Kamala is both insanely charming and able to project gravitas in a way many politicians - especially women - are not. And in a country that loves to vote on personality, it could be an asset.

Your conflating issues and in your ignorance making connections between two unrelated issues. People take exception with Hollywood casting Zoe Saldana as Nina Simone does not mean they do not consider Zoe Saldana black (how she identifies).

I really like Kamala Harris, but I think the biggest mark against her is that she’s still so new to national politics. She’ll get painted as an ambitious California liberal. Obama was also inexperienced, but he was a man, so being ambitious was fine, and he was from Illinois, which doesn’t have the same connotation as…

“I would totally vote for a woman! Just not that woman.”

Good god, the fact that you actually believe that is what will doom us.

dividing Bill Gates’ money up 7 billion ways doesn’t net you much

She seems pretty lefty on all the major issues. Does she have deep ties to Wallstreet or something? She publically announced support for “medicare for all” last Fall (and sure she could recede from that, but she hasn’t yet, and I would also take flip-flop as a major strike too); she seems to be carrying a torch for…

(who voted Hillary even though I was against her as a person. Better her than this psychopath)

people that have to pay into the system knowing that we’re not going to benefit from it.

I like how when taxes are cut for the rich and we criticize it, we all get yelled at about how “it’s not a zero-sum game!!”

The pie you speak of is actually the sum many many smaller pies. It is possible to create your own.

Ah yes, I too look forward to another four years of Trump as the left and center-left continue to blame each other for not getting behind whichever fucking candidate is the One Last True Hope, assuming we actually live until 2020, which is in itself seeming increasingly unlikely.

Thank you. I think the strangest criticism of a politician is “they change their positions based on what the majority of constituents want.” Aren’t they supposed too? Isn’t the refusal to change positions why Republicans are raising the taxes and taking away the healthcare over the objection of some of their most…

This. Donald Fucking Trump is the fucking president and they’re asking, “Yeah, but is she the RIGHT democrat to go up against a piece of shit?”

Bros won’t vote for any woman. They will always find a bullshit reason for why they can’t support her.

She’s shown better instincts over the last year than any other Democrat in the Senate. Better than Sanders, Booker, Harris, Warren, or whoever we’re supposed to be pulling for. I care more about that than what she was doing in upstate NY in the 90's.

Look at the articles on franken that have been posted on splinter. Also, I don’t get the hate on the resistance movement, which is also largely made up of women

Anyway, after the election of Donald to the presidency, I think it’s fair to say that it’s not actually possible to be too transparently opportunistic to be a viable candidate.

I’m sure she will be destroyed by the true leftists, saying she’s phony neoliberal. The same people will vehemently defend franken. Neoliberal, a death penalty offense. Women groper, not so much.

Counterpoint: No.