Kamala's departure reveals a problem the Democrats need to fix. Now.

[StarfishSaver]

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

[mcar]

1. Agree completely

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287366075

[thesquanderer]

164. I think it's noteworthy that of the six left on the debate stage...

...we have two women, a gay man, and a Jew. Any of these would be historic firsts if they were to be elected president.

I'm surprised Harris didn't at least stay in for the debate, since she did qualify, and it is still another chance for her to raise her profile for whatever she wants to do next, and if she'd like to, to speak about things that are important to her. It's not easy to find opportunities to reach millions of people for free.

[samnsara]

178. yep

[BuffaloJackalope]

197. And any of them would be 10000x better than Putin's lap dog.

[Hulk]

200. Agree totally

It wasn't meant to be for Kamala Harris. I still think any one of the candidates are worthy of beating the socks off the pig in the White House

[DrToast]

2. They don't need to "fix" anything

Also, Gabbard and Yang will likely be there.

[StarfishSaver]

7. You're not serious, right?

[DrToast]

9. About what?

That they don’t need to fix anything? Or that Gabbard and Yang are people of color?

[LovingA2andMI]

38. The problem...in live and living color.....

Exist in this party also. See the above response for the complete details.

[thesquanderer]

150. that Gabbard and Yang are likely to make the next debate (n/t)

[Hortensis]

216. Lol: "We have every kind of mix you can have. I have a black,

I have a woman, two Jews and a cripple." ~ immortal quote from Reagan's SecInt James Watt that had me almost rolling on the floor every time they replayed his happy cluelessness.

Just came to mind. He really was a nasty piece of work, though, as eager to fulfill his duties to sell off our national lands and repeal protections as any of today's Republicans. He banned the Beach Boys from their traditional Fourth of July appearance at the national mall because they attracted "undesirable elements."

Back to this.

If the powerful black bloc suddenly decides they don't like Biden after all, we'll hear about it. As it is, a majority of those kept Biden as their strong card and let Senator Harris go. This time. Their choice.

Absolutely none of them are going to suddenly wake up in shock to see there's only one black man on the debate stage. For shame for the grave insult to them!

And none of them are going to equate our redoubtable Senator Cory Booker with that misogynistic RW religious whack job Ben Carson. For shame for the grave insult to literally all of us! Carson couldn't get a job in our party driving Booker's car.

[Blue_true]

232. Your point on Black voters is right on.

People are whining about institutional racism in the primary selection process, but it is Black voters that put and are keeping a White man on the debate stage and in the lead while giving virtually no support to either of two Black candidates.

Harris and Booker simply didn't or haven't connected with Black voters as the top of the General Election ticket choice, if they did, Biden would be the one dropping out.

[Hortensis]

241. Yes. Majority rules, and black and white together

have created an enduring one.

It's been a very interesting year. Two very dynamic, charismatic people like Harris and Booker, each with great potential, were not elevated to challenge Biden, who was identified as far out ahead of everyone, and already well liked by many AA, before he even entered the race.

For all the inevitable criticisms and thoughts of what they should have done, I'm imagining something else, not predominantly their own failure to connect for either of them. Rather, lack of interest as mostly an indication of just how enormous the threat is understood to be from an increasingly fascistic, mean-people right -- for all of us but particularly AA and other minorities. Very few spoiled romantics there. And for women, who are half of AA after all.

So my thought is that perceived electability has been ruling from the beginning. In that scenario, their only chance was to magically come from way behind to soar out ahead of Biden, or at least strongly challenge, and stay there. And when they didn't, their calls weren't returned.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

252. Very well put. Btw, the last poll I saw had 1/2 Dems

Putting who can beat trump as the most important factor. But I still think human nature plays a role too. The intangibles.

[Hortensis]

253. Oh, absolutely. Even honest professional pollsters get it wrong

too much of the time.

[onetexan]

75. +1 -K&R

Natural attrition. May the best candidate win, regardless of color, gender, sexual orientation, financial status...

[StarfishSaver]

220. I understand your point. But the problem with "natural attrition"

is that when, historically, it's been virtually impossible for minorities and women - and, especially minority women - to get in the room, when one of us finally gets in (and usually it's just one or two), "natural attrition" usually means that, unless we're absolutely exceptionl or an effort is made to help overcome the other built-in, institutional obstacles that are still there, we'll get washed out pretty quickly, while white men with similar or lesser qualifications are able to remain there.

In a world in which minorities and women have to struggle just to be in the room, "Natural attrition" isn't really natural at all. It's more like "last hired, first fired." If the system were fair, there would have been many more Kamalas in the room, so one leaving through "natural attrition," wouldn't mean what it means when the only Kamala leaves while numerous white men who aren't any more talented, effective, hard-working, politically savvy or experienced than she is remain.

I think one of the reason so many black women, many of whom weren't necessarily Harris supporters, feel frustrated and dismayed by her leaving the race is that we know how this works, how it often has worked against us, and how it worked against her.

I hope you can understand why this is so troubling to many of us.

[DownriverDem]

155. What we need is

a diverse ticket like Biden/Harris or Biden/Abrams. We have never had a woman VP. Many in the country need to see a woman VP first. I don't agree, but I do recognize reality.

[joost5]

173. You mean Klobuchar/Harris. Klobuchar/Abrams. Klobuchar/Booker

[squirecam]

182. Or

Joe/Amy.

[Mike Nelson]

3. Should white men drop out, and...

... aren't Elizabeth and Pete considered diverse? Plus, I think Kamala will be on the VP short list!

[tblue37]

8. Yes, VP or AG. nt

[StarfishSaver]

10. Reminds me of the time I met with an organization who bragged to me about how diverse their all-whit

group was because they were from different parts of the county and two of them were women.

There's diverse and there's diverse. A group of white men and women and one Asian guy may look "diverse" to some people, but not to me. That's not diverse. That's just not completely all white. But not all white is not the same thing as being diverse.

And the fact that Kamala may be on a VP short list does not make the group of white men and women and one Asian guy any more diverse.

[bucolic_frolic]

117. Let's try a quota system then

but how diverse can the party become with 2 people on the ticket?

[cwydro]

199. A quota system?

Are you serious?

[Mike Nelson]

242. Thank you for updating me...

... I also saw Cory Booker on Chris Heyes' show last night. He said the six Democrats at the upcoming debate showed no diversity at all. Zero. Previously, I thought diverse included more things... Now, I see it's people with some African/Black heritage. It's okay by me... I just did not know. I am updated!

[StarfishSaver]

243. You're welcome

Let me update you further: In this circumstance RACIAL diversity is important. Critical in fact.

Telling black people, the backbone of the party, that an all white slate is diverse because the white people aren't all the same is not a good look.

I'm pretty sure if every person on that stage were black, claiming it was a diverse group because they hailed from different parts of the country, two of the black people were women and one of the black people was gay would be a non-starter. At least among people not blinded by white privilege.

[LiberalFighter]

100. I don't see Kamala making it as VP.

They need to get votes from purple states. California is not one.

[OnDoutside]

207. I agree. I think that rumour about Abrams 6 months ago is key.

That's my gut feeling... Biden/Abrams.

[LiberalFighter]

210. She would be more likley. But still doubtful.

They need to key up on Wisconsin, Ohio, Michigan, and Pennsylvania at a minimum.

[scheming daemons]

4. The only way to "fix it" is to have a candidate of color get enough polling support to qualify

There's nothing the DNC can, or should, do about it.

*VOTERS* need to boost a candidate of color in the polls.

[StarfishSaver]

13. *VOTERS* can't boost anyone at the polls if they don't get a chance to vote for them

because pollsters and pundits decide winners and losers months before a single vote is cast.

[scheming daemons]

17. When I said "polls" I meant in the qualifying opinion polls.

[StarfishSaver]

48. So the polls should drive this before the voters ever get a say?

[Demsrule86]

59. Yes of course it does...because most candidates need money. That is political reality all candidates

must deal with.

[mr_lebowski]

105. Agree ...

This is going to be used to divide us ... look how it's popped up INSTANTLY upon Kamala dropping from the race ...

The media is going to hand-wring over it the next few days, watch ...

[Demsrule86]

228. It is ridiculous. You can give everyone the opportunity to compete...but some will win and some

won't. She didn't have the money...and she never made inroads with AA vote.

[TwilightZone]

118. That's kind of how it works.

Candidates who can't gain traction in the polls drop out before the primaries start rather frequently, and it happens every election cycle. It doesn't make a lot of sense to continue a campaign that one feels isn't going to be competitive with voters or is unsustainable financially.

By November, 2015, for example, Chafee, Webb, and Lessig had all dropped out, months before the first primary. O'Malley dropped out the day of the Iowa caucuses.

[pangaia]

159. How else can the field be narrowed down to a manageable number, whatever that may be?

[Laura PourMeADrink]

251. DNC decided. It's built in - $ and poll #s. Personally think they started way too early

Newbies are considered LATE and shouldn't be. How else could they decide who would debate tho.

[getagrip_already]

36. no, but $ contributions are he reason harris dropped out....... She qualified to be on stage

And almost all the candidates are living on small dollar donors right now. So if the supporters don't pony up, the candidates drop out.

And that isn't democrats fault, it's just their choices.

[TidalWave46]

104. How do you suggest Democrats "fix" pollsters and pundits?

I get that this is a very fresh narrative and the kinks are being worked out. The cornerstone is racism and now it's time to find an argument. I'm seeing this argument currently all over the map. Even from the same individual. Is it the Democrats as outlined in the op? Is it "pollsters" and "pundits" as you have stated here?

[luvtheGWN]

146. Has everyone forgotten about Cory Booker?

Saw him last night on TV. His bona fides are pretty impressive, especially when matched up with Mayor Pete.

[thesquanderer]

152. but he hasn't gotten enough support to qualify. (n/t)

[Demsrule86]

5. You can't fix it...and has POC supported her or Booker that would not be the case...

It is the voters will...and AA voters chose not to support her or Booker.

[hlthe2b]

15. I think an election where we were not desperate to eliminate Trump would be different...

That being the overwhelming priority explains a lot as to why many AA were hesitant to embrace Kamala or Booker before seeing (as they did with Obama) that they could garner wider support.

I'm very sad to see Harris leave the race, but I don't think this necessarily portends the future of Dem primaries. More the fact we have two late-comers with billions $$ against which to compete.

[Demsrule86]

37. I think you are right...and electability is very important when if we miss the mark Trump remains

for another term.

[sop]

139. Or three, or four...

[Demsrule86]

187. the old saying his complexion is pure gallows...Trump's is pure dictator. Yes you are right.

[KPN]

51. This is exactly what underlies this. Biden is

the chief beneficiary by far. Sanders somewhat but not a lot. Bloomberg May also benefit.

[Demsrule86]

64. Unlikely about Bloomberg who will never win a general.

[Mars and Minerva]

86. I would have thought that he could easily win the general election...

but he can't win a left leaning Democratic primary. That's why he ran as a Republican when he ran for mayor.
Unlike Warren, he is a life long Democrat.


I would actually prefer Biden as POTUS but, I think that Bloomberg would wipe the floor with Trump in a way that Joe could only dream of.

[Demsrule86]

186. He can't win the general...for the same reason Buttigeig can't...no AA support...he is the stop and

frisk guy who stopped only when ordered to do so by the courts.

[Mars and Minerva]

224. He only has to convince the AA community that he can win the general election.

And he will represent them while he is in office. Just like everyone else, he will have to cut a deal with their leadership to deliver their demands if he wins.

Plus, he has the money to get his point across. You should never be surprised at who throws in with who in an election.

That's politics.

[Demsrule86]

233. Not with his record...he will not win a general...won't win the Mid West either.

Anyone is better than Trump so I would vote for Bloomberg for sure in a general...but he is the type that will hand social security reforms to the GOP...make bad deals...he is a bad choice. He is good on guns...not so much on anything else...and the tax cut would remain to.

[Mars and Minerva]

237. That's not how he ran NYC.

He was pretty much a moderate Democrat.

[TwilightZone]

158. I think he could win the general, perhaps by a large margin.

He's toward the bottom of my list, but I think there's enough motivation on the Dem side that we'd hold our noses and vote for him in November, and I think he'd appeal to independents and a few unhappy Rs. I think he'd do well head-to-head against Trump.

I don't think he has much chance of winning the primary, though.

[Demsrule86]

184. I will vote for any nominee...but he won't win the states we need...he loses the EC.

[StarfishSaver]

16. As I said, why bother with primaries if "support" is determined by pollsters before anyone gets a

chance to actually vote?

What in the hell is a campaign for if not for candidates to CAMPAIGN in order to convince people to support them? But we now let pollsters and pundits decide who has the right to even campaign anymore. It's sickening.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

27. I thought she qualified for the next debate??????

[StarfishSaver]

28. She qualified for the next debate, but she's been treated as a loser for weeks because of her

low poll numbers.

[Demsrule86]

34. I personally think everyone with low numbers should drop out...what is the point?

[Quackers]

35. I'm pretty sure that public letter and resignation of one of her top aides didn't help. nt

[Demsrule86]

33. You assume that AA voters will vote for AA candidates...that is not the case this year...Harris

did some things as AG and DA that gave me pause and I think that is why she didn't have support in the AA community...jailing parents for their kids not going to school for instance. There is other things as well that were never addressed. The same is true for Booker who instituted broken window policing which is designed to go after minority communities IMHO. He also hired Ghouiani's guy. I would not vote for a woman because she was a woman...I would have to agree with her on issues and just like her. I think it is the same thing. Barack Obama was not a rich man either, but he won the nomination and the presidency twice.

[Demsrule86]

250. You have to be able to raise money in order to compete in a primary. This is how it has always been.

I don't see a fix for this...not do I think we need one...we can try to give opportunity but can't guarantee outcomes. I thought the debate rules were fair too. I don't think Iowa or New Hampshire should go first. That would be a fix I could endorse...maybe the first four go...Nevada, Carolina, Iowa and New Hampshire.

[FarPoint]

6. We need to defeat Trump...

I don't think race is significant.

[tishaLA]

11. Much as he annoys me sometimes, Van Jones was just talking about this

in CNN. He said that it looks bad for the party and that one of the most insidious parts of this process this year has been that some candidates with short resumes, penises, and white skin are given a pass because of the "promise" they represent while candidates like Sens Booker and Harris can't even get the media to cover them.

It's a broken process, in no small measure because this whole fixation on electability turns voters into amateur pundits

[StarfishSaver]

18. This is true

White men are judged on their potential while blacks and women are judged by their resumes.

[Bettie]

40. And their resumes have to be

spotless and perfect and far and away more comprehensive than any white man.

[The Mouth]

120. Jackie Robinson and Obama had to be way better than their competitors, too

Harris just did not run a good campaign.

The primary is supposed to winnow out those who are not just ideologically acceptable but can run something as complex and fragile as a political campaign against all sorts of attacks, treachery, and media bullshit.

The winner is ALWAYS going to be the person with the best ability to fight all the way to the end, that means logistics and personnel management every bit as much as charisma and fundraising.

President Obama won because he got boots on the ground where the votes were, the money got spent where it would do the most good, and the people working for him felt pumped and valued.

Yes, a white person, and a male, have some advantages, but logistics and organization is 95% of winning

[Jirel]

168. This.

The two candidates that are getting outsized coverage are the two Bs - Biden and Buttigieg. Both white dudes are getting coverage about their prospectus - gee, it's gotta be either the white, moderate ex-VP that "has to" resonate with older long-term Dems, or the white, moderate, younger gay guy who "has to" resonate with the younger but "responsible" younger Dem crowd, right?

But overall, I think the coverage is roughly in line with the poll-standings. I don't think the media owe it to any of the candidates to give them more coverage to level the field. I do wish they'd try to quit guessing who "of course" has to come out on top, though, and hedging their bets somewhat in that direction.

[StarfishSaver]

171. I'd agree with you of the coverage didn't affect the polls

But the fact that the media coverage has a huge influence on the polls makes the media's insistence on basing their coverage on the polls a problem.

[Jirel]

193. I see this just the opposite way.

I wish there was a way to keep the media from reporting on the polls. It's ridiculous and toxic. There are endless polls far too early, some with good methodology, and some that are trash. But reporting on polls creates expectation as well as feeding the media's choices in coverage. If candidates kept polls in their hats, or organizations didn't poll and publish until some reasonable point in the year, it would help a lot.

[LovingA2andMI]

76. A U.S. Sitting Senator is Out from the largest and bluest state in the Nation is Out...

A Small Town Mayor from South Bend, Indiana which has not voted for Democrats (as in the State) in numerous Presidential Elections (since 2008 Barack Obama and that was BARELY THEN) is still in.


That qualifies the statement above

[tirebiter]

12. I'm picking up this has more to do with money than race in Harris' opinion

She can’t fight the onslaught of Bloomberg’s cash differential.

[redqueen]

14. This is nonsense. We had Obama as president. Hillary won the popular vote.

I wanted to use much more colorful language about the politics of divisiveness but I won't.

[StarfishSaver]

21. Obama was president and that's proof that the playing field is perfectly even and minorities no

longer face more obstacles.

Your "post-racial" world is a fantasy.

[redqueen]

23. Strawman. It's proof that the primaries are not the obstacle

to women or minority candidates.

I have a lot of problems with the primary process, but demonstrated history is what it is.

[DrToast]

24. What do you want the DNC to do?

[LovingA2andMI]

54. Does the DNC want to win in the future?

If so, they will figure it all out.

[DrToast]

56. lol....figures

[LovingA2andMI]

70. LOL...TRUTH..

So what's with the LOL? Amazing what lurks....

[DrToast]

74. The LOL is you can't even come up with a solution

You just want to be able to complain about anything, but shrug your shoulders when someone asks what should be done.

[LovingA2andMI]

80. What's Funny....

You have no idea what we do yet, judging based on being called out for your BIAS. Amazingly....superficial and typical response.

[Demsrule86]

71. There is nothing to figure out...people appeal to voters...and there are polls and those candidates

like Pres. Obama do it well and win but some don't...and so the cookie crumbles. It is the nature of elections...there is a winner and multiple losers this year. I remember posts where some who support Warren were excited that Biden had money issues. Money is a fact of life...and the DNC needs to stay out of it. Someday, if we manage a win maybe we can address campaign finance reform. That might help all candidates.

[StarfishSaver]

82. So, why bother voting. Let's just pick our nominee with opinion polls?

Primaries and campaigns are so yesteryear ...

[rzemanfl]

167. Bookmarking. n/t

[Demsrule86]

42. People have to be able to win...I think Harris made some real mistakes in this campaign which would

have hurt any candidate...this has nothing to do with race. Biden was Obama's VP and people think he can beat Trump.

[LovingA2andMI]

60. This....

Your "post-racial" world is a fantasy.

However, many will choose to blatantly ignore the obvious for their convenience.

[LovingA2andMI]

44. So is Barack Obama....

The last one the African-American community can ever receive by the Democratic Party? If so, the 2020 race will be VERY interesting, indeed.

[redqueen]

57. What? nt

[LovingA2andMI]

62. Can't understand?

Sad.

[ismnotwasm]

19. K&R

[TCJ70]

20. While I very much disagree with all arguments that are based on electability...

...(whatever that word means) Harris' departure from the field just means she didn't appeal to a wide enough audience of the Democratic voter base. What is the "fix" for this "problem"?

[StarfishSaver]

25. How do we know who she appealed to when not a single vote had been cast?

You're relying solely on polling and the media narrative being fed to us to decide who appealed to a "wide enough audience of the Democratic voter base."

One of the "fixes" is for polling not to play such a major role in determining a candidate's viability before the voting even starts. The whole point of a campaign is for candidates to spend time with voters trying to get their support. Support is not a static thing and deciding someone's not viable because the polls say they're not is letting the tail wag the dog and drives out a lot of good people.

[TCJ70]

31. So...what? 20+ candidates at every debate until voting starts?

How does your "fix" address funding problems? Aren't the polls the DNC using national polls?

[Demsrule86]

47. You have to be able to raise money in order to run for president...well before any votes are cast.

It is the process.

[Quackers]

53. We follow her lead.

For what it’s worth, I don’t think she should’ve left the race. It was too early for where she was at in her campaign. But on the other hand, she is the one who made the decision to drop out. Who am I to tell her that she’s wrong?

[Loki Liesmith]

79. No one made her drop out.

[brooklynite]

140. So you're saying that Delaney has the same ability to win as Warren?

We both know that’s not true.

Polling isn’t perfect, but it’s reflective of broad trends. And that pesky 1st Amendment means you can arbitrarily ban data.

[Docreed2003]

175. +1

Excellent post StarfishSaver. The idea of "electability" based on polling a year out from the election is laughable. Also, some things are more important that how much money a person has raised or what the media narrative happens to be. In Kamala's case, she provided a unique voice and perspective that no other candidate has.

[JaneQPublic]

22. First Step: Start the Dem primary season in states with greater diversity.

Granted, IA and NH take their privilege very seriously and IA voted for Obama in the 2008 caucus. But it is unconscionable for the Dem Party, which has POC as its backbone, to allow such white states to continue playing such a pivotal role year after year.

[StarfishSaver]

26. Thank you.

[Renew Deal]

49. Do you think Kamala would still be in if the race started in California?

She's even trailing there. The last poll has her in 4th.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-primaries/democratic/california/

[JaneQPublic]

58. Those polling numbers don't apply to a race that starts in CA.

They apply to the existing race, where candidates are expending all their time and money elsewhere.

[Renew Deal]

63. She needs to advertise in CA?

She's the senator. They already know her.

[JaneQPublic]

94. And they knew her equally well in Feb when she was polling at 53 percent.

Then she began spending all her time in IA, NH, and SC.

[Renew Deal]

96. Ahhhh, but you made my point

Her numbers went down as they got to know her better.

[JaneQPublic]

114. No, you're point was that CA voters already knew her.

And knew her so completely that having her campaigning for president there wouldn't teach them anything new. Don't go twisting your logic into knots and think no one will notice.


So tell me, are you from IA or NH? Because you are working extremely hard to defend those state's place of privilege.

[Renew Deal]

116. Which state should go first?

[Algernon Moncrieff]

147. We need a national primary

Up to three votes (if needed) 6 weeks apart.

First vote gets you to the top 5; 2nd tier whittles it to 1 or 2; third vote (if necessary) decides the winner. All states vote. All voting done in a booth in a secret ballot. No caucuses.

[brooklynite]

143. Your solution for a candidate who can't raise money is to start in a State where money is critical?

[Takket]

203. THIS

I have been thinking with annoyance for YEARS about how much Iowa influences elections. If you had some sort of "progressive thermometer" you can take a reading in each state with, IA (AS A WHOLE) in no way represents the party as a whole.

[treestar]

255. The DNC has no say

the states do. NH will move its primary up if any other state tries to take an earlier date than theirs. Their law says that they have to be first.

[JaneQPublic]

262. But it has influence.

From 2008:

"Florida, Michigan seek exit from Democratic penalty box"

https://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/06/florida.michigan/

[treestar]

263. It's up to the state; hopefully anyone could have "influence."

That's what an endorsement is. But one thing from 2008 with Howard Dean's opinion does not take any power from the state to set its election rules.

[JaneQPublic]

264. And yet the FL and MI primaries are still in March...

the way the DNC wanted it, not moved to January, the way their state lawmakers wanted it.

[SaschaHM]

29. It's almost like...

centering the beginning of the primary on two very white states affect the perception of the rest of the race. Imagine what that stage would look like if we were polling NY/CA/GA/OH/SC non-stop for months and that affected donor dollars.

If no one on that stage can speak authentically to issues facing people of color, that's a problem. Nobody is as empathetic as Hillary was last year. The absence will be stark. Maybe Joe can fill the void, but while he has my vote, I've given up on expecting him to be as eloquent at a debate as he is during personal interactions.

[spicysista]

46. This, a thousand times.

Just excellent points, all around. I hope Joe can step up and shine during the next debate. I've seen him be authentic and wonderful before. He still has "it". Let's hope he brings "it" to the stage.

[SaschaHM]

50. He definitely has it.

It just doesn't pop up when he's debating anymore. If was doing a repeat of his VP debates, this contest would have been sewn up months ago.

[The Valley Below]

92. Biden doesn't use his debate superpowers against fellow Democrats.

He's old school that way.

Some will mock him for that, but he rises and others fall when he sticks to the high road even when they don't.

Against Trump there will be very different rules of engagement.

Pity the fool.

Bill

[StarfishSaver]

55. Thank you, Sacha

You're eloquently saying what I'm too angry and frustrated to try to articulate.

[PunkinPi]

176. Well put, thanks. nt

[IluvPitties]

30. How are we supposed to fix something based of the choice of voters?

[StarfishSaver]

65. Have there been any votes yet?

Voters haven't chosen anyone yet. Polls are supplanting elections.

[Autumn]

217. And the media drives the polls to their benefit. nt

[nbsmom]

67. Bless your heart

Voters have not had a choice yet.

As the OP points out, this primary has been horribly manipulated well before any votes have been cast.

Don't mind me. I'm a little bitter that someone who says "the Democrat Party," appears regularly on Fix News, and has been getting her funding from who knows where is still officially in the race for the nomination, yet a woman who really represents the best of our party and our country is not.

[squirecam]

189. So....

We kick her out and she runs third party and bashes us The Whole time like stein?

No thanks. I’d rather she get gets through primaries with 3%, gets no delegates, and quits on her own.

Harris had her moment in the spotlight, but failed to capitalize. That happens.

[Bettie]

221. She'll run 3rd party anyway

I think that is the plan, thus Agent Orange's "team" congratulations to her today.

[treestar]

257. Not this again

If your candidate loses, why has it always got to be "manipulation?" The DNC was accused of fixing it for Hillary. This time we cannot allow that bitterness to go on after the nomination.

[treestar]

256. +1

[The_Counsel]

32. Wait...When Did Cory Booker Drop Out??

Did I miss something?

[nbsmom]

39. He hadn't qualified for the December debate as of today.

Kamala had.

[The_Counsel]

77. Seems Booker Should Be the One Dropping Out Then...

...and not Harris.

Too bad journalists and columnists have been writing her campaign's obituary for months now.

[getagrip_already]

45. or duval patrick.....

[nbsmom]

73. Hmmm... are you just being obtuse here?

I don't know, perhaps if the DNC will let Mr. Patrick straight up buy his spot on the stage in L.A...

The OP was about the fact that no votes have been cast, and the debate stage will be populated entirely by white people + Yang.

(Just because they haven't dropped out, BTW, doesn't mean they're still in it.)

[getagrip_already]

84. booker hasn't qualified either... (has he?).... but he is still in the race

Patrick "just" entered. He has zero chance because he has no runway with the polls or with contributions. Neither does bloomberg for that matter.

But that can change.

The post I replied to pointed out that cory is still in the race, even if he may not be on the stage.

[dsc]

141. Gabbard is a POC as well

[The_Counsel]

81. I Almost Forgot About Him. :-O

Has he even qualified for the December debate as yet?

[getagrip_already]

90. nope, no chance given when he entered....

I'm not sure why he entered to be honest. Maybe just for future name recognition?

But he hasn't been in many polls, and hasn't had much of a chance to collect contributions. So he won't be on stage.

[The_Counsel]

103. I Think His Plan Was to Focus on South Carolina as a Springboard...

...as to your point, it's way too late to gain any real traction for Iowa and New Hampshire.

We'll see if it works. I believe both John and Bobby Kennedy entered the nomination process fairly late even for the times.

[IronLionZion]

41. We still have women, Jews, a gay fellow, and a Russian asset

Whoever is our nominee, they better choose a woman or minority as VP to boost turnout.

It's true that our party needs more diversity all around, not just presidential candidates. Even here on DU we see arguments in favor of throwing minorities under the bus on many important issues to help white people feel better about maintaining their white privilege. There used to be more of that for women back in the day before we started electing more women leaders to office everywhere.

The same needs to be done for minorities. Having 5 Indian-American congresspeople and 1 US Senator/presidential candidate resulted in fewer DUers insisting in the nonsensical concept of American-born H-1Bs. US citizens are Americans, not H-1B, not job stealers, regardless of race or country of their family's origin. The idea of an Indian-American with a US passport, US birth certificate, and obviously American accent still somehow being a foreigner invading this country to steal jobs sounded a little more racist when one of us was on televised presidential debates.

Personally, I enjoyed the threads insisting that she's somehow not African-American because she's Indian-Jamaican. We need some beer cheese and mustard to enjoy those logical pretzels.

[Demsrule86]

52. I will vote for any nominee and I don't care who the VP is...for God sakes didn't we learn the

message about turning out for elections in 16? Always vote blue...it doesn't matter who the candidate is and it sure hell doesn't matter who the VP is.

[IronLionZion]

66. Booker talked about a big decrease in the turnout among African-Americans in Milwaukee

Detroit, Cleveland, Philadelphia, etc. to lose important swing states. President Obama somehow managed to win Indiana and North Carolina with record turnout.

We need turnout from more than just DUers. We need minorities, women, young people all across America especially the blue areas of swing states.

[The Valley Below]

78. Good thing that in Joe Biden we have a Democrat who is widely popular with black voters.

[IronLionZion]

87. Older black voters like him because of his past work with the black community on important issues

many younger black voters are not that excited because of his crime legislation and drug policy. Booker hit him on that in the last debate. We need high turnout from all types to win.

[StarfishSaver]

95. I don't think that's the reason older black voters like him

He never had much of a footprint in the black community.

I believe they like him because: 1) they want to win and think he's the most likely to beat Trump and 2) he was Obama's VP so he's got a good "recommendation."

[IronLionZion]

113. Those are both good points

CNN said it also depends on where people get their information from, which varies by age. Mainstream news media was promoting those points. It's a bit different on blogs and social media.

[Demsrule86]

89. There was also a great deal of voter suppression in those area...particularly Milwaukee...the

number of 'spoiled' ballots exceeded the number Trump won by...look if anyone wants to sit this one out so be it...but it seems like four more years of Trump is a heavy price. I am not in favor of making race a requirement for presidential elections. She didn't attract AA voters and that is not fixable by the DNC nor should it be. You have be able to win. If you can't win a primary, you can't win a general...had Harris attracted AA voters in South Carolina, she would still be in the race. But she didn't and there is no fix for that.

[LAS14]

181. Examples?

"Even here on DU we see arguments in favor of throwing minorities under the bus on many important issues to help white people feel better about maintaining their white privilege."

Could you give a specific example? Not a post, but an opinion someone expressed? I'd like to know if I've just missed these posts or if you and interpret things differently.

tia
las

[IronLionZion]

211. I'll assume your question is in good faith

Some DUers (obviously a small vocal minority) have been big supporters of racial profiling by airport security. This disproportionately impacts brown males and some brown females but never whites. There is data on how this does jack shit for security, screening for weapons is better than screening for race. It exists only to create an illusion of security. TSA lets a lot of weapons go through including loaded handguns and big knives, because they have massive human judgment failures in their processes. TSA officers don't know what a Middle Eastern Muslim looks like, many of them look white. They are profiling brown skin, and get many Indians and brown Christians/Hindus. And brown women get it bad enough that TSA had to get legislation passed that they can't be sued for sexual assault and informed local law enforcement agencies not to investigate reports of TSA sexual assault in the line of duty.

Some DUers (obviously a small vocal minority) feel that if a person's grandparents or distant relatives are citizens of a foreign country, that person should never be sponsored for US government security clearances. And contracting companies should not be sued for discrimination in who they spend their money sponsoring for clearances. This disproportionately impacts people whose parents are immigrants, and ironically it helps immigrants from certain enemy countries who have cut ties to their grandparents and distant relatives. There is data on how this screws over Asian, Middle Eastern, Latino, and African(Nigeria, Ethiopia) US citizens, many who have been born here. But people who have immigrated from Russia, Cuba (or white Hispanics), or Eastern Europe and still have a thick accent are sponsored for clearances. It's fine if they pass thorough background investigations, but using race for this is just plain stupid and does nothing for US national security.

Companies always assign me to work with hundreds of H-1Bs. The ratio on these contracts is often like 5 US citizens to 200 H-1Bs. Companies always assign me to technical roles. My qualifications and experience are in business functional work, I don't know how anyone can justify my work assignments, I just look like the other people doing that work. Some DUers (obviously a small vocal minority) have told me that merely working for an American company that hires so many H-1Bs for federal government contracting services is evidence that my loyalties are to India, not the USA, and I'm a traitor to American workers, foreigners are stealing Americans jobs, etc. When the real issue is that I'm being blocked out from jobs that I'm qualified for because of my race.

There is more along these lines of the "perpetual foreigner" myth. But when it comes to questioning a person's trustworthiness and loyalty to this country, there are serious implications for many of us for no valid reason, just the misguided perception that nonwhite people are somehow "less American" than whites, even for me and I was born here and several blood relatives who have served active duty in the US military. It only helps promote privilege for whites and discrimination for browns.

[LAS14]

244. First, thanks SO MUCH for assuming good faith on my part.

I've written more than one post in response to people who do just the opposite. Makes me nuts. And thanks for your detailed response. It's clear that it's a case of my just not having seen these posts. That means your post wasn't one of them, and I'm glad to know that.

[IronLionZion]

249. Each of us understands issues that impact us, but may not understand issues that don't

So that's why it's important to have diversity among our policy makers to include people who have different experiences, backgrounds, and perceptions.

And it's apparent that in cases when someone denies another person's experience, they are probably benefiting from the status quo and don't want to lose that benefit. It reminds me of this Upton Sinclair quote from long ago:

It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.

Upton Sinclair

[Renew Deal]

43. How do they expect it to be fixed?

Kamala is out because she wasn't connecting. The field still has at least 4 women, the highest polling openly gay candidate in history, an Asian American, an African American man who is an unmarried vegan, a Hawaiian-Indian woman, two Jewish people, and two elderly people. It's a very diverse field with a lot to offer.

[beachbumbob]

68. Pretty funny as I see a Biden/Harris ticket as landslide all

written over it
So does the GOP

[Demsrule86]

93. I would prefer Stacy Abrams which give us a shot at Georgia and could help the Senate race too...

Kamala has baggage and does not bring anything that benefits us in the EC or in the senate races.

[Loki Liesmith]

69. You will need to fix the Democratic electorate then

Last edited Tue Dec 3, 2019, 04:33 PM - Edit history (1)

Because that’s the source of the “problem”. They didn’t get excited enough about the candidate the author wanted them to get excited about.

[StarfishSaver]

88. What "electorate"? The people selected by pollsters to be polled?

That's not an "electorate." That's a sample.

If everyone thinks that sample is reliable enough to tell us who should and shouldn't be in a race, why waste time and money with campaigns and elections? Let's just let the polling sample pick our nominee.

[Loki Liesmith]

165. Wrong on several counts.

A sample is a *measure* of the electorate. It is one physical instantiation of the abstract concept of the electorate.

The question of weather or not it is accurate enough to determine who should be allowed to run...well it *didn’t* determine that. Harris determined it. No one made her quit. That’s entirely on her.

What’s more Harris used the polls you are deriding to make her judgement to quit. Why do you think you understand the relationship between polling and what the electorate wants better than she does?

[GitRDun]

72. A prime example of institutionalized racism

It's a race to win Iowa and New Hampshire, the wonderful whimsical world of white people.

It's most of what gets talked about in the news. Drives donors and institutional support of candidates.

The Democratic Party is a party whose members roughly resemble the people you see at the mall when you go shopping.

You have to ask yourself, why do the key primary states look more like the background of a Trump rally?

It's time to wake up and smell the coffee folks. No way I am saying the party is racist, clearly it is not.

We can do better, though. Our primaries should line up with our inclusive policies.

Try leading with Illinois. Very similar to US demographics. New York isn't bad either.

Unless Democratic Party institutions line up squarely with their policies, only once in a lifetime candidates like Barack Obama stand a chance of being a person of color who can overcome these institutional barriers.

Just my opinion.

[Demsrule86]

101. The reason she is out is that she was not competitive with voters in South Carolina...nothing to do

with racism or Iowa...she was not well liked, and some of it stems from her time as AG and DA.It doesn't look like Biden will win Iowa or New Hampshire...but he is competitive in other states and is raising money which all candidates must do in order to continue to run for president.

[GitRDun]

130. Does not change the argument in the least.

If we want equal pay for women, companies must proactively change the institutional biases and policies that hurt their professional and economic advancement.

That means real action.

Why is it so strange to think that it hurts non-white candidates to have the 1st two primaries in primarily white states?

In my mind, your anecdotal "causation" contributes to us doing nothing to level the playing field.

The real problem then remains institutionalized.

[Demsrule86]

156. I am against holding first two primaries in those states...but I doubt it would have helped Harris.

Hold the first four on the same day is a simple fix...

[LonePirate]

148. No, the reason she dropped out was due to money. She said so herself.

Money brings recognition and awareness which lead to likability and competitiveness. She simply did not have the awareness among voters in SC who seem to be favoring the candidate they do know.

[Demsrule86]

153. She did not get money because she was not doing well with voters in South Carolina...AA vote is a

big part of our party. Harris like Biden could lose Iowa and New Hampshire (two candidates are from that area) but she had to get votes in Carolina or she had no way forward.

[LonePirate]

163. SC has hardly mattered so far. The state makes the news far less than IA or even NH.

Money comes from all over the place but only to candidates perceived as doing well - and that metric is largely based on how they are doing in IA and nationally. Opinion in IA frames the national narrative, not so for SC.

[Demsrule86]

183. Iowa and New Hampshire are not determinant this year...if she had support AA outside of these two

states people would not have decided she could would lose the primary and the money would not have dried up.

[TheRealNorth]

83. Sheesh

Should we just pick some Latino out of the crowd and put them on the stage also in the interest of "diversity".

Yeah, let's just allow the ratfucks at 538/NYT create narratives that Democrats are not diverse. It's clear we haven't learned anything from 2016.

[KentuckyWoman]

239. This.

[marlakay]

85. I might be white but I vote the person

I actually started with Harris until Warren fit me better with policies.

I don’t care the race.

I was living in WA state when Obama first ran, it was a caucus then and my first time voting that way, i had joined FB to be one of his first million. I talked people in my caucus into voting for him and worked on his campaign in east WA the more conservative side.

We rented a restaurant on election day and were jumping up and down with joy.

I really think we need to stop judging woman, man, color and just look at what they stand for and what charisma they have because that does pull people out like Obama and Bill Clinton and Kennedy.

All of our candidates are good but I think we are worried as a country that somehow Trump will cheat again and get away with it. Has us all on edge most of the time.

[Demsrule86]

107. I agree with you...while race is in this country a factor as is misogyny...we must vote the person

we think can do the best job and win a general...and work on hearts and minds. Kamala didn't have AA support in South Carolina...I don't see that as racist though.

[marlakay]

115. I see that as African Americans

Are just like everyone else they vote for who they want as it should be.

[Demsrule86]

192. I do too...when I asked my Gay daughter why she was not supporting Buttigeig (supports Warren)

she said well would 'you vote for Nikki Haley if she was running? Of course not...the point is she likes EW policies.

[marlakay]

236. One of my daughter's likes Biden

And I like Warren opposite of you, lol.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

91. K&R

[LiberalFighter]

97. The DNC does not control who makes it thru.

That is all the doing of the candidates.

The DNC does not control how the primaries are conducted. That is dictated by each state.

The DNC does not restrict how or where the candidates receive their support or finances.

[StarfishSaver]

102. I wonder if people here would be so cavalier about this if only men were in the next debate

I don't think they would be.

[DrToast]

106. Nobody forced Harris out

She could have stayed in if she wanted too.

[Demsrule86]

109. That is going to happen because none of our women candidates are polling that well at

the moment...how long before Warren or Klobachar can't continue? I would say the same thing...the DNC can not do anything about this.

[squirecam]

191. Warren isn't going away

And Amy is doing fine.

[Demsrule86]

198. That is simply not true. Neither are doing well.

[TheRealNorth]

170. Why do you not like men?

Do you think that men cannot represent both men and women effectively? Do you think Obama was a poor president for women?

I personally no some women that are reluctant to vote for a women because they think the country is not ready for a woman candidate and they are desperate to beat Trump As a man, I think that is the wrong approach- I want the best candidate that shares my values while at the same time had low negatives among the broad portion of the Democratic electorate. I don't care if they check off some sort of affirmative action box.

[treestar]

259. What has that got to do with the DNC

not having control of primary timing and the things the poster mentioned?

[StarfishSaver]

261. You should do some research on institutional raciam

Among other things, it might help you better understand that it perpetuates racism without anyone taking any intentional action and the only way to overcome and eradicate it is for people and institutions to take steps to disrupt it, even when they weren't personally responsible for creating it..

[treestar]

265. Than that is on the states

and the way they set up their primaries. In this issue, that is where the institutional racism came from.

[StarfishSaver]

266. As I said, you need to study up on institutional racism

Your continued insistence is that it's only "on" any one particular entity "where the institutional racism came from" to address it shows you obviously don't get it. Among other things, institutional racism doesn't "come from" any one particular place. It's built into the institutions - that's the point.

Here's a start if you're really interested in learning about it.
https://www.racialequitytools.org/fundamentals/core-concepts/structural-racism

[treestar]

258. It's so much easier to just blame the DNC for fixing it

when your candidate doesn't win.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

98. It's partly result of Iowa and New Hampshire always going first

It skews the survey results when we see numbers for Iowa and New Hampshire constantly.

It's also partly a result of the unique dynamic of this election, inasmuch as many people don't care about any policy position a candidate might have nearly as much as they care about the candidate's perceived ability to defeat Donald Trump.

I have to also say that those who have dropped so far have run mediocre to poor campaigns. Kamala got some good zings in at the debates, but has otherwise struggled to find an audience. I see advertising aimed at Western Iowa, and have yet to see a TV ad for Booker - or a YouTube ad, or a billboard, or a bumper sticker. My daughter took a recent trip to Ames and saw a bunch of ads for Mayor Pete. I see ads for Steyer, Yang, and more recently Bloomberg. I see billboards on 80 for Tulsi, and some large signage for Bernie. I see bumper stickers for Elizabeth Warren and Joe Biden, although (being real) I see more Trump Pence bumper stickers than I do for any of our candidates so far.

[Demsrule86]

111. South Carolina was the key for Harris...and she is not doing well there.

[frazzled]

127. It's also due to other factors, perhaps

And I know others will disagree, but for me, the primary reason I think her campaign failed was ... her campaign.

Let me say that at the beginning, I was very excited about Kamala’s campaign, and thought she was likely to be my choice, based on her background as an attorney general, her performance in the Senate. But after the first few debates, I felt very tepid. It felt as if her campaign didn’t have a consistent focus or theme; her debate performances felt contrived at times, as if she were trying too hard to get a hook, but missing somehow; she never hit a tone. And while this may just have been my perception, I think probably quite a few others felt the same.

Look, it happens. Running for president is, alas, an art that involves more than just being smart or having the right positions. I can’t articulate what that something is that captivates the electorate ... it can be a host of different things ... but it’s like high school: even the nicest, smartest kids sometimes don’t make the popularity list.

Fire away; but this is my personal view.

[OhZone]

99. If she hadn't lied about Biden -

She might still be a contender.

Blame is entirely on her unfair, lying tactics, imho.

Oh well.

[bucolic_frolic]

108. Biden was VP for Obama

and has credentials with minorities. Applying the lens of race at each point does not serve Democrats well.

[Cartoonist]

110. The wrong person dropped out.

I'm going to dread our nominee.

[Demsrule86]

119. I find that sad...I have had nominees that I liked better than others...but I always did my best to

help win because I knew that the alternative was a Republican...I dread Republicans...not any of our candidates. Vote blue no matter who...this sort of attitude is why we lost in 2000,2004, and 2016. Vote for whom you love in a primary...but vote blue no matter who in the general...and the I am voting for the nominee, but I hate them attitude only hurts our chances. such a person discourages others from voting for the nominee.Trump is a monster...Satan would be preferable IMO, and all our candidate are decent people...all will be great presidents and 1 billion trillion times better than Trump. I would cast my vote proudly for any of them.

[Cartoonist]

126. I always vote blue

I'll even vote for Bloomberg if he's the nominee. My dread is that we are going to nominate a candidate that will lose.

[Rainbow Droid]

144. We do seem to be good at that.

And fair enough, recently more by foul means than fair, but the point remains that Republicans can nominate a polygamous goat-sodomizer under a "Family Values" ticket that all their sheeple will (proudly or quietly) vote for in the general, but if our candidate isn't Perfect For Everyone, all news media has a "Snouts in the Trough" orgy of doom and gloom and Tan Suit II "scandals" and tons of people stay home.

Because turnout is the real problem and only someone people want to vote for can ensure high turnout. Nothing else matters.

edit: I mean, obviously a lot more matters, but I thought in the context it was clear that I was emphasizing the importance of the point, and not literally saying that nothing else matters, because that's just silly. <3

[Demsrule86]

190. I am sorry...misunderstood....yeah I have nightmares about this...I too fear Trump could win.

And we must get him out.

[Cartoonist]

195. That's why I prefer we get him now

Another year is too long.

[Demsrule86]

202. I wish we could but the senate won't convict.

[Cartoonist]

205. Attack your enemies' weak point

His health.
I think they're doing a good job of prodding him. I would like to see them kick it up a little, but that's just me.

[Demsrule86]

227. Good point...something happened when he went to the hospital.

[TexasTowelie]

112. I think that one of the issues that affected Harris is that black voters

looked upon her career as a prosecutor and that she played a role in having blacks incarcerated. They simply did not trust her.

I'm not certain why Booker has not gained more traction other than it is a crowded field and that there were already marquis names in the field. If Biden wasn't in the race, then I could see where Booker might have some appeal to that subset of voters. However, there were five candidates from the mid-Atlantic and New England states during the early stages of the contest (Biden, Booker, Gillibrand, Sanders, and Warren) that already had devoted bases of voters. Since there were so many choices, it prevented Booker from building any regional alliances initially. His ties to the pharmaceutical industry and his "tough on crime" reputation as mayor may have also hampered his connection with voters.

[Demsrule86]

122. Booker had issues in Newark that I find troubling as well.

[Chemisse]

166. Harris was my top choice until that info came out and she just didn't ease concerns.

She didn't seem to be adept at advocating for herself when criticized.

[randr]

121. Whoa everyone--we have a way to go and an open convention not to mention a VP to choose

Why must we think the sky is falling when we are confronted with an issue?

[onenote]

123. The comparison to the Repub debate is BS.

In November 2015, the Repub debate featured four white males, 1 white female, 1 African American male, and 2 Latino males - all straight
In November 2015, the Democratic debate featured four white males (one gay, one Jewish), 2 white women, 2 women of color, 1 African American male, and 1 Asian male

By December 2015, the Repub debate group had gotten LESS diverse: 5 white males, 1 white female, 1 African American male, 2 Latino males.
Not sure who exactly will be in the field for the December 2019 Democrat debate, but in all likelihood it will be more diverse than the 2015 Republican field.

And by January 2016, the Repub debate field was down to four white males, one African American male, and 2 Latino males. No women. All straight.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

124. It's bizarre how media thinks Democrats always have problems. . . . nt

[TwilightZone]

151. And how we tend to perpetuate that....

[madaboutharry]

125. This is how it has shaken out because of the polls

and contributions. No one purposely made it this way.

I don’t know how democrats are supposed to “fix” it.
African-American voters are backing Biden in large numbers. Are they wrong? No, they are not. This is how politics works.

[crazytown]

133. "African-American voters are backing Biden in large numbers".

Exactly.

[BigOleDummy]

128. I still think

And I'm wary of entering this thread to be entirely honest, that the Citizens United ruling has done more than just about anything else to handcuff "our" side. Completely do away with corporate money in our elections. I like Ms. Harris but getting her message out was always her main problem imo. Yes, I think others can make better presidential candidates but until we remove the stranglehold of special interests we may never know.

As far as "fixing this" vis a vis the DNC, how? Their hands are pretty much tied by , what else?, the economic realities of running a presidential campaign as well as the various Senate/House contests. I think Ms. Proll, Ms. Jones and Ms. Greenberg are doing none of us a favor by bringing more controversy and divisiveness to the leftish side. Do we need more POC and women as our representatives in Washington? Of course we do! Do we need to add another layer of controversy and divisiveness to our side AT THIS PARTICULAR POINT IN TIME, no an emphatic no!

[LeftTurn3623]

129. I disagree with the tweets

if they need to fix anything its to make it harder to get on the debate stage the last debate and the next one.

When strong candidates run then people support them. Nothing to do with race. If Michelle Obama would of ran she would be the clear front runner and there would not be a close 2nd. Hell if she announced tomorrow she would run away with it.

I have a feeling when AOC runs she will be a heavy favorite and one of the top front runners. I know I cant wait until she runs!

[lunatica]

131. Yes

I want more women of color elected. A lot more. I feel privileged to be from New Mexico with two of the three first Native American women elected to Congress.

I hope I live long enough to see a woman President and I hope the first one is Black. The idea that “Oh great! We elected a Black President! Now let’s just go back to ‘normal’.” needs to be proven wrong, wrong, wrong!

[Kurt V.]

132. K&R . we gotta walk the walk. now

[TwilightZone]

134. Blaming potential voters probably won't accomplish much.

If Harris couldn't gain enough traction with potential voters to continue her campaign, I'm not sure why we should be blaming the voters. They have preferences that are both publicly and privately (internal polling and voter outreach) known, and she wasn't one of the top ones. That's kind of how this all works. Not everyone will win.

If the DNC is somehow to blame (aren't they always?), perhaps you or the tweeters can explain what exactly the DNC can do about Harris not appealing to enough voters/donors to remain competitive.

[brooklynite]

135. Racial and Sexual equality means...

...you have the same ability as a white male to be be a failed candidate (Hickenlooper, Moulton, Ryan, Bullock, O’Rourke, Sestak.....)

[FloridaBlues]

136. She didn't get enough support from potential voters. This happens every primary

Starting out almost 2 yrs before election is way too soon and takes tons of money.

[RhodeIslandOne]

137. It is not the party's fault Kamala did not manage her campaign properly

I'm stunned she dropped out. It seems like there were a lot of problems behind the scenes.

It is unfortunate, she was my third choice, but if she couldn't even make it to February, it sounds like this was the Titanic.

[LonePirate]

138. I am sure it has nothing to do with two of the whitest states in the country being the first to vote

[still_one]

142. Senator Harris main problem IMHO is she didn't have a clear message. Sound bites aren't enough

[Dopers_Greed]

145. The Dem Primary has been vicious

Even worse than the Republican one last go around.

[LiberalLovinLug]

149. OMG this is the worst of the PC shot in the foot

This is why we don't get traction when fighting for real problems of inequity in society. We ran one of, if not the, most diverse slate of candidates in history!

Democrats have already proven, as if they have to, they will nominate a black man, will nominate a woman. IF THEY THINK THEY ARE WORTHY FOR THE POSITION!

Are we now actually accusing OURSELVES of being racist or sexist?

For gawd's sake, we still have a woman running very highly in the polls, including on DU, as well as a gay mayor. Heck, Tulsi is a woman of colour.

Methinks this faux outrage might originate simply because this tweeter's favourite dropped out, and they are lashing out at some easy answer to find someone, or something at fault for it. When its simply a part of the process. The sad part is how many fall for it, while Republicans laugh and will use this 'concern' to prove we all live in a PC straight jacket.

[Baltimike]

157. SHE made HER choice. We dems had very little to do with it.

I personally wish she would not have dropped out.

She did.

That sucks.

But nothing needs to be fixed.

[Chakaconcarne]

160. Sorry, I don't buy that one bit.

It's nonsense...and that's my opinion.

And this borderlines an attempt to sow discord within the party... and that's my opinion as well.

[awesomerwb1]

161. Random twitter people

tweeting opinions and people here overreacting to them.

If Kamala couldn't excite minorities....she was never going to win. fix what??

[Sparko55]

162. Surely you can't be serious, and don't call me Shirley!!!

Ah Airplane, but yet I jest.

Fix what? Any candidate that takes a slogan "For the People", which is a cheesy commercial in many parts of Florida by a law firm, has got to figure out what they were running for, what are their foundations for a campaign, and why people would turn to them for leadership. Those that have fallen by the wayside haven't really connected to the electorate - and the first ballots of the primaries haven't even been cast. It seemed that everybody and their brother / sister was throwing their hats into the ring, and all were reaching for the brass ring. Nothing wrong there, but as with most things, correct timing, correct course for the endeavor, and then a fair measure of luck are all required.

There is a measure of fatigue in the voter, already, after the pile on to run by Democrats across the country. Few if any candidate has been able to articulate a vision beyond the go slow, don't rile up the RW crazies, and we can't have nice things because Republithugs. No one can solve the 40 year ache that the GOP has left the country in, over night, and few are offering a way forward apart from broad nostrums of change. And most the public is finding unappealing. Maybe once the dust has settled a couple more entrants will throw in, and maybe that is what they race needs.

[BannonsLiver]

169. So what's the solution?

[radical noodle]

172. Have we all forgotten that Democrats

overwhelmingly voted for Obama in 2008? This isn't racism, this is who attracts the most support. The last I heard, African American voters were primarily supporting Biden, so are they racist and sexist?

We will divide Democrats into tiny little groups, fight one another, and lose... giving trump another 4 years to totally ruin the country.

[BannonsLiver]

174. The whole narrative is somewhat irrational.

My guess is the heat from Woke Twitter and elsewhere will be so strong, Perez will alter the rules to allow Castro and potentially others to be on the debate stage. Then the media will make a big deal about that, and how the Dems are pandering to minorities. There is no way to win, really. But, like you, I can't help but note it was this fucking party that nominated the first black candidate and first female candidate to head national presidential tickets. The day that happens in the GOP is when pigs fly.

[radical noodle]

179. Well, they did have Ben Carson and Herman Cain

How great is that?

[samnsara]

177. its still got 4 women a gay guy and an asian guy..

..or have i missed a drop out? oh one is jewish too.

[ancianita]

180. I don't agree.

[joost5]

185. Attorney General Kamala Harris has a nice ring to it.

Whatever D gets elected Prez, they should seriously consider her for their AG.

[cry baby]

188. These tweets are incongruous with the fact that POC are supporting Biden,

an older white male.

[StarfishSaver]

196. Some AA voters support Biden. Many support other candidates. That's beside the point

This isn't about giving black voters a black candidate to vote for. This is about having a diverse slate of candidates for ALL voters to choose from.

[cry baby]

201. I believe it's more than "some". My point is that the Dems put forth

a wonderful, talented, diverse group of candidates for a diverse dem party. This diverse party will choose, and POC and women have a huge say in who is left standing. If they prefer a white male candidate in such numbers that take that candidate over the top, then so be it.

It would have been a real problem if we hadn’t had a field that didn’t look like America. We didn’t put forth an all white male group.

The real problem is money in politics, even on our side.

[StarfishSaver]

204. But the party didn't "choose" anyone. Not a single vote has been cast

The pollsters and pundits are deciding for voters. And now voters have fewer choices when it is time to vote because the pollsters and media decided that certain people shouldn't be in the race.

[cry baby]

206. I can agree that the media shows bias, which can affect which candidate succeeds.

And I read a great suggestion in this thread. Why don’t we begin our primaries with a more diverse state? If we lead with NC, it would be more fair. If we did that beginning today, a old white guy would start with strong momentum...go figure.

I’m not arguing that things are perfect but the field we started with is much improved from our recent past. Pollsters and pundits will do what they do. Handshaking and door knocking can overcome the bias, as shown by the Obama campaign.

I also advocate for equal governmental funding for each candidate.

[StarfishSaver]

208. I hear you - but praising "the field we started with" for its diversity while that field has been

Last edited Tue Dec 3, 2019, 09:26 PM - Edit history (1)

to a very non-diverse group before a single primary has taken place and not a single vote has been cast ignores the reality in favor of appearances.

The field as it stood six months is irrelevant if it doesn't look anything like that now.

[cry baby]

214. I understand what you're saying.

I hope we will continue to improve, but in all our diversity right now, I trust that we will choose wisely and continue to do better and better in the future.

Nice discussing this with you.

[StarfishSaver]

218. I hope we will

Thank you for this conversation. I appreciate it.

[cry baby]

219. Me too! nt

[TwilightZone]

209. Welcome to every election ever.

I know you're not new to this, so I really don't understand why you're acting as though this is a unique event or that it's unique to Harris.

This happens every cycle. The field winnows down based on polls and based on fundraising or lack thereof every...single...presidential...primary. We've already had half a dozen people drop out before Harris. Were they all forced out, too?

The pollsters and media didn't decide that Harris shouldn't be in the race. She did. She's not the only one who was facing funding/polling difficulties - half a dozen people already quit and there are several more in similar (or worse) situations than Harris.

It's not the Democrats' fault. It's not the DNC's fault. It's not the media's fault. It's not the voters' fault. It's not the pollsters' fault.

In the end, she just couldn't compete with the front-runners. Happens to nearly everyone who ever runs, and many of them similarly don't make it to a primary.

[StarfishSaver]

212. I know this is how it's worked for a couple of decades. It doesn't mean it's right

And when I see race and gender compound it and it results in the undermining of the party's fragile diversity, it's even more problematic for me. And it saddens me to see so many Democrats dismiss it as no big deal or "business as usual" because it's more and bigger than that.

[whistler162]

194. Yup... the problem being

if you don't make your case and run a bad campaign you fall in the polls.

[StarfishSaver]

213. Lots of factors cause candidates to fall in the polls ...

[madville]

215. She shouldn't have assisted in the railroading of Al Franken or tried to paint Joe as a racist

She got what she deserved, which was basically no support here at the end. She was in danger of falling to <1% nationally in the next week or two.

[Mars and Minerva]

225. The attack on Biden was the beginning of the end.

It seemed wrong to want to slap around a fellow Democrat. She should have stuck to the issues.

[loyalsister]

222. Truth!

I blame a willingness to cater to white supremacy and a refusal to honestly discuss the role ALL white people play.

[StarfishSaver]

223. It's very sad to see so many people here completely dismiss that component as if it doesn't exist

and played no role at all.

I expect better of allies. Disappointing.

[loyalsister]

226. Very

White Fragility is a real thing and resistance to acknowledging it dominates progressive thought. It is a concept that made me uncomfortable because I saw so much racism in my own history, and I also think I have a more honest perspective and better relationship with my friends who are not white because of it.

[Jarqui]

229. I don't agree

A day ago or so, three women matched three men qualifying for the December debate.
One of the three men is gay.
One of the women is a top contender who may well win.
Those facts really pleased me - I felt a little proud.

The last 12 years, this party has put forward a black man or a woman as their candidate for president. I'm a little proud of that.

The leading candidate for blacks - in a landslide - is Joe Biden - not Kamala or Cory.

If Barack Obama was running again, this primary would already be over.

There's a lot more right than wrong here - beyond the anomaly of this particular result.

[StarfishSaver]

230. You've missed the point

This has nothing to do with giving black voters a chance to vote for someone who looks like us.

It's about giving ALL voters a chance to vote for someone from a diverse range of candidates. Having a debate slate consisting of white people and one Asian man is a problem. That's not diversity.

And Obama and Hillary having been candidates four, eight and twelve years ago is irrelevant.

[squirecam]

231. Oh

So 4 years ago is irrelevant?

Then we should have a white male candidate. After all, we haven’t had one since 2004. A veritable lifetime ago.....

This is just BS. Harris didn’t lose due to racism or sexism.

Tell me how the multiple white men did in Iowa in 2008......I’ll wait.....

[Jarqui]

234. I think you're missing the point

This is not a cookie cutter process where everything comes out in tidy columns and rows - like a manicured garden.

It is closer to a candidate emerging from the jungle of competition.

It was very diverse at the start when there were 24 or so candidates.

There are flaws. Too much private money. Voter rights being violated, etc.

24+ had a chance, About half of them dropped out because they couldn't deliver on that chance - and survive in the jungle of competition. A hunk of what has decided that are the polls - where voters were asked what they thought as the contest evolved.

Kamala had one of the best starts to a campaign I've ever seen. When she stalled, she took a chance. She took a run at Biden trying to pry his black support. It backfired. Didn't work. She spiraled downward after that. But she had a legitimate chance when she threw her hat into the ring.

Above is some complaining about whiter Iowa going first. I am inclined to agree with them but .. I think historians would back me up on this: Obama winning Iowa was incredibly important to his campaign. Like Biden, in 2008 Hillary had the support of the blacks. But when the blacks saw Obama win Iowa, they jumped on board by the time the primary got to SC. Having Iowa first couldn't have worked out any better for Obama. When he proved he could get white votes in Iowa, a whole bunch of folks jumped on board. The rest is history.

In late June, Kamala was beating Biden in Iowa in one poll
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/ia/iowa_democratic_presidential_caucus-6731.html

There have been a number of reports of infighting in Kamala's campaign. This CNN article covers the details of her campaign's demise
https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/03/politics/kamala-harris-2020-campaign/index.html

There's little in there about the system being broken. She got her shot. Made her pitch. And not that many folks were willing to stick it out with her. That is not a Democratic Party problem. That is a Democratic candidate problem.

Something roughly similar could be said about Cory Booker. He did not get as good a start. Never got as high in the polls. But never caught on and is all but faded out. That is not a Democratic Party problem. That is a Democratic candidate problem.

Same could be said for Castro.

If Deval Patrick had got in earlier, he may well be still on the debate stage.

The biggest gripe might belong to Yang who has been left out of too many media reports.

The debate stage is not an unreasonable (although not perfect) scorecard on how the candidates have done. Many races, sexes, sexual orientation, religion, etc have been represented. And the chips have fallen largely according to their campaign and the candidate - driven heavily by people pseudo voting in the polls and with their wallets.

So no, I still do not agree with the top post. And I do not think I'm missing the point.

[StarfishSaver]

235. I'm not missing the point at all

Saying "it was diverse when it started" doesn't address the problem. A system set up that makes it more difficult for minorities to get past certain hurdles that aren't in place for white men is not fair, even if it allows minorities to make it into the very first pool.

You can argue and try to justify all you want but anyone who cannot see this, who doesn't believe despite all evidence to the contrary that Harris had to deal with a double standard that white men do not have to navigate either doesn't understand the pervasiveness and insidiousness of institutional racism in this country or understands it but doesn't care.

I assume you fall into the former category. But I just don't have the energy to try to engage on it any further. I'll leave it to someone else to try to explain it to you. I'm going to bed.

[Jarqui]

246. Again, I disagree

I do not think it is a perfect system.

But is is a system that allowed a black man to become President for 8 years and a woman to lead the party in 2016. So there may be some misogyny, some discrimination and some bias against gays among the voters and maybe the media but the system has allowed good candidates to prevail through those disadvantages far more in the Democratic party than the GOP or as Independents. That discrimination is not the fault of the Democratic party - it is a fault within the country at large. But the Democratic party had enough equality so that many women, blacks, an Asian and a Latino felt they had some sort of shot to give it a go. And most got some respectable results. They were not jokes. Kamala Harris was a very serious contender until she stepped into trouble with her own actions.

Kamala Harris', Cory Booker's and Julián Castro's, for example, have suffered far more because of their campaign and candidacy. That has much more to do with why they're not on the stage in December than anything else. Hillary Clinton's efforts in 2008 and 2016 suffered from misogyny but that was not restricted within the Democratic party. It was less so in the Democratic party than the country at large. Barack Obama's efforts suffered from discrimination. He has to be that much better to overcome it. But again, that was not the fault of the Democratic party.

Women, LGBTs, non Whites and non Christians have some sort of discrimination disadvantage. But I will not pin that on the Democratic party. I don't buy that for a second. It is a national discrimination issue.

[LAS14]

245. Very well stated. Thanks. nt

[Tarheel_Dem]

238. How is this a problem of the Democratic party? Everyone knew the rules when they jumped in.

The fact that certain campaigns didn't take off as expected is not a reason to blame the refs now.

[Garrett78]

240. Agreed.

One fix that should have happened long ago is changing which states go first. Starting with 2 states that don't remotely reflect our electorate is asinine.

To all of those "colorblind" and "gender-blind" people on DU who sound like Republicans by claiming that race and gender don't matter, wake the fuck up. First of all, read up on "colorblind racism." Secondly, consider the diversity of our electorate and the fact that studies make clear that women and POC in public office do a much better job, on average, of representing women and POC.

I just read a post on DU in which someone used the term "race card." WTF? Is this Republican Underground?

[Jose Garcia]

247. It looks like Tulsi will be in for a while

[NewJeffCT]

248. How close is Booker to qualifying?

i know Castro seems to be a longshot?

[AncientGeezer]

254. It's kind of how it works....Polls drive funding...it has squat to do with the DNC

Sen. Harris didn't poll well and couldn't raise money...
I don't think she got more than 7% Here....my preference isn't doing well here... or nationally for that matter... but she hasn't decided to suspend yet.

Senator Harris made that decision...not a problem for the DNC to fix.

[Eric J in MN]

260. Last time, there was one woman in the debates.

This time there have been six women in the debates.

We’re moving in the right direction and there isn’t a crisis.