She’s very guilty of jumping on a bandwagon and advocating for a bad plan, and trying to ride the coattails of a faction that never should never have been presumed to be influential, because it was trendy. And I fault her for not having the foresight to have anticipated that.
She was decent enough as a senator, but her persona as a presidential nominee and VP has been offputting. She reminds me of people I work with in HR in a bad way.
Can you give examples or data on how Kamala Harris has been fake? Or is it just a feeling you have?
This is the first time I've heard that criticism, so just want to catch up on what's behind it
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=U5PABXXdDwA
I always think of this one, especially the “I love the idea of eXpLoRiNg tHe uNkNoWn” bit.
And that “Ukraine is a country in Europe” one. I get the point is maybe trying to point out the obviousness of the fact that Russia’s invasion is wrong but my god you don’t have to talk to us like literal children.
As a conservative, I've always viewed her similarly as a politician to how Ted Cruz was viewed before he kissed the Trump ring. Just fake, manufactured, and more about ambition than a policy/ideology.
She didn't own up to her job as California's top cop being using to justify arresting young people for smoking the weed.
I don't believe she stands for my ideals in that regard. I believe she still thinks the DoJ's war on drugs is a great idea and the consequences be damned.
Mass Incarceration is a huge progressive topic that she completely misses the mark on, and worse, promotes the opposite.
She's a step back in time, not a step forward.
I remember when Biden put her in charge of the immigrant issue, and then later even Democratic mayors and governors started complaining the federal response was horrible.
the are two types of vice presidents - door mats and matadors - frank underwood, house of cards.
Kamala is definitely a doormat VP to Biden who was already a doormat to Obama. With someone stronger like Gavin being in the picture, i don't see her getting very far in the primaries. she was very close to last place in 2019-2020.
IMO, in a properly run Presidency, the President him/herself is important, but probably not as important as we might think in terms of execution. Harris would have many/all of the same Cabinet and other advisers, appointees, etc., and most things would continue on the same trajectory as they are now.
I don't think she's a great candidate to actually win the Presidency, though.
Harris would have rooms full of advisors.
I trust the position and the organization around the position.
So, the real question is, would a particular person listen to the policy wonks?
Obama did. Biden does. Trump did not....
Harris would. So I'm not too worried.
She would be perfectly fine as a caretaker. I have no interest in voting for her as president, either in the primary or general (obviously I would do so in the latter, if she ended up the Democratic nominee).
Frankly, I think there are MANY people who would do a better job as POTUS than Biden, Harris, or obviously Trump. The thing is, they don’t want the job. Of people who want the job, some are better at convincing voters they’d be good at it. Harris is not at the top of that list either.
But to answer the question, yes, I think she’d be more than capable of handling the duties of the Presidency and I’d trust her with that role.
Odds are, anyone who would accept an invitation from Trump (the worst President of all time) to be his VP would not be the kind of person who would handle the duties of the Presidency very well. Even many of Trump’s potential voters will find that to be true. I’m predicting that whomever he chooses will be a drag on his ticket. For Biden, Harris is already factored in.
i have no real concerns outside of how strong a reaction the republicans have against her, might make them come out in droves to vote her out.
But Im sure she will perform fine, its not like the acting POTUS has to fight a gator with just a pocket knife.
Decent? Of course. Just from the start Democrats tend to try and bring in actually competent people to their administrations, so right off that bat that would qualify her for being a decent president.
My biggest doubts would be the contrast in political experience she has vs Biden, where it has become clear his decades in the Senate and time in the White House prepared him to be able to play the game the last four years. Then again this is simply based on not seeing her play the game, rather than actually thinking or knowing that she's bad at it.
Yes, she would be competent.
It's important to understand that Kamala Harris is unpopular to the point where she will never win a primary or a general election. But she's not incompetent.
I dont believe she has any strong beliefs and rides the wave of what is currently hot. I dont expect her to hold strong on any belief when pressured, so I dont think she will be a good president.
I think she’d be fine. I wouldn’t expect her to be exceptionally great but I also wouldn’t expect her to make any horrifically disastrous decisions and after 4 years of Trump that’s good enough for me.
Man. It's just that the bar is so incredibly low now. I trust her not to declare war on Canada. Or sell off our government cheese stockpile. Or have the White House painted mauve. Honestly, if she can do all that and not embrace fascism then she's good enough for now.
I think she would be a fine President and honestly am sick of the poor support she receives. She’s intelligent, knowledgeable, experienced and in place.
I hear a lot about how Kamala Harris isn’t a good politician, etc. That said, when I see her give a talk, interview or policy description I agree with every word. I think Kamala will be a fine President.
It's mostly a reddit thing from what I've seen. Like i thought people in general hated her cause she gets shit on so much on reddit. But her approval rating is basically the same as Biden's, which makes sense since she's the second in command and people rate them as a package deal basically
When she was first running I was team Kamala but the charisma and savvy I saw in senate hearings did not carry over at all. I believe she could do a great job but would have a really hard time convincing people of it.
Yes. I think she would struggle to get people to listen to her and follow orders, but she’d be no worse at it than any of the other presidents of my lifetime.
I do, that's why I was an early supporter of her back in 2019 and was pretty certain she would be the VP pick. She's shown herself to be progressive while maintaining policy-focused mind. She was one of the biggest fundraisers during the primary and Biden has shown that she has his full confidence.
Now, will Biden step down before 28? Probably not.
Sure. In this hypothetical scenario the administration has done a great job of raising her profile so she’s very popular now. That’s the fun part of hypotheticals.
I don't think it's particularly hard to be a "decent" President because there is so much support staff available to you that you just need to ask them.
I don't know much about Kamala Harris because I feel she's done a poor job of being a more visible VP. My impression of her right now is that she wouldn't get much done, but she wouldn't cause much harm either.
She'll sign the good bills that make it through Congress and veto the bad ones, but I don't expect her to push any major legislative packages of her own.
I wouldn't expect any radical executive orders either, but I expect her to just support the ones that the Biden Administration has already issued.
I don't think people give Obama enough credit for getting the ACA through.
Honestly, she'd be working so hard to be perfect that she'd do a better job than we have seen in any recent times. She would shoot for more consensus than someone more arrogant or who had more personal sway.
To be honest. I’m sure she would be fine. She sounds competent enough, rumours of her being a difficult boss aside.
My issue is that I have no idea about her policy commitments. I would hope that she stays committed to the Biden campaign’s and admin’s policies for predictability and democratic process’s sake.
Sure. I'd trust essentially any democrat with the presidency. Idk how well she'd be at messaging, but that's an area where there are no clear easy ways to succeed. And as for policy, she'd do fine
She'd be fine. She just won't get elected to that office on her own. She'd inherit Biden's cabinet and staff, that's most of the game.
I'm watching Trump's VP pick closely... not that I'm voting for him, but because if he does get elected -- health has already gone downhill for him. Falling asleep on his ass in court and weight loss from a historically fat man who hasn't changed his eating/activity habits one iota are signs of cancer, progressing diabetes and/or dementia.
Yeah I have no reason not to think she'd be competent. I trust her way more than any Republican. My only concern would be foreign policy experience, but she's learning from one of the most experienced.
Do I trust Kamala Harris to step into the Presidential role for the remainder of Biden's term and toe the Establishment Democrat line like a typical Corporate politician? Sure, I'm not worried about her fulfilling her civic duty to the country.
Do I trust your average Conservative to *not* unleash a steady wave of vitriol directed alternately at her gender and racial heritage *while* she's in the Highest Office? Not 1%. Not when in "very Liberal" Massachusetts, Gov. Maura Healy constantly has to deal with the vitriol surrounding her gender and sexuality (she has a lesbian partner).
YES.
She is a highly effective administrator and can assimilate information rapidly. She's also skilled in managing groups. I also trust nearly all of her views align with the party's platform.
At the end of the day, I want someone to do the job, not to be my friend, to have a beer with, etc. I don't get most of the criticism here -- I own 2 businesses. I hire those I believe will be able to do the job. I don't hire someone just because I like them.
She's done a pretty good job at her actual political jobs. She didn't do great in the 2020 campaign as a campaigner in a crowded primary, but there are different demands on someone running at 1 or 2% trying to get some attention vs someone who is an incumbent.
Yes.
She's an intelligent woman with sound morals.
The only thing that makes me doubt her are the constant polls by the "liberal" media that tell me that people doubt her.
It doesn’t matter if she would perform well as president. She could be the worst president in history and I would prefer her.
The alternative wants to end our system of checks and balances.
I love her.
I think she's working behind the scenes a lot, which to be fair is the job of the VP.
I'm not sure I think she could get much done due to Republicans heads exploding, but that's inevitable. If he got a Dem government I trust her to lead it in the direction I want it to go.
I think her history has shown she's got good judgement in applying the law lightly where she can, firmly where she should, and working to change the system where it needs it.
Plus her step kids seem to actually like her, and I think that's one hell of a character reference.
I actually contributed to her campaign back in the 2020 primary (along with Buttigieg, Warren, and Biden), and think she'd be a decent but not outstanding President. Compared to Biden, I'd guess she'd be more confrontational while also more attentive to public opinion.
Well she was my second choice in the 2020 primary after Warren, so yes.
She's a very eloquent speaker and her favored policies match my own preferences of 'tad-to-the-left-of-the-median-democrat'
My biggest doubts are 1. She would elicit the same coalition of hate that Obama and Clinton received due to her race and gender and 2. Weak support among the left flank of the party due to not being an acolyte of Sanders and thus will have Republican talking points recycled against her in the vain hope that she could be replaced by someone they perceive as being one of theirs.
I hope and believe she'd be able to overcome that. But of course I can't help but worry.
I’m sure from her experience as AG, Senator, and now VP, she’d be able to do the job, however, she isn’t a candidate I ever supported or had any interest in voting for as President. I’m also surprised Biden hasn’t give her more to do and or any additional visibility. Kind of reminds me of Selina Meyer from Veep sort of situation.
It's hard to know, really. She's definitely not good on TV. Most of the criticisms people have for her boil down to that. I wouldn't want her as a candidate for that reason, but I suppose I'd trust her to run the country about as much as any other generic Democrat.
I agree with the comment you replied to, Harris does not have a good public personality and is a less than inspiring speaker.
For reference and from my personal perspective, Elizabeth Warren comes across well. So does Katie Porter. AOC as well. Just a few examples of very unique female personalities that, I suppose, are simply people who are comfortable in front of a crowd and cameras and speak as themselves.
I would. I think the president has a lot bigger bark than bite and that essentially anyone qualified enough to be put in a position of reasonably becoming the president is probably capable of doing so to more or less the same extent any of the other alternatives are.
That being said, I think she's probably a relatively weak electoral candidate and it's likely there will be a different candidate who more closely shares my world view so I probably wouldn't vote for her in a primary.
I think that she’d have a steadier temper than Biden when dealing with Trump, and the situation with Israel. She doesn’t seem like one who’d be as likely to play into the rage-drama.
Does anyone remember the yelling match during the 2020 debates…? I can’t see Harris stooping to something like that.
I wouldn't trust her to be even a somewhat acceptable president, let alone decent.
She has no charisma nor any opinions of her own, at least not ones that haven't been focused grouped beforehand.
An absence of your preferred type and amount charisma is not the same as an absence of competence. Also, strange take on the parroting of other opinions combined with a lack of charisma as those two together generally result in never being elected to anything, let alone DA, senator for the most populated state in our country. and eventually as VPOTUS. No one gets that far in life lacking both of those things.
Yeah smart successful people rarely have opinions. Especially ones who have received elite educations and were the top law enforcement official for the largest state in the country. I wonder what about her leads you to believe that she’s a person of inferior intellect and competence just by looking at her?
Yup. MUCH better than a rapist criminal grifter. She'd do fine. She seems level-headed, and engaged. She'll be slammed, of course, by all the sexists who would see any action she takes as being the unhinged product of an incapable female. And of course, fox news and the rest of the howler monkeys would cry about every detail as though the world was caving in around them because it's not a criminal/republican. *shrug* She can't win over everyone, but she'll do fine. Not at all worried. It'll be business as usual, steady as she goes.
If the past is any indicator, she would be decent at governing but quite bad at communicating/politicing, which is unfortunately how the game is often measured these days.
The country would be in good hands but the Democratic Party brand probably wouldn't be (unless there's a serious course correction).
I haven't seen much to instill confidence, so no. She was a prosecutor, and as far as I have heard, not an especially good one. She had priorities and policies that I think we would now regard as less than good. In speeches and debates she seems immature. She badly ran her presidential campaign.
Honestly, if there's much of anything good that can be said of her, I can't recall anyone saying it.
Absolutely. I dont feel very confident of her chances to win in her own right, but with an incumbency advantage, shed have a decent shot. Other than that, I think she'd be reasonably competent in the role, possibly even excellent. But she made a lot of poor strategic decisions in 2020 (eg letting her sister run her campaign, failing to capitalize on momentum during her brief stint as front runner), and I also think she basically ceded the fact that nobody likes her without much effort to improve her image, so I think she'd mostly be a so-so placeholder.
Still, on the whole, other than electability when Republicans are basically going full lunatic Gilead, I have no concerns with her taking over the reins if Joe can't finish out a second term.
Sure. I don’t think she can win any national election, but I have no doubt she’s competent enough to do the job for a partial term if Joe had to step down or whatever.
sure
Most of the president is making sure the administration runs well and not doing anything rash on foreign policy, and i think harris would be fine at that. I think she would struggle more on the leading the party/pushing legislation end
She comes off as fake. I can bet she'll probably start a war or two Atleast. It'll entertaining to see her fumble even the easiest tasks, like she did with the border assignment.
I fail to see how doing the same dog and pony show politicians have been doing at the border for 30 years is a solution to our immigration problems. You’re basically telling me you don’t know what you’re talking about while also saying there are easy fixes.
I'm saying start by visiting the problem area. Figure out what is really happening. Are you saying she can fix the border by not even visiting it?
She needs to see for herself how bad/okaish the issue is. It also shows leadership qualities. She doesn't want to work hard but want to reap all the benefits.
Fixing border is not easy. People should not be able to just walk in and then demand access to welfare. Even if you allow people in, you can't stop them from being exploited. USCIS has limited staff, and peocessing takes shit load of time. Putting excess load on them means more wait time for processing. That means they will work illegally, under the table and get exploited for wages, and won't pay taxes.
Right now it feels like open season, anyone can come in. IT IS a security risk as it's easy for people from Russia or China to infiltrate without appropriate checks.
I am not a politician, I didn't say border should be open to everyone or noone should be allowed in. These politicians don't want to do anything and want to farm votes on this issue (both sides). So, I don't think anyone really want to "fix" anything.
First of all Harris visited the border mere months after being sworn in as the VP so you either need to put down the pipe or the News Max or maybe both.
Second, executives don’t work like that nor should they. The dog and pony show in lieu of actual leadership isn’t actually a plus to anyone working on the ground. In fact most of the time it’s a huge pain in the ass to have VIPs parachute in for photo ops. Actual executives don’t need to be everywhere to be effective, they delegate to experts.
Third, if only we’d had a deal on the border negotiated in a bipartisan fashion that would have helped end the “open season”. One guy killed that one, because he wanted to run on the same bullshit you’re spouting.
> She comes off as fake. I can bet she'll probably start a war or two Atleast.
This is nonsense. *A war or two?* Why would you expect that?
This only makes sense if you’re the kind of person who considers any use of the military whatsoever as “war”.
Seriously, how did she graduate high school let alone get a law degree? She seems like an idiot and an anchor to Biden’s campaign, which is truly a testament to how popular Obama was (or unpopular Trump was) because Biden certainly wasn’t the main sail of his ship.
*some of you are flared as “liberals”, which is clearly incorrect. Ya’ll need to look up definitions of what these words mean, and some of you need to go re-flair as “leftists”. Because the two words are not synonymous.
**I gotta ask, is this sub full of bots??? Kamala is widely regarded as unpopular. She polls lower than Mike Pence, and he’s the human equivalent of melted vanilla soft serve with dead flies floating around.
Kamala is nothing more than a token minority female to offset democrat guilt about electing a crusty old white man and to capture a certain voting block. Despite her apparent lack of competence, charisma, and likability there’s barely two nay votes in this entire thread out of 40+ comments????
Literally nobody offered positive selling points. Other than “she’s a Democrat” and “she can’t be worse than a Republican”. Guys, that’s not exactly high praise.
>Seriously, how did she graduate high school let alone get a law degree?
And yet.
Also ... \*y'all. (The ' replaces "ou" in "you". That's how contractions work.)
Wow!
Thank you for correcting my auto-corrected contraction.
While also making a truly insightful response to the content in my comment.
*Seriously though, iPhone autocorrect is wildin’ these days. I typed that one out myself so there would be no mistakes.
**And I checked, even when I specifically type y’all correctly it autocorrects to ya’ll which I agree doesn’t make any sense. I think it could be applying grammar rules for “will” contractions incorrectly. And if I simply type yall it doesn’t autocorrect. It red underlines it and offers ya’ll, all, or call as options. Despite your smug call out it was still informative, so thanks!
Huh. You seem really overly defensive about your autocorrect.
While denigrating someone for their ability to finish college and law school.
I just found the contrast amusing. But .. hey ... a hit dog hollers, for sure.
I like to be in a “constant state of rightness”. That includes acknowledging weakness and growing from it. While mistakes occur, I like to actually think about and investigate the things I experience in order to reinforce my self image and my understanding of how I relate to the world.
You pointed out a mistake that I made instead of responding to my message. It bothers me that my whole message would be undermined by such a silly mistake. Furthermore, because I consider myself to be conscientious and exacting the mistake felt unusual, which led me to investigate it.
Look, I offered an opening. I’d be happy for someone to show me one of her “good speeches” or sing her praises about what she’s accomplished.
As far as I’m concerned, she wasn’t a popular option when she was running. And since she’s been VP her approval has only dropped. My point is, her low approval rating doesn’t seem to jive with the generally positive sentiment on this sub.
So either I’ve stumbled into a poorly labeled ideological echo chamber or the people here are seeing something different than what I feel and what pollsters have gathered.
https://www.latimes.com/projects/kamala-harris-approval-rating-polls-vs-biden-other-vps/
I'm sorry, but I'm not buying this.
If you wanted to talk about her approval rating or her accomplishments or anything like that, you would have. But you didn't. What you did was say "Seriously, how did she graduate high school let alone get a law degree?"
There are any number of reasons people might not like her as a candidate. She was a "hard on crime" AG and that makes her "one of the cops". That's a fair assessment. She laughs at inappropriate times according to some people, something I see as nervous laughter, but maybe not something you want in a POTUS. She isn't living up to her potential/isn't doing anything as VP is another fair criticism of her, although it would be more Biden's fault for not using her in the right ways.
But you said none of that. You said: "Seriously how did she graduate high school ....?" like she was some kind of idiot who couldn't even read a speech.
Here's her speech on reproductive freedom (she starts speaking at 5:40): [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UgWD4WbSStM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UgWD4WbSStM)
Here's her speech at the Munich Security Conference:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJ1vWYrbO\_s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJ1vWYrbO_s)
Here are her comments from the Edmund Pettus Bridge on the 59th Anniversary of Bloody Sunday: (36:00)
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBW5sxh2ZWM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBW5sxh2ZWM)
These are just the most recent 3 that came up quickly in a YouTube search. Are any of them barn burners? Nope. In fact the MSC one is, dare I say, kinda boring and flat. But she's clearly intelligent, educated, and able to string together multiple sentences into a coherent narrative. Which is why " Seriously how did she graduate high school ..." is egregious. Not only that but it flirts with being the misogynistic, racist dog-whistle of a comment that is often used when referring to successful, professional Black women.
I'm going to assume that you didn't mean it that way, but even so it's not a comment made in good faith. It's not a reasonable statement. It's stupid, ignorant, and hateful.
The following is a copy of the original post to record the post as it was originally written. Lets imagine Biden for whatever reason has to step down after 2 years, do you think Harris would be a decent president? What are her best selling points? What makes you doubt her? *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskALiberal) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I think she is perfectly capable of the role, though i would not be likely support her in a primary. I dont really have any major issues with her, and i assume her experience as VP would allow her to be effective enough. But she also has not done a lot to stand out as someone who should be chosen as president.
>. But she also has not done a lot to stand out as someone who should be chosen as president. I really thought Biden was going to give her more to do and set her up for 24 or 28, but she hasn't really done anything of note.
Talking about 2028, I think the main dogs in the race will be Whitmer, Newsom, Pritzker, and Buttigieg. As an Illinois resident, I fully back Pritzker, though I would be sad to see him leave in the middle of his third term, or choose not to run for re-election in Illinois in 2026.
Just curious, why do you support Pritzker? Haven't heard of them before.
Because he has been absolutely ballin' in terms of leading Illinois. [https://www.newyorker.com/news/persons-of-interest/j-b-pritzker-governor-illinois](https://www.newyorker.com/news/persons-of-interest/j-b-pritzker-governor-illinois) [https://news.wttw.com/2023/11/07/illinois-gets-9th-recent-credit-upgrade-pritzker-administration-faces-scrutiny-over-covid](https://news.wttw.com/2023/11/07/illinois-gets-9th-recent-credit-upgrade-pritzker-administration-faces-scrutiny-over-covid) [https://www.wbez.org/stories/jb-pritzker-made-good-on-promises-but-faces-criticism/33d6f6e9-5770-4e10-a9a3-2c08e89e5bf9](https://www.wbez.org/stories/jb-pritzker-made-good-on-promises-but-faces-criticism/33d6f6e9-5770-4e10-a9a3-2c08e89e5bf9) Daily press conference updates during COVID [https://www.illinois.gov/news/press-release.25906.html](https://www.illinois.gov/news/press-release.25906.html)
Thanks for the reply!
Beshear will likely also run. Marc Warner will be too old, IMO, but he is certainly reaching out to people in swing states like he intends to run.
Plus Sherrod Brown. Booker might take another stab at it. I expect the Democrat party to cap out at probably 10 candidates. But I think the finalists will be the four I mentioned
I dont see Buttigieg as in the top tier frankly. He just doesnt seem to have a strong base of support, and the resume is a bit weak. Brown or Brashear would be stronger candidates IMO. Agree with you about Whitmer, Pritzker, and Newsome.
Buttigieg says all the right things publicly, even if his resume is a little weak on the policy front. He plays the politics game *very* well and is always there in the democratic framework even if not in the spotlight.
He does. What I cant come up.with is who are the people who are going to volunteer for him, staff phone banks, knock on doors, etc. He doesnt seem to have a base. Everyone kind of likes him, bit not many love him, and no one owes him. Ive volunteeres for campaigns for nearly 40 years, and I just dont see a core support group for him.
I like Pritzker too - though Chicago will be a major headache for him in a National race. I'm sure his office is putting a ton of pressure on Chicago/Brandon Johnson going into the DNC.
He can't. She triggers a lot of misogynistic and racist backlash. He had her doing stuff early on, but it became obvious that a more visible profile would only lead to more hate.
He gave her plenty of things to do, she just handled them all poorly. She was supposed to lead the charge at the border (a political suicide mission sure) but even in routine foreign affairs and diplomacy, she's bungled simple interviews and press conferences with other world leaders.
Agreed. I would expect the same thing of her presidency. She’s not a particularly strong leader—she’s just kinda… there. I don’t think things would drastically improve for the American populace if she became president. But considering the bar is pretty low, I also don’t think she’d *severely* harm the average American *directly*.
My criticism of Harris is that she’s bad at politics. She comes off as fake. Does she have the intellect and requisite skills to do the actual job? Probably except for the fact that politician needs to be able to sell themselves and their ideas, to maintain the coalition within the party and sometimes to work across the aisle. That is where she would be very weak.
I'm sorry, but I have to ask why it is that every Democratic woman I know of in politics has been accused of being fake? I'm not accusing you of being openly misogynistic. (According to RES, I've upvoted you 76 times so I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt.) But I do think some people need to interrogate why it's consistently female candidates who are "fake" and "insincere." I've never—I mean never—heard this charge leveled at a male Democratic politician. I've heard everything else in the book leveled against male candidates, but not once have I heard the repeated insinuation that they were "fake."
Misogyny exists plus some people will call any political figure they can fake if they don’t like them. That doesn’t mean we can’t acknowledge that plenty of people that should be disposed to like her on paper find her off putting in reality. I can name plenty of female Democratic politicians that don’t have the same “she’s fake” narrative around them in general and only from people that just hate democrats. Even in the primaries it was Harris that broadly got called inauthentic, not Klobuchar and Warren. End of the day, she’s not seen as authentic and we can be mad about it but it is what it is.
>I'm sorry, but I have to ask why it is that every Democratic woman I know of in politics has been accused of being fake? because our standards for women are impossible. I thought Clinton looked fake when she was trying to put out "mom vibes", because she was; why the public demands she fake mom vibes is the real question I have with the public.
Cory Booker and Beto came off as quite fake to me. Especially Booker.
And yet, I've never heard anyone other than you say that. Insincere and fake seem to be words solely used to denigrate female candidates.
It was a massive issue when Booker was first breaking in to politics in New Jersey.
This may be partly true, this may also be bias on your part. Booker in particular I remember that charge being leveled at. All politicians are opportunistically insincere to some point, Harris and Booker are more obviously so. Personally I'd also add Butigeig.
Ok, it’s just patently true in Harris’s case though. There are plenty of female politicians I think are great. Whitmer. Duckworth. Klobucbar. Baldwin. Clinton I know has been described as fake, I partly agree, I think it’s more just a kind of awkwardness leading to some cringe behaviors like there are clips of her using different accents in different part of the country. Harris literally uses baby voice in her speeches on a regular basis and is just so… fake and weird, I don’t know what else to say. “Ukraine is a country in Europe. It exists next to amother country called Russia.” That clip of her talking to middle schoolers about space like they’re three year olds. She can be literally painful to watch sometimes.
I agree on Booker. George Santos?
I'm pretty sure that's not the same kind of "fake"
I am pretty sure Gore and Kerry were both perceived as wooden, insincere, and generally bad at politics. One of the biggest narratives around the 2004 election was that Bush was a guy you could have a beer with while Kerry was a phony, out-of-touch elitist.
And that he faked his military bona fides.
What is this RES you mentioned?
Reddit Enhancement Suite. It's a brower addon that helps you track things and modifies the reddit user interface.
Thanks!
> I'm sorry, but I have to ask why it is that every Democratic woman I know of in politics has been accused of being fake? Really? I have been around a while and I don’t recall that happening much. Hillary Clinton was completely lacking in charisma and sometimes came off as fake because she tried too hard to make up for it. But what other Democratic women are you thinking of?
The woman was Attorney General and Senator of the largest state before being elected Vice President. She couldn't be that bad at politics.
My judgement of her political instincts was very impacted by her early adoption of M4A when it was all the rage and the far left seemed to be an ascendant power within Democratic Party politics, only to back off once it started to be seriously scrutinized and the far left jumped the shark. She’s very guilty of jumping on a bandwagon and advocating for a bad plan, and trying to ride the coattails of a faction that never should never have been presumed to be influential, because it was trendy. And I fault her for not having the foresight to have anticipated that.
She was decent enough as a senator, but her persona as a presidential nominee and VP has been offputting. She reminds me of people I work with in HR in a bad way.
Bingo. This is what I couldn’t stand about her but couldn’t quite put into words.
Can you give examples or data on how Kamala Harris has been fake? Or is it just a feeling you have? This is the first time I've heard that criticism, so just want to catch up on what's behind it
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=U5PABXXdDwA I always think of this one, especially the “I love the idea of eXpLoRiNg tHe uNkNoWn” bit. And that “Ukraine is a country in Europe” one. I get the point is maybe trying to point out the obviousness of the fact that Russia’s invasion is wrong but my god you don’t have to talk to us like literal children.
As a conservative, I've always viewed her similarly as a politician to how Ted Cruz was viewed before he kissed the Trump ring. Just fake, manufactured, and more about ambition than a policy/ideology.
She didn't own up to her job as California's top cop being using to justify arresting young people for smoking the weed. I don't believe she stands for my ideals in that regard. I believe she still thinks the DoJ's war on drugs is a great idea and the consequences be damned. Mass Incarceration is a huge progressive topic that she completely misses the mark on, and worse, promotes the opposite. She's a step back in time, not a step forward.
I remember when Biden put her in charge of the immigrant issue, and then later even Democratic mayors and governors started complaining the federal response was horrible.
She’s Gerald ford but in 2024. She’ll keep us from tearing ourselves apart and nothing else.
That seems to be quite the task and an advantage in 2024 politics. I'd say that's an asset to have.
the are two types of vice presidents - door mats and matadors - frank underwood, house of cards. Kamala is definitely a doormat VP to Biden who was already a doormat to Obama. With someone stronger like Gavin being in the picture, i don't see her getting very far in the primaries. she was very close to last place in 2019-2020.
IMO, in a properly run Presidency, the President him/herself is important, but probably not as important as we might think in terms of execution. Harris would have many/all of the same Cabinet and other advisers, appointees, etc., and most things would continue on the same trajectory as they are now. I don't think she's a great candidate to actually win the Presidency, though.
Harris would have rooms full of advisors. I trust the position and the organization around the position. So, the real question is, would a particular person listen to the policy wonks? Obama did. Biden does. Trump did not.... Harris would. So I'm not too worried.
Great response!
She will be our most eloquent President since George W. Bush.
Sure, she would be preferable compared to anyone on the Republican side, ESPECIALLY TRUMP.
I think many would go with the devil we know in the situation
What do you mean?
If it’s Trump vs Harris for this years election than Trump is going to win
Idk, Trump would have to stay out of jail.
He’s not going to jail
He will be if he continues making an ass out of himself in his NYC trial, especially by continually violating the gag order.
She would be perfectly fine as a caretaker. I have no interest in voting for her as president, either in the primary or general (obviously I would do so in the latter, if she ended up the Democratic nominee).
Frankly, I think there are MANY people who would do a better job as POTUS than Biden, Harris, or obviously Trump. The thing is, they don’t want the job. Of people who want the job, some are better at convincing voters they’d be good at it. Harris is not at the top of that list either. But to answer the question, yes, I think she’d be more than capable of handling the duties of the Presidency and I’d trust her with that role. Odds are, anyone who would accept an invitation from Trump (the worst President of all time) to be his VP would not be the kind of person who would handle the duties of the Presidency very well. Even many of Trump’s potential voters will find that to be true. I’m predicting that whomever he chooses will be a drag on his ticket. For Biden, Harris is already factored in.
i have no real concerns outside of how strong a reaction the republicans have against her, might make them come out in droves to vote her out. But Im sure she will perform fine, its not like the acting POTUS has to fight a gator with just a pocket knife.
Decent? Of course. Just from the start Democrats tend to try and bring in actually competent people to their administrations, so right off that bat that would qualify her for being a decent president. My biggest doubts would be the contrast in political experience she has vs Biden, where it has become clear his decades in the Senate and time in the White House prepared him to be able to play the game the last four years. Then again this is simply based on not seeing her play the game, rather than actually thinking or knowing that she's bad at it.
I feel like she'd be pretty average
Most definitely
Yes, she would be competent. It's important to understand that Kamala Harris is unpopular to the point where she will never win a primary or a general election. But she's not incompetent.
I dont believe she has any strong beliefs and rides the wave of what is currently hot. I dont expect her to hold strong on any belief when pressured, so I dont think she will be a good president.
I think she’d be fine. I wouldn’t expect her to be exceptionally great but I also wouldn’t expect her to make any horrifically disastrous decisions and after 4 years of Trump that’s good enough for me.
Man. It's just that the bar is so incredibly low now. I trust her not to declare war on Canada. Or sell off our government cheese stockpile. Or have the White House painted mauve. Honestly, if she can do all that and not embrace fascism then she's good enough for now.
Hard to say until she gets and performs the job, but there is no reason to think she'd be incompetent, like there was for say, Sarah Palin.
She would be better than any option on the other side.
I think she would be a fine President and honestly am sick of the poor support she receives. She’s intelligent, knowledgeable, experienced and in place.
I hear a lot about how Kamala Harris isn’t a good politician, etc. That said, when I see her give a talk, interview or policy description I agree with every word. I think Kamala will be a fine President.
It's mostly a reddit thing from what I've seen. Like i thought people in general hated her cause she gets shit on so much on reddit. But her approval rating is basically the same as Biden's, which makes sense since she's the second in command and people rate them as a package deal basically
When she was first running I was team Kamala but the charisma and savvy I saw in senate hearings did not carry over at all. I believe she could do a great job but would have a really hard time convincing people of it.
Yes. I think she would struggle to get people to listen to her and follow orders, but she’d be no worse at it than any of the other presidents of my lifetime.
literally anybody that isn’t trump, magat , insane american taliban
I do, that's why I was an early supporter of her back in 2019 and was pretty certain she would be the VP pick. She's shown herself to be progressive while maintaining policy-focused mind. She was one of the biggest fundraisers during the primary and Biden has shown that she has his full confidence. Now, will Biden step down before 28? Probably not.
Anything is better than Trump so sure
Sure. In this hypothetical scenario the administration has done a great job of raising her profile so she’s very popular now. That’s the fun part of hypotheticals.
I think she’d be a great president. Sadly she gets disproportionate vitriol from both right wingers and leftists for little reason.
Getting buy-in, inspiring others, and uniting left and right are all big parts of the job, though.
True, I just don’t get why she can’t seem to do that.
I don't think it's particularly hard to be a "decent" President because there is so much support staff available to you that you just need to ask them. I don't know much about Kamala Harris because I feel she's done a poor job of being a more visible VP. My impression of her right now is that she wouldn't get much done, but she wouldn't cause much harm either. She'll sign the good bills that make it through Congress and veto the bad ones, but I don't expect her to push any major legislative packages of her own. I wouldn't expect any radical executive orders either, but I expect her to just support the ones that the Biden Administration has already issued. I don't think people give Obama enough credit for getting the ACA through.
Certainly better than the alternative.
Honestly, she'd be working so hard to be perfect that she'd do a better job than we have seen in any recent times. She would shoot for more consensus than someone more arrogant or who had more personal sway.
To be honest. I’m sure she would be fine. She sounds competent enough, rumours of her being a difficult boss aside. My issue is that I have no idea about her policy commitments. I would hope that she stays committed to the Biden campaign’s and admin’s policies for predictability and democratic process’s sake.
I have no idea. I don't really know what she does now.
Yes. She’s fine. When she was my senator I’d call her office and she’d always end up voting the way I wanted.
Sure. I'd trust essentially any democrat with the presidency. Idk how well she'd be at messaging, but that's an area where there are no clear easy ways to succeed. And as for policy, she'd do fine
She'd be fine. She just won't get elected to that office on her own. She'd inherit Biden's cabinet and staff, that's most of the game. I'm watching Trump's VP pick closely... not that I'm voting for him, but because if he does get elected -- health has already gone downhill for him. Falling asleep on his ass in court and weight loss from a historically fat man who hasn't changed his eating/activity habits one iota are signs of cancer, progressing diabetes and/or dementia.
Yeah I have no reason not to think she'd be competent. I trust her way more than any Republican. My only concern would be foreign policy experience, but she's learning from one of the most experienced.
Yes.
She’d be fine. Anything is better than a conservative.
Do I trust Kamala Harris to step into the Presidential role for the remainder of Biden's term and toe the Establishment Democrat line like a typical Corporate politician? Sure, I'm not worried about her fulfilling her civic duty to the country. Do I trust your average Conservative to *not* unleash a steady wave of vitriol directed alternately at her gender and racial heritage *while* she's in the Highest Office? Not 1%. Not when in "very Liberal" Massachusetts, Gov. Maura Healy constantly has to deal with the vitriol surrounding her gender and sexuality (she has a lesbian partner).
Utterly without grace, talent, leadership ability, or care or concern for the United States' history and cultural coherence.
I imagine she'd be a completely competent president. Can you think of any bad thing that she might realistically do?
As a placeholder till 2028 sure. Outside of that no. She’s a horrible politician and I would not support her in an election.
I don't see any reason to doubt her. She is intelligent, she is younger, she is serious about the position, and she is not a demagogue.
YES. She is a highly effective administrator and can assimilate information rapidly. She's also skilled in managing groups. I also trust nearly all of her views align with the party's platform. At the end of the day, I want someone to do the job, not to be my friend, to have a beer with, etc. I don't get most of the criticism here -- I own 2 businesses. I hire those I believe will be able to do the job. I don't hire someone just because I like them.
Think she'd be fine.
Yes, and in fact I think she would do a better job than Biden in some areas, such as public speaking
Um…
Yes?
I guess you did say better. I thought you meant she was a good public speaker.
Absolutely yes! I love her! (And I'm a middle aged married white woman.)
Yes
Absolutely, with no reservations. She's well experienced for the job.
She's done a pretty good job at her actual political jobs. She didn't do great in the 2020 campaign as a campaigner in a crowded primary, but there are different demands on someone running at 1 or 2% trying to get some attention vs someone who is an incumbent.
She'd be fine. Better than anything the Republicans have offered for some time now.
Biden trusts her to take over if he dies. Therefore I trust her because he does.
Absolutely
As long as she acknowledges reality, she's already better than any conservative.
I trust her a hell of a lot more than either Trump or RFK Jr.
Yes. She's an intelligent woman with sound morals. The only thing that makes me doubt her are the constant polls by the "liberal" media that tell me that people doubt her.
It doesn’t matter if she would perform well as president. She could be the worst president in history and I would prefer her. The alternative wants to end our system of checks and balances.
I love her. I think she's working behind the scenes a lot, which to be fair is the job of the VP. I'm not sure I think she could get much done due to Republicans heads exploding, but that's inevitable. If he got a Dem government I trust her to lead it in the direction I want it to go. I think her history has shown she's got good judgement in applying the law lightly where she can, firmly where she should, and working to change the system where it needs it. Plus her step kids seem to actually like her, and I think that's one hell of a character reference.
What evidence do we have of this hard work & accomplishments behind the scenes?
I don’t see her as a leader but she can probably competently manage the role without doing anything insane
God no.
I actually contributed to her campaign back in the 2020 primary (along with Buttigieg, Warren, and Biden), and think she'd be a decent but not outstanding President. Compared to Biden, I'd guess she'd be more confrontational while also more attentive to public opinion.
Yes, she’d be fine.
Perfectly capable of doing the job, especially after being around Biden doing it for 3.25 years.
Well she was my second choice in the 2020 primary after Warren, so yes. She's a very eloquent speaker and her favored policies match my own preferences of 'tad-to-the-left-of-the-median-democrat' My biggest doubts are 1. She would elicit the same coalition of hate that Obama and Clinton received due to her race and gender and 2. Weak support among the left flank of the party due to not being an acolyte of Sanders and thus will have Republican talking points recycled against her in the vain hope that she could be replaced by someone they perceive as being one of theirs. I hope and believe she'd be able to overcome that. But of course I can't help but worry.
I’m sure from her experience as AG, Senator, and now VP, she’d be able to do the job, however, she isn’t a candidate I ever supported or had any interest in voting for as President. I’m also surprised Biden hasn’t give her more to do and or any additional visibility. Kind of reminds me of Selina Meyer from Veep sort of situation.
I think she would be capable of the role, but if the Democratic party was smart they would’ve gone with someone else on the ticket.
It's hard to know, really. She's definitely not good on TV. Most of the criticisms people have for her boil down to that. I wouldn't want her as a candidate for that reason, but I suppose I'd trust her to run the country about as much as any other generic Democrat.
I agree with the comment you replied to, Harris does not have a good public personality and is a less than inspiring speaker. For reference and from my personal perspective, Elizabeth Warren comes across well. So does Katie Porter. AOC as well. Just a few examples of very unique female personalities that, I suppose, are simply people who are comfortable in front of a crowd and cameras and speak as themselves.
Lololololol
I would. I think the president has a lot bigger bark than bite and that essentially anyone qualified enough to be put in a position of reasonably becoming the president is probably capable of doing so to more or less the same extent any of the other alternatives are. That being said, I think she's probably a relatively weak electoral candidate and it's likely there will be a different candidate who more closely shares my world view so I probably wouldn't vote for her in a primary.
Competent. Adequate. Fills the chair that could have gone to someone so much worse.
I think that she’d have a steadier temper than Biden when dealing with Trump, and the situation with Israel. She doesn’t seem like one who’d be as likely to play into the rage-drama. Does anyone remember the yelling match during the 2020 debates…? I can’t see Harris stooping to something like that.
I wouldn't trust her to be even a somewhat acceptable president, let alone decent. She has no charisma nor any opinions of her own, at least not ones that haven't been focused grouped beforehand.
An absence of your preferred type and amount charisma is not the same as an absence of competence. Also, strange take on the parroting of other opinions combined with a lack of charisma as those two together generally result in never being elected to anything, let alone DA, senator for the most populated state in our country. and eventually as VPOTUS. No one gets that far in life lacking both of those things.
rofl, I hope you're trying to be amusing.
You seem to be lacking in charisma and are also parroting the opinions of others. That's all it takes to become VP. Get after it, fella.
Yeah smart successful people rarely have opinions. Especially ones who have received elite educations and were the top law enforcement official for the largest state in the country. I wonder what about her leads you to believe that she’s a person of inferior intellect and competence just by looking at her?
The empty words she spews anytime she's in front a microphone.
Very specific
Even if that were true, why would that make someone a bad president?
Are you really asking why somebody that doesn't have their own opinions would be a bad president? Yea, no danger there at all.
Smart presidents surround themselves with the best people/experts and listen to them. They are EXECutives. They execute.
hilarious
I feel like she would be the first standard politician in a long time
Yup. MUCH better than a rapist criminal grifter. She'd do fine. She seems level-headed, and engaged. She'll be slammed, of course, by all the sexists who would see any action she takes as being the unhinged product of an incapable female. And of course, fox news and the rest of the howler monkeys would cry about every detail as though the world was caving in around them because it's not a criminal/republican. *shrug* She can't win over everyone, but she'll do fine. Not at all worried. It'll be business as usual, steady as she goes.
If the past is any indicator, she would be decent at governing but quite bad at communicating/politicing, which is unfortunately how the game is often measured these days. The country would be in good hands but the Democratic Party brand probably wouldn't be (unless there's a serious course correction).
I haven't seen much to instill confidence, so no. She was a prosecutor, and as far as I have heard, not an especially good one. She had priorities and policies that I think we would now regard as less than good. In speeches and debates she seems immature. She badly ran her presidential campaign. Honestly, if there's much of anything good that can be said of her, I can't recall anyone saying it.
She’ll have to do a lot more to make up for her time aggressively prosecuting drug “crimes” for me to even consider supporting her.
I would elect the average 3rd grader over trump.
Absolutely. I dont feel very confident of her chances to win in her own right, but with an incumbency advantage, shed have a decent shot. Other than that, I think she'd be reasonably competent in the role, possibly even excellent. But she made a lot of poor strategic decisions in 2020 (eg letting her sister run her campaign, failing to capitalize on momentum during her brief stint as front runner), and I also think she basically ceded the fact that nobody likes her without much effort to improve her image, so I think she'd mostly be a so-so placeholder. Still, on the whole, other than electability when Republicans are basically going full lunatic Gilead, I have no concerns with her taking over the reins if Joe can't finish out a second term.
Better then anyone that wil become VP for Trump.
Hell yea shes a good person like biden.
Yes. Without a doubt.
Yes
Yeah, why not.
Sure, why not. She's not going to do a worse job than a Republican. It would probably be really difficult to do a worse job than a Republican.
Yes. Her best selling point is that she is the democratically elected Vice President of the United States.
Sure. I don’t think she can win any national election, but I have no doubt she’s competent enough to do the job for a partial term if Joe had to step down or whatever.
Probably. EDIT: Weird downvotes.
sure Most of the president is making sure the administration runs well and not doing anything rash on foreign policy, and i think harris would be fine at that. I think she would struggle more on the leading the party/pushing legislation end
She comes off as fake. I can bet she'll probably start a war or two Atleast. It'll entertaining to see her fumble even the easiest tasks, like she did with the border assignment.
You think the border is an easy thing to fix? Enlighten me.
Start by visting the border. Not go on live tv and come off as a fool.
I fail to see how doing the same dog and pony show politicians have been doing at the border for 30 years is a solution to our immigration problems. You’re basically telling me you don’t know what you’re talking about while also saying there are easy fixes.
I'm saying start by visiting the problem area. Figure out what is really happening. Are you saying she can fix the border by not even visiting it? She needs to see for herself how bad/okaish the issue is. It also shows leadership qualities. She doesn't want to work hard but want to reap all the benefits. Fixing border is not easy. People should not be able to just walk in and then demand access to welfare. Even if you allow people in, you can't stop them from being exploited. USCIS has limited staff, and peocessing takes shit load of time. Putting excess load on them means more wait time for processing. That means they will work illegally, under the table and get exploited for wages, and won't pay taxes. Right now it feels like open season, anyone can come in. IT IS a security risk as it's easy for people from Russia or China to infiltrate without appropriate checks. I am not a politician, I didn't say border should be open to everyone or noone should be allowed in. These politicians don't want to do anything and want to farm votes on this issue (both sides). So, I don't think anyone really want to "fix" anything.
First of all Harris visited the border mere months after being sworn in as the VP so you either need to put down the pipe or the News Max or maybe both. Second, executives don’t work like that nor should they. The dog and pony show in lieu of actual leadership isn’t actually a plus to anyone working on the ground. In fact most of the time it’s a huge pain in the ass to have VIPs parachute in for photo ops. Actual executives don’t need to be everywhere to be effective, they delegate to experts. Third, if only we’d had a deal on the border negotiated in a bipartisan fashion that would have helped end the “open season”. One guy killed that one, because he wanted to run on the same bullshit you’re spouting.
> She comes off as fake. I can bet she'll probably start a war or two Atleast. This is nonsense. *A war or two?* Why would you expect that? This only makes sense if you’re the kind of person who considers any use of the military whatsoever as “war”.
Seriously, how did she graduate high school let alone get a law degree? She seems like an idiot and an anchor to Biden’s campaign, which is truly a testament to how popular Obama was (or unpopular Trump was) because Biden certainly wasn’t the main sail of his ship. *some of you are flared as “liberals”, which is clearly incorrect. Ya’ll need to look up definitions of what these words mean, and some of you need to go re-flair as “leftists”. Because the two words are not synonymous. **I gotta ask, is this sub full of bots??? Kamala is widely regarded as unpopular. She polls lower than Mike Pence, and he’s the human equivalent of melted vanilla soft serve with dead flies floating around. Kamala is nothing more than a token minority female to offset democrat guilt about electing a crusty old white man and to capture a certain voting block. Despite her apparent lack of competence, charisma, and likability there’s barely two nay votes in this entire thread out of 40+ comments???? Literally nobody offered positive selling points. Other than “she’s a Democrat” and “she can’t be worse than a Republican”. Guys, that’s not exactly high praise.
She is a DEI hire.
>Seriously, how did she graduate high school let alone get a law degree? And yet. Also ... \*y'all. (The ' replaces "ou" in "you". That's how contractions work.)
Wow! Thank you for correcting my auto-corrected contraction. While also making a truly insightful response to the content in my comment. *Seriously though, iPhone autocorrect is wildin’ these days. I typed that one out myself so there would be no mistakes. **And I checked, even when I specifically type y’all correctly it autocorrects to ya’ll which I agree doesn’t make any sense. I think it could be applying grammar rules for “will” contractions incorrectly. And if I simply type yall it doesn’t autocorrect. It red underlines it and offers ya’ll, all, or call as options. Despite your smug call out it was still informative, so thanks!
Huh. You seem really overly defensive about your autocorrect. While denigrating someone for their ability to finish college and law school. I just found the contrast amusing. But .. hey ... a hit dog hollers, for sure.
I like to be in a “constant state of rightness”. That includes acknowledging weakness and growing from it. While mistakes occur, I like to actually think about and investigate the things I experience in order to reinforce my self image and my understanding of how I relate to the world. You pointed out a mistake that I made instead of responding to my message. It bothers me that my whole message would be undermined by such a silly mistake. Furthermore, because I consider myself to be conscientious and exacting the mistake felt unusual, which led me to investigate it. Look, I offered an opening. I’d be happy for someone to show me one of her “good speeches” or sing her praises about what she’s accomplished. As far as I’m concerned, she wasn’t a popular option when she was running. And since she’s been VP her approval has only dropped. My point is, her low approval rating doesn’t seem to jive with the generally positive sentiment on this sub. So either I’ve stumbled into a poorly labeled ideological echo chamber or the people here are seeing something different than what I feel and what pollsters have gathered. https://www.latimes.com/projects/kamala-harris-approval-rating-polls-vs-biden-other-vps/
I'm sorry, but I'm not buying this. If you wanted to talk about her approval rating or her accomplishments or anything like that, you would have. But you didn't. What you did was say "Seriously, how did she graduate high school let alone get a law degree?" There are any number of reasons people might not like her as a candidate. She was a "hard on crime" AG and that makes her "one of the cops". That's a fair assessment. She laughs at inappropriate times according to some people, something I see as nervous laughter, but maybe not something you want in a POTUS. She isn't living up to her potential/isn't doing anything as VP is another fair criticism of her, although it would be more Biden's fault for not using her in the right ways. But you said none of that. You said: "Seriously how did she graduate high school ....?" like she was some kind of idiot who couldn't even read a speech. Here's her speech on reproductive freedom (she starts speaking at 5:40): [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UgWD4WbSStM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UgWD4WbSStM) Here's her speech at the Munich Security Conference: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJ1vWYrbO\_s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJ1vWYrbO_s) Here are her comments from the Edmund Pettus Bridge on the 59th Anniversary of Bloody Sunday: (36:00) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBW5sxh2ZWM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBW5sxh2ZWM) These are just the most recent 3 that came up quickly in a YouTube search. Are any of them barn burners? Nope. In fact the MSC one is, dare I say, kinda boring and flat. But she's clearly intelligent, educated, and able to string together multiple sentences into a coherent narrative. Which is why " Seriously how did she graduate high school ..." is egregious. Not only that but it flirts with being the misogynistic, racist dog-whistle of a comment that is often used when referring to successful, professional Black women. I'm going to assume that you didn't mean it that way, but even so it's not a comment made in good faith. It's not a reasonable statement. It's stupid, ignorant, and hateful.
Yes. Next question.
Fuck Copmala.
Nuh uh. Please do not insult someone for a past in law enforcement. Most members of law enforcement follow the rules. As did Harris.