Harris will never get my support and honestly anyone who supported Hillary Clinton won't either. The only thing that brings me back into the fold for the Democratic party following the absolute disaster and myopic favoritism in 2016 is Bernie or one of his acolytes.
2
Anyone seriously considering Senator Harris as an acceptable and viable Democratic candidate for President should take the time to read about her tenure as California's Attorney-General on Wikipedia. It appears that Senator Harris is not so liberal as she might want us to believe, except when pressured to be so. Her performance, as detailed here, should, at the very least, be examined carefully in weighing her candidacy.
2
Why does the Times simplify her identity? Her mom was Tamil. That is complex and interesting. Can we not walk and chew gum?
1
I am concerned that there will be too many candidates in the Democratic primary and the most effective candidate will not secure the nomination. We have witnessed this consequence in the Republican primary. The Democrats need a nominee who will move to the center in order to win the election.
3
I have voted for Kamala Harris consistently and I am impressed by her and will campaign for her....I adore this woman and hope she will become our first elected female President (following interim President Nancy Pelosi after the fall of the Trump/Putin Admin)...I think she is just what we need to lead our country and to restore our economy, our self esteem, and our international relationships. I remain hopeful....please DNC no more Corporate Democrats being forced down out throats....we need a true Progressive who can make the Green New Deal our reality. Please!
1
Why "black"
Why not mixed ethnicity, Jamaican father, Tamil Indian mother, American citizen following how many American customs that give her American ethnicity?
She does not look black to me, at least in photographs, and there are researchers, one at NYU whose name I do not remember, who distinguish three ethnicities in the population seen by the USCB as black/African American.
Ethnicity 1 - African American using line of descent back to a slave as a critical element.
Ethnicity 2 - Caribbean American
Ethnicity 3 - Nigerian, Somali, etc American following practice for other groups such as Italian American, Swedish American.
If Kamala Harris goes on the road changing her identity from stop to stop she will lose my support quickly. For that matter, what do we know about the lines of descent of her mother and father?
Lauretta Charlton, new Editor of Race/Related, had best get to work and talk with scholars like Dorothy Roberts, Thomas Chatterton Williams, Kenneth Prewitt, Adolph Reed, and Adrian Piper to learn that there are no genetically distinct races that can be tagged for voter convenience.
Who will be the first Times interviewer to put the question to Kamala Harris. What is your haplotype and haplotype subgroup? What are you anyway?
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
Citizen US SE
1
Kamala Harris (and the wider ilk) is to Democrats as squirrels are to dogs.
The bar to nomination has fallen so far: Sanders, Trump, even Hillary. Surely with 300 million citizens, we can all do better than fawn over an interest group-vetted candidate who has ZERO executive experience.
Have we forgotten the POTUS’s main job? It isn’t building hotels, serving as a tough prosecutor, or advocating for Socialism.
HRC was at least prepared if she wasn’t more offensive than Orange Man.
6
She can’t be a bridge between the 40’s and 70 year olds running because Gillibrand says she is a youthful mom at 52 when most of the people I know were youthful Grandma’s at 52. Youthful mom’s are 22 not 52. Having passed through all those ages I would say that the 40’s and 50’s are the same age.
2
Kamala Harris first run for D.A. of San Francisco was against Terry Hallinan and lost. She then won in a rematch. Hallinan lost to Harvey Milk in 1977. She had the support of Willie Brown who was the former Speaker of the California Assembly and went on to become the Mayor of San Francisco. She was well qualified when she ran for the U.S. Senate... and like Obama proved he could become President, I think she can too. Democrates need to replace the old guard and this would be a start.
1
No, please. Denied evidence tampering. Left people in jail to respect the system, even when the system went wrong, defended the death penalty as being good for those on death row(!). She' not all bad. But why?
4
Year of the woman baby! Lovin' it. I have more choices. God Bless America!
@JenB what does this even mean?
5
Unless Democrats are going to become very generous with their money, the over two dozen hopefuls who are running will have to get by on small portions of the donated funds. Then they will fight it out and dig up dirt on each other. The battle will be entertaining. Which Democrat will provide change we can believe in and make America great again?
2
To bad she let all the bankers run wild in California during the banking meltdown.
4
So far, big “meh” on all of these candidates. Male and female.
I was very interested in Beto O’Rourke until he filmed his teeth being cleaned. That made me wonder.
6
Should a voter support candidate Harris because she is a Woman with Black and Native-American roots? In my opinion, these should not be deemed relevant qualitifactions. Among the declared canditates to date, I believe a strong winning ticket would be Kirsten Gillibran and Julian Castro.
Once we get done slicing and splicing individuals into more granular ethnic, gender, and religious groups we will be forced to reckon with a great unthinkable: the rights and responsibilities of individual citizens.
The beauty of our nation is that it was founded on principles of human dignity. Those protections are necessarily individual in both their endowment and expectation.
It is ironic that this grasp for Progressive power at the voting booth leads back to the beginning.
It will be amusing watching it unravel and seeing how transgenders elbowed in on the Women’s Day marches and now slip into women’s colleges and sports teams is a great bit of evidence for where this is heading.
4
Like many others, I was impressed by the articulate Ms. Harris. But the Times op-ed of January 17 by Lara Bazelon has forced me to reconsider. It's a frank, biting assessment of Harris's track record before coming to national prominence. It suggests a narrow, regressive, reactionary mindset – the very last thing Democrats or the country needs in the wake of Donald Trump.
If the portrayal is accurate, it would seriously question her suitability to carry the Democratic banner in the 2020 presidential election. And so far I have not seen a rebuttal from Ms. Harris or her camp.
3
I'm from the Bay Area, California. I too graduated from UC Hastings. Yet I find myself wondering who is Kamala Harris. I do not recall ever hearing anything from Kamala Harris concerning her thoughts on what America should be. Sure, she's great at getting convictions as a prosecutor, but what is her view on issues concerning China, Taiwan, the Middle East, and Russia? What is her solution for saving Earth's inhabitants from the effects of global warming? What is her solution for greater income equality in the United States?
6
She might need to link her message to the economy as well to sway the industrial heartland.
This male vs female candidate thing is already getting tedious enough. It will wear even thinner by 2020. Why don't we simply look for the best, most qualified person (and the one with the least baggage).Maybe that's too much to ask?
5
@Mark Shyres
It is, in fact, blasphemous: a violation of Liberal dogma.
4
Inslee was on TV talking about his announcement of forming a committee back the day after Elizabeth Warren said she would.
Not understanding why he isn't in the "Running" group.
The presidential candidates seem diverse compared to previous presidential candidates only because most presidential candidates are lumped into the catchall "Non-Hispanic White"category as if they have no ethnic ancestry. For example, a presidential candidate who parents spoke Italian and Gaelic or German and Greek would count contributing to diversity while candidate who parent both who Spanish would.
1
@William Case
I thought that judging a person by their skin color was known as PROFILING.
2
Much as I want Trump out, I think I'm going to just vote for whatever Democratic candidate announces a run after Nov. 2019. 2 years is too long to campaign. Enough already.
1
I don't know enough about Ms. Harris to have a real opinion on her qualifications but I say, "Give her a chance to prove her case." Dyed-in-the-wool candidates have proven nothing that they can beat Trump. Let's hear her case and assess her merits before dismissing her as another "also dreaming" candidate. A "qualified and honest" woman (unlike Hillary) who can beat Trump is more than welcome.
1
I was so hoping that she would wait. It feels as if we’ve had so many early candidates for high office who have not taken the time to learn the job of governing because they feel the call of the historical moment, or because the nation is in danger, or worse, because they are running AGAINST government, as if any 2 year old or corporate big shot can actually run a complicated ship of state.
I love Senator Harris; I’m a lifelong Californian (albeit in exile) and I think she has amazing promise. I just wish she would slow down a bit, get some more experience in actual governance, establish the network of (hopefully) bi-partisan relationships and friendships that can facilitate working the Hill.
She hasn’t even finished an entire term in the Senate yet! Not fair to those of us who voted to give her the chance to serve all Californians in the Senate. That, running for the Oval at the first possible moment, is truly not a good look, terrible optics.
2
Senator Harris's campaign slogan, "Kamala Harris for the People," may qualify as the most insipid in the history of politics, dating back to Aristotle.
4
As a proud San Franciscan, i say let Harris run this country with Gavin Newsom, whom also hails from The City, as Governor of our great state and you will see unprecedented attention on climate change, help for the poor and forgotten including medical insurance, true rebuilding of blue collar America, a SANE immigration plan, and a renewal of our relationship with our allies. And respect for the other party. The country will be back again.
9
@Frank
Frank, have you taken a good look at San Francisco since becoming a Leftist stronghold? Homeless encampments and trash lining the city streets where only the wealthy can afford housing in decent neighborhoods. Sanctuary city, indeed! No thank you!
No thank you.
10
@Frank
The Liberal ideal: San Francisco writ large.
Cool restaurants. Cost-prohibitive condo prices. Neat software companies primting money. And unspeakable poverty.
Try not to trip over a homeless drug addict or get spat on when you navigate a SF sidewalk.
But that’s not an issue when driving your Porsche down to Sand Hill Road.
6
There's one critical question to answer: Will this candidate win back the Obama voters that defected to Trump in 2016? If the answer to that question is no, then the answers to any other questions are of no consequence.
8
@Abraham
As reported in this paper, one characteristic above all others characterized the voters who switched from Obama to Trump. They were remarkably susceptible to fake news. What in the world are we to do with that?
Abraham wrote:
"There's one critical question to answer: Will this candidate win back the Obama voters that defected to Trump in 2016? If the answer to that question is no, then the answers to any other questions are of no consequence."
A major difference between her and Obama.
He became famous because he opposed the invasion of Iraq and there was a videotape of his saying so. This differentiated him from Hillary Clinton and significantly helped him to get the nomination.
Harris hasn't demonstrated any similar position that went against the tide.
9
@Steve
Yes, I don’t think people remember that it was the positions of those two on the Iraq War that resulted in people supporting Obama. If not for that, Clinton would have won the nomination.
1
God Bless. I especially like her tax plan. In fact her tax plan is 90,000,000 times better than the GOP plan. That's how many people HER plan will actually help compared to what the GOP plan DID to America's middle class
4
I find it interesting that a lot of you commenters question Sen. Harris's experience. Bring her on, I say. She is smarter x 100 than the "Carnival Barker" in the White House. And trust me, she will not allow him to chase her around the debate stage like prey. The Repubs want Biden to run. Let's not hand them another victory, please. Time for the next generation.
11
This piece is an eye-opener. Until she publicly addresses the wrongdoing, she is just another hypocrite.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/17/opinion/kamala-harris-criminal-justice.html
In fairness, I can excuse her relationship with slick Willy. Most know that it was a relationship based on gaining political favors and donors. Many men do questionable thigns to advance their political carreers it and I don't think she should be scrutinized. But also in fairness, her pursuit of the highest office in the country should be scrutinized in every angle and due diligence performed, as was her questioning of Brett Kavanaugh.
7
the criticisms of her background as a prosecutor raised in The Times Op-ed brings to mind something that was widely predicted when women got the vote.
At that time many predicted that as women would never vote to send their sons off to war, there was little chance the U.S. would ever go to war again.
It just goes to show that when it comes to politics and important decisions, for all the shouting about how different women are from men, in a final analysis women politicians aren't very different from their male counterparts.
4
Harris' problem is that she is not more qualified than a woman of color who is not running, and who will be the first female president of the United States. Who has been a governor and actually run a state, and the most effective United States ambassador to the UN since Jean Kirkpatrick. Gov. Nikki Haley. Let Harris finish her Senate term, then try to govern California or at least San Francisco for eight years, and fix its homeless problem. Then, she'll be ready.
8
@Observer of the Zeitgeist
Indeed, Nikki Haley would get my vote. Kamala Harris, never.
3
as a moderate liberal, she scares me to death.
5
Khamala Harris and her attacks on SCOTUS and other judicial picks over their religious beliefs will be an issue. It shows she is ready to say that men are guilty without the presumption of innocence based on non credible accusations.
I am not a Christian but a lot of the country are. You need to get the Christians to vote for you as much as any other demographic.
2
As a constituent, Ms Harris is one of the few people i have wholeheartedly voted for. She has the experience and the determination to be a great President. She also has great charisma and will unite the disparate regions of the U.S., just as JFK did. And this in spite of Republican obstructionism. And because of Trump, we can expect that in the next election women will no longer be fooled by Republican propaganda.
For the People: notice that the Party of Lincoln is now firmly Democratic as Republicans now represent corporate monopolists and white nationalists almost exclusively. Hopefully we will see a reversal of Citizens vs United and a fairer election process, universal healthcare through single payer, tax reform with budgeting that eliminates structural deficits, and most importantly, because this has yet to be done by Republicans or Democrats, a serious effort to combat climate change--that is, a U.S. leadership role which is urgently needed.
5
A California dem does not help the party. We will vote Democratic either way. We need a candidate who can help us win swing states.
7
Please let's all have the good sense to not make this into a purity test, of whether or not Harris or any of the other candidates is progressive enough. All of the Democratic candidates, with the exception of outliers like Bloomberg, agree on the vast majority of things. E.g., good and affordable health care for all; infrastructure investment and infrastructure jobs; protecting women's rights; fixing institutional racism; ethical government; voting rights.
6
I am a lifelong liberal Democrat who voted for Ms. Harris for senator, but if she wins the 2020 Democratic nomination for president, I will vote for the Republican nominee even if it is Donald Trump. In my opinion, Ms. Harris has no accomplishments during her more than two years as a senator, and as a number of recent articles have indicated, her record as California attorney general is spotted with decisions that call into question her judgment. I have been following her activities during the last two years and it is readily apparent that she began running for president the day she was sworn in as a senator. In this dire time, when many of the pillars of our democracy are under assault, America needs a proven leader whose accomplishments far out weigh her or his ambition.
19
@Mathman314
She began running for President long before she was sworn in as senator. Every move she makes and every word out of her mouth is calculated. She won’t get my vote.
14
Donald Trump has no political experience whatsoever. Ms. Harris has been working as a civil servant for most of her adult life.
3
Note that Ms. Harris doesn't have to bother with an "exploratory committee," and for good reason. She can afford to announce her run because she is 100 percent supported by her party's leadership.
The DNC, as well as the Democrats' wealthiest donors, had already decided back in 2017 that Harris was going to run.
Another annointed candidate, after what we went through with Clinton? - You betcha.
https://observer.com/2017/07/donors-george-soros-steve-mnuchin-kamala-harris/
https://pagesix.com/2017/07/15/kamala-harris-meets-with-democratic-elite-in-hamptons/?utm_campaign=SocialFlow&utm_source=P6Twitter&utm_medium=SocialFlow
9
The Attorney General in each state is responsible for enforcing consumer protection laws. I have not seen anything regarding Harris’ accomplishments in that area as the California AG. She hasn’t even claimed any such accomplishments, as far as I’m aware. Labor and consumer protection will be important issues to working class people in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania.
So what will she bring to the race that will appeal to those voters? Please don’t tell me that she’s “intelligent, articulate, and knowledgeable” or “smart as a whip.” These voters are looking for a substantive record, not fluffy rhetoric.
13
Biden/Beto?
We are all searching for the magical alchemical combination. This one offers age and youth, wisdom and compassion, experience and fervor, and all without California or New York which are probably toxic to a national ticket. Both are working class populists. The Anita Hill hearings are very old news and hopefully Democrats would not devour their own on that issue.
I would love to hear other combinations that NYT readers think are winning.
4
Kamala Harris is an excellent presidential candidate. Experienced, eloquent speaker, never shy of confrontation.
A genuine biracial woman is ready to tackle donald trump for what he is worth.
Trump is slowly losing his own support from his base for his self serving waysof dealing with crisis which he caused in the first place.
8
One of the reasons that Trump won is that he had no political legislative or governing record. Every prospective Democratic presidential hopeful does, and will be criticized for their shortcomings and either for lack of experience or too much. With so many running, the danger is that there will be disputes about whether the party needs a "liberal," "a progressive," or a "centrist.," with no consensus , and one or other sector disaffected. Unless Trump is impeached or resigns, he may be re-elected.
5
Extremely disappointed she went into the typical Democratic defensive crouch, of let's wait for the Mueller report, instead of supporting impeachment right now.
2
@ Ken,
We don’t know what Mueller has and until then, what are we impeaching him for?
You can’t impeach someone because you don’t like him...that’s not the process.
4
@Ken calvey
So you're disappointed that she's smart, and did the right thing? Democrats are just absolutely incapable of getting out of their own way. This is why Trump will get reelected.
4
What? That’s not a defensive crouch. That’s common sense. As much as I hate him, he was elected after all.
3
I have never understood the desire of Senators or Congressmen to run for President. If you are in Washington, you are already one of the 535 most powerful people in the U.S. Use your seat as a vehicle to draft your legislative ideas into action!
Orrin Hatch served in the Senate for almost 50 years, or nearly 20% of our nation's history. His power and influence should have been unrivaled. Yet I cannot think of any major national proposal he successfully brought forth. He must have served his state well to keep getting re-elected, and that may have been enough.
For those with national visions, however, consider Ocasio-Cortez. She was just elected and she is everywhere, and she will NOT be ignored. Her proposals may fall short or be unwinnable, but she is moving the conversation in Her direction. Her youth and enthusiasm are infectious. She may never rival Pelosi or McConnell in power, but I bet she will be more influential on policy direction than any of the candidates who have announced their candidacy so far.
12
@Lambros Balatsias
And Bernie was the influential one who made AOC and some of the others possible. I kinda doubt that talking single-payer healthcare would have been normalized, with so many jumping on the bandwagon, if not for his candidacy.
12
@ Lambros Balatsias agree with you completely. The mistake that Bernie Sanders and Ms Ocasio-Cortez make is that they call themselves socialists. That expressionnhas a negative connotation to those who remember the world before 1989. In Germany we have the Social Democrats, a more than ca. 150 yearvoldvpartycold whose thinking is along the same lines. They are socially oriented democrat who advocate people friendly rule.
4
aoc is completely clueless and staunch anti-democracy. wants to turn the USA socialist. how well has that worked out in Europe? to support her goes against everything this country represents.
4
Run lady.... puleeese run!! Trump will chew you up and spit you out just as he did the 17 Republicans in the 2016 primaries. I am sure he is thinking of a brand name for your brand of identity based politics. Remember "crooked Hillary." It. worked. And don't think you will get a pass because you are a female. Trump believes in equal helpings for men and women.
12
@ Steve,
I guess you taxed on Long Island aren’t high enough?
2
I'll have to study Kamala Harris a bit more before I decide what I think, however I have noticed Amy Klobuchar, and see her on the might run list. I think she would make a great president. How about an all woman ticket, maybe Klobuchar and a "to be decided" for VP.
6
an "all woman ticket" sounds quite sexist to me. sounds like you are choosing and voting based on sex. if a.male did that it would be considered reprehensible. why.the double standard?
6
@bored critic I was considering Beto. In the end I don't think he will run, he wants to do other things, including watching his kids grow up first. Amy Klobuchar is very smart, and can verbally stand up to whatever gets thrown her way. If it wasn't for her age and maybe even then, I would say Nancy Pelosi deserves the VP spot in that case.
The comparisons to Obama are really racial & physical. Pres Obama was a 2 term senator. She's a 2 year senator. Which shows you something right there. She's kind of full of herself to run for President. Obama had made a very well received speech at the Dem convention that put him into the national spotlight. He had been in Chicago Politics for a long time. She's was a prosecutor and a controversial one we are finding out. Obama is one of the best public speakers we ever had. I haven't heard her stump speech yet but I doubt it's on that level.... She is shooting for a VP slot, but for me looking at her past, it's troubling.
8
Might want to check the history of Obama's two Senate terms.
10
@Ken calvey*** yes your right .. I stand corrected
2
I’m confused as to how Ms Harris is saying and the NYT is saying she’s an African American when her mother was born in India and her father was born in Jamaica.
Granted I’m not the smartest guy in the world so how is she African American? Last I knew those two countries have nothing to do with Africa. Can someone explain?
Thanks.
7
Most Jamaicans are of African descent, as was her father.
12
@bill elliot--and I'm descended from Adam and eve so what does that make me? there are no rules about how far back we trace and stop our ancestry or what percent it is. look at Warren, shes native American Indian. and we know how much they agree with her.
1
@Max Moose, she's really a multi-ethnic American, but her African blood is most prominent in her appearance.
Maybe Kamala for VP. Sherrod Brown for Pres.!! Middle America sadly won’t vote for a woman. It wasn’t just Hillary.
13
And a fellow graduate of Westmount High in Montreal.
Unbelievable !
1
If Kamala gets to be both an Indian American and an African American, you have to start referring to Obama as the first Black and White President!
12
yes because Obama is irish. tipperrary. we need more boxes to check on the application forms. it will be about 5 pages long.
3
I like Kamala Harris a lot. She is smart and focused on
how to bring the country together and look at the needs
of the American people.
8
The important thing is to win. I don’t think she can. She’s too far from the main stream and not well enough known by the main stream. She needs to do something outrageous to attract the attention of the main stream. See Ocasio-Cortez.
3
Another lawyer with no experience running a city, state, or country.
16
Yet another preamble to the Dems snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. A crowded field, lobbing insults and accusations, big and small, erudite and offensive, each attempting to outmaneuver the other accommodating the issue of the week and the micro-population du jour. The Republicans won’t have to field a candidate until the last Dem is left (bloodied and) standing.
10
Cuomo, where is he?
Governor of NY. Not a small job. If he can govern NYS than he can run this country.
3
@Peter
Have you taken the subway anywhere lately?
3
family connections to mafia. that's why Mario never ran. skeletons.
2
I would vote for her.
6
I will too ....in 12 years.
The worst Democrat is still light years better than the best Republican. Kamala Harris would be phenomenal. The problem that Democrats face in the upcoming presidential contest is a preponderance of viable candidates. From Harris, Booker or Biden to Bloomberg, Castro and Warren, each is eminently qualified for the office. And the nominee will go against the least qualified person in America to hold the highest office in the land — Trump.
10
She is dead in the water. Not even in hindsight will there be any appreciable indication of headway with her campaign. Two adjectives immediately occur to mind in relation to presidential appeal, cultural and authentic, and she shows neither. She shows astonishingly no grasp of how politically tried and true exposure comes only with experience, and she is utterly absent of what Obama brought or could’ve brought in the face of unprecedented obstruction. Wherever she comes from, or whoever her handlers are, they show virtually no concern for what a pivotal moment must mean beyond attracting attention.
14
@Orbis Deo
Cannot agree more. The lack of authenticity is what strikes me first as someone who knew next to nothing about her until pretty recently. There are so many examples where her performative displays/calculations are so obvious but it's too boring to even go into them. As someone who loves Obama, I just find the constant comparisons really facile and superficial! At least, I know I'll be saving money in terms of political contributions in 2020 if she is the candidate.
4
"denigrate her candidacy." Interesting choice of words.
Heaven help our country if we finally do get Donald Trump out of office only to see him replaced with an angry leftist radical like Harris or Warren, committed as they are to making war on the private economic sector.
8
Methinks Kamala is actually running for vice-president.
6
The Democrats have moved so far left they can see Russia from their house. Harris is an embarrassment. She caused all sorts of legal grief for David Daleiden, a citizen journalist. A federal just ruled those infamous videos were not deceptively edited and Planned Parenthood in the past year performed more abortions than ever.
4
Another Democrat who wants to raise taxes of $3 Trillion! Don't these progressives realize that where they are going is Socialism and we know where that leads.
8
Trump and Paul Ryan cut taxes by $1.5 Trillion for the Top .2% and Big Business. Who do you want paying for that gaping hole in the tax $receipts? Folks making $10/hour?
1
I just watched her press conference at Howard University. Goose bumps. Absolute goose bumps. Like the first time I heard Obama.
3
@ Andy,
She gave you goose bumps? Wow, very low bar.
She doesn’t stand a chance...enjoy the shinny new to for now.
Joe Biden is waiting for all these dem socialist that want to tax everyone to the high-heavens to declare.
Then he’ll allow the base to woooh him back.
A socialist has less than zero chance at unseating trump. If the base decides to do their homework, it will be a white male who has the best shot.
This isn’t the election to mess around and see if we can elect our first female.
3
Harris should have used Steven Mnuchin's birthday as the occasion for announcing her ambition to be president. Because Harris refused to prosecute OneWest Bank for thousands of fraudulent home loan foreclosures turned up by her California Attorney General's office, it's CEO, Mnuchin, walked away rich and unchallenged, eventually becoming Trump’s Treasury Secretary and protector of one of Russia's richest oligarchs.
16
Either Biden
or
Beto
Biden/Beto is ideal.
9
@su
Why?
You might as well vote republican.
2
@ Blunt,
I love the infighting already within the democratic base...
Who do you want if not Joe and or Beto?
Because, if the Dems have any chance at taking back the Whitehouse. It will be a moderate candidate.
Or, are they too stupid to trot out a socialist because it sounds good and get trounced in the polls.
Keep in mind, all the swing voters who secretly voted for Trump would rather re-elect him than vote for her.
Don’t lol a gift horse in the mouth...you should thank Joe Biden for his services if he decides to run.
7
Beto O'Rourke 2020! I am hoping he throws his hat in the ring. He is a person who really made me excited about the future of our country.
2
It's time for a woman to be in office. 2 white men running do not give a clear, consice picture of how divided our nation is. Trump, on a daily basis, rips the moral fiber of our Constitution to shreds.
I an not left or right anything. I want the proper people, who do not let Fox news give the play by play instructions, to repair the laws this administration has virtually destroyed.
We need leaders who will not throw "Tantrums" in order to get their way.
Leaders who follow the guidance of it's administration and do what is necessary to get the United States of America back to her strength and never-ending ability to be at her best.
That time is not occurring at this time.
2
@Kristin
Why? Besides his looks I yet have to come across a quality that may appeal to progressive voters who can read and hear.
His policy positions are to the right of most Democrats. He votes with Republicans.
I am curious to know how this fellow whom we hardly know anything about, will excite anyone about the future of the county?
Please people, think a little. Go deeper than the dead skin and try to understand how the world works. Economics, Political Philosophy, Social Welfare, Geopolitics are all difficult matters. Good citizens should try to learn about them. Learn enough so they can ask questions and don’t fall like Reagan, GW Bush and Trump lookalikes.
6
@Kristin
That's what the US needs; another unqualified individual as its president.
4
Keep going democrats. Trump is going to win with these coastal liberals. Repeat after me. Midwest swing counties decide the election. Midwest swing counties decide the election.There is zero chance my parents home county in western Wisconsin or any other moderate Midwest county will vote for such a democrat.
25
@ Brad. Sorry about your parents brad. Perhaps you could educate them?
6
@Anderson O’Mealy Yea my father has his doctorate from Yale, my uncle from Harvard, my grandfather and great uncle were dentists, my other great uncle a lawyer and judge. My great great uncle was on the Minnesota supreme court and great, great great uncle was a dentist also. All in small town western WI. My mother comes from a long line of teachers and educated farmers. Small towns in the midwest have a higher concentration of educated people than any other place in the country and certainly more than Hawaii or Manhattan. And I am a lawyer. Don't think we need any more education. We can spot a shallow condescending politician like Harris a mile away.
10
You are spot on. I could not agree more and I am a liberal progressive female. Did I just see Gillibrand on an MSNBC clip saying "our time has come"? She sounded just like Hillary. Maybe if these women run on something other than being a woman, our party might have a chance.
1
Stay tuned. I think that by 2020 our country will be dying to elect an "educated, knowledgeable, respected, articulate woman", and Kamala Harris is high on my list of those.
10
I am uncertain about another centrist candidate who touts "hope" and "unity" as her message. We saw it before; it didn't work. The article and commentators here also cite San Francisco's liberalism as another indication of the Senator's left-leaning politics. But San Francisco is a good indication of what's wrong with the modern Democratic Party: It's a city socially liberal policies, yes, but also of extreme income inequality, one where homelessness has reached levels even the UN has deemed a crisis, and where schools are segregated by race and wealth. Kamala Harris' regressive position on criminal justice, paired with the Democrat's right-leaning stance on economic redistribution, does not make me at all confident that she will deliver what's needed in America or that she will inspire the voters that Clinton was unable to sway.
19
Really! The New York Times could do a lot better than "pragmatic" vs "leftist" Democrats. Harris is at the same time trying to call herself a "progressive" which she is NOT.
1
So many opportunists stepping forward, with stars in their eyes and fire in their belly, but, regrettably, with no qualifications whatsoever to serve as President of the United States and few ideas that have any chance of becoming the law of the land.
16
Oh Lordy. A highly intelligent, politically established, competent, compassionate woman. Reversal of Fortune? However, will America ever get over whiplash? Very Nicely, Thank You...........
1
My question - can Ms Harris win white working class votes in MI, OH, PA, WI and FL?
16
I'm sure her husband can help her with that. Hopefully the people in those states have woken up and realize that they deserve better.
1
No
6
Who is the Che Guevara of Westchester, the Lenin of the Bronx, the JLO of Washington going to back? This is what the people want & need to know. AOC is our future.
2
In 2016 Hillary Clinton made history as the first woman presidential candidate nominated by a major political party, and she secured nearly 3 million more votes than Donald Trump in the general election, but she still lost her bid for the White House. That was a shame, many third world countries brag about electing a woman prime minister or president but not America the beacon of democracy. In 2020 we will have as many as five women, including Gillibrand, Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, Tulsi Gabbard, a 37-year old lawmaker from Hawaii and one of the first two female combat veterans ever to serve in Congress, California Sen. Kamala Harris, the first South Asian-American and second African-American woman elected to the upper chamber and more. They all have credentials far superior to our current president, America is ready for a female president. I hope one of them will win.
4
Kamal’s Harris is a formidable class act. She is bright, eloquent and tough. Those who dismiss her do it at their own peril.
8
Those of us outside dismiss her as a lightweight.
8
@MM
Who are you? To judge her as a lightweight your comment has to have a bit more heft. It doesn’t so far.
3
Harris is one of the Senators for my state. I voted for her, as my voice in the Senate. But during the shutdown she has been on her book tour, GMA and will now hit the road as a candidate. How about working in Washington DC, trying to resolve the shutdown? Not happy that she is no longer representing me or California. Shortsighted in her part. California will not forget this disregard for us.
24
I wouldn't vote for her, because her colleges aren't good enough. I know that sounds bad, but that's how I feel. I tend to judge people by SAT/GRE/LSAT scores. I think it would be unwise for the Dems to pick a candidate who isn't more or less Ivy League (or equivalent). I didn't see Obama as a black candidate. I saw him as an Ivy grad. O'Rourke (Columbia), Bloomberg (Hopkins), and Sanders (Chicago) all have that elite school stamp of approval. Perhaps it shouldn't matter, but it does. If the Dems want to defeat Trump, they need to pick a candidate with a jaw-dropping academic pedigree. I really think color and gender matter less that school name. and, all things considered, that's not a bad thing. Here, in the Northeast, there's less prejudice about race and gender than there is about where you went to college.
5
@richguy - disagree 100%. I don’t care for Kamala Harris, but Hastings doesn’t admit dummies. What we need are candidates who went to excellent Midwest state schools like Purdue, Indiana, Illinois, Minnesota that create a connection to more voters, not spoiled elite Ivy League.
8
@richguy
As a double-ivy grad (Yale, Columbia), let me tell you that you’re extremely misguided here. You can find brilliant, hard-working students at every university (and conversely, every school has its duds).
There are a lot of reasons why a kid might not go to an Ivy League school. Judge politicians on their records, and nothing else.
11
@richguy May I present George W. Bush, Yale graduate?
Yale is most definitely an Ivy. GWB is most definitely not a brain trust. He was a legacy and a not very bright one, at that.
1
Somebody famous - I think Churchill - said (and I paraphrase) that anyone who was young and not a socialist has no heart and anyone old who was not a conservative has no brain. Well, I am old now, relatively speaking, and I am still the same (Canadian) socialist that I was at 20 - perhaps more so as my years of observing injustice have passed. (I mention Canadian because that makes me extreme by American standards.)
Where I have changed, however, is my pragmatism. I have learned the impracticality of supporting candidates where I and 4 others agree that he or she is perfect representative for our points of view. While the purity of our votes is undoubted - at least by me - we also watch while someone less suitable wins the race and changes the future of society. In some awful cases that someone is a "Trump" whose win while unimaginable becomes all too real.
What I have learned is that there is value in attending rallies with fellow travellers - exchanging ideas and reinforcing our mutual beliefs. But when the election takes place if my preferred candidate is not the "chosen one" supporting the candidate who will do the least damage has greater value than the purity of thought that leads to a truly awful candidate winning the race.
I don't know if Kamala Harris is that flawed voice. However, I would not care if she was a bit right wing as a prosecutor if she could eclipse the complete evil of Trump.
8
In reply to Michael Greason, Toronto
Churchill’s actual words were “ Any man who is not a socialist before the age of forty, has no heart. Any man who is not a capitalist after the age of forty, has no head”.
3
Senator Harris will be a formidable candidate, as are Senators Gillibrand and Warren. If Jeff Merkley of Oregon gets in, we will have four extremely articulate and accomplished progressives running for the Democratic nomination. Then there's Gov. John Hickenlooper, Gov. Steve Bullock, and former VP Joe Biden. That's a strong field from which to choose.f
Best of all, any of these candidates would mount a strong challenge to He Who Shall Not Be Named.
5
Excellent news. The current stable of announced candidates ensures a Republican win in 2020.
12
Democrats are going to repeat the mistake of the GOP in 2015/2016 by front loading too many mediocre career politicians on the bus, perhaps ending up with their own Trump who'll be just as disastrous for America while giving the party a black eye.
7
It is the qualities of leadership that recommend a candidate.
Of those who have, so far, declared, Kamala Harris leads.
Kamala Harris has the background in terms of education, work experience, personality, character and physical strenghth. She is very engaging and has demonstrated a competency for public political life.The other announced candidates pale in comparison.
This is my immediate reaction. It may change, but she I am well-impressed with her.
While some of us say a woman should not run, that the country is not ready for a woman president, I say, it depends on the individual, whether man or woman.
5
She does NOT have my vote and her notable absence as a co-sponsor of the S.720 - Israel Anti-Boycott Act
115th Congress (2017-2018) is the first reason though there are others.
If Biden or Bloomberg run either gets my vote immediately. Between the two I'll take Biden though I really do like Mike Bloomberg. The rest of the field is fluff.
8
Senator Harris appears to have many impressive qualifications, as do several other candidates. But for Democrats the question is whether she has the one that counts - electability. The Democrats need to come to terms with one unfortunate fact: It does not matter whether the Democratic nominee is the one who best represents a Progressive agenda, is the most intelligent, or represents a new age for being the first [fill-in-the-blank] candidate. It only matters that they are electable under the current Electoral College system that includes that large, wide swath of voters between the bubbles of a few large cities on the East and West Coasts. Donald Trump is the only exhibit necessary to prove that rather distressing truism. He is not intelligent, fair or honest, but he still won. The method of voting will not change between now and November 2020, so complaints about the electoral system are useless. Democrats should do everything possible to reinforce the rights of individuals to register to vote and increase participation by those who are registered to vote. But, if the candidate on the ballot isn't enticing, it will not matter. Regrettably, it is time the Democrats play to win the race, not the contest of who has the most qualified candidate.
7
If you fell for Obama you'll love Harris.
"“Let’s do this together: For ourselves, for our children, for our country,”
For sheer vacuity, this beats "hope and change" by a mile. What is "this" ? Read into it what you want, feel good and then hope and pray.
It has been obvious for a while that Harris' candidacy was being floated by friends in the media. On the Identity Scale her score is out of sight: not one but two ethnic minority statuses plus femalehood! In case anyone might miss it, the U.K. Guardian (U.S.) spelled it out in the headline to an article on Harris last fall.
But what about that incidental thing called "policy"? What has Harris accomplished in her long career in the Senate? There was a big splash two years ago about providing sanitary napkins to female prisoners in federal prison and then, of course, she ripped into Kavanaugh demonstrating her prosecutorial badger-the-witness skills. But where is Kamala Harris when it comes to health care, social security, minimum wage, student debt, wealth disparity and last but not least the impending environmental catastrophe?
Republicans may be deplorable but Centrist Corporate Democrats have reduced politics to the level of cereal ads.
23
Announcing on Dr.King’s Day, to me, is a self-serving grab for the spotlight and takes attention away from honoring him. Fine to tap into the historical legacy, but why not wait a few days? “In this week of celebrating Dr. King’s legacy and the 10th anniversary of President Obama’s first inauguration, I announce....”. Snap!
21
Count me a fan.
I think the first thing to do is make it clear how to pronounce your first name!
3
I know nothing of Harris other than she has a fairly lukewarm track record in prosecution of liberal defendants and she's attractive like Obama said. We need a serious all hands on deck debate about who will be the candidate to defeat the middle American con man and Russian stooge
3
If Kamala can stay away from identity politics, I believe she can win. She is smart, articulate, charismatic, tough, honest, experienced, the list goes on and on. The fact that she is a woman of color is a plus, for sure. But she doesn't need to advertise her gender or ethnicity, it is literally there for all to see.
I think Hillary's ongoing "Our Turn" theme and focus on becoming the first woman president cost her millions of votes of both men and women. You almost never heard Barack Obama focus on his ethnicity. He focused on policy and universal messages, and the people responded at the polls overwhelmingly... Twice.
Using the same strategy, Kamala can win. So far, she appears to be on the right track.
10
@Jeff
You suggest that she “stay away from identity politics”, then proceed to suggest that she being a “woman of color” is “a plus”.
4
Stay away from identity politics??? She’s a black woman who announced on MLK’s birthday. How’s that for co-opting?
6
Good for her. Good for all of them. Let's have a vigorous and reasonably civil debate on the candidates and their policies.
Like Booker, Klobuchar, and Durbin, Harris demonstrated sobriety and veracity at the hearings for the histrionic dishonest unfit Kavanaugh.
Like the others, she was cool, calm, brilliant. Make America Smart Again.
Let's not, however, do irreparable damage to the front runners. Every candidate must know where to draw the line.
After all, how did those dishonest claims of "rigged systems" and "Wall Street Democrats" during the 2016 primary work out?
The 2016 general election was in all likelihood truly stolen in a conspiracy with a foreign adversary, by a man who has truly given Wall Street everything it wanted.
We are two years into the Trump national emergency. We don't have the luxury to indulge in any of that brutal dishonest selfish quixotic junk.
Let's be smart and let's all of us, Democratic candidates and Democratic voters alike, put the well being of the democracy and the nation first.
Thank heavens she's starting in South Carolina.
"Trump carried Iowa by the largest margin of any Republican candidate since Ronald Reagan in 1980."
Iowa and the Midwest have, as far as I'm concerned, altogether abandoned their mythical claim to the moral high ground of the heartland.
No such thing exists now, if it ever did. They'll tell us who they are by what they do.
2
I support Tulsi Gabbard.
4
@Yuri Pelham
Good for you but why? Answering that may be a little more reason to occupy space here.
2
i sure hope beto, bloomberg, howard schultz, tom steywr, or romney run.
4
@Rob C
Why? I see no connection between those than that they are all very wealthy (Beto’s wife but I guess that is ok)
2
Why only men?
1
Kamala Harris calculated her chances of getting Democratic nomination by winning states that are dominated by black and Hispanic votes in the south plus California. That is how Hillary Clinton won the nomination. With the exception of California, none of those southern states would go to democrats in the general election. Her first visit to South Carolina is wrong, which says she is already asking for vote based on color. She has to campaign based on what she has accomplished and her policies for the nation.
4
@Kodali
Says who? Why?
There are gazillion strategies to win elections. Even Trump came up with one that you most likely thought was “wrong.” To everyone’s dismay in the sane parts of the planet, he won!
1
I like her and I think she's got a lot of the qualities needed to win, one of which is being a woman. Being a male president is very 2016. Trump basically trashed the credibility of a man in the presidency for a century at least. Though I know men beg to differ. They're always finding another reason for a (any) woman not to run! Been there done that boys. Sit down and watch.
6
K may not be 'the most' of anything, but there is a softness, a beauty like in her smile, a willingness to help that is captivating. Okay...Best candidate for Vice-Pres. with Julian as Pres. Go team!
3
Now is not the time for such announcements, regradless of gender or party affiliation. Now is the time to reopen government. Everybody needs to get back to DC and do the job they’re currently getting paid to do.
16
Her improprieties as DA make her unelectable.
10
@N
Republicans don't have to mention her record, her gender or her racial status. They need only ask whether the voters want the US to become California and then talk about sanctuary cities, open borders and illegal aliens overwhelming schools, hospitals and the safety nets while not paying a dime in taxes. The Republican nominee would win in a landslide.
1
Unfortunately- another reason Mr Trump might win reelection- anybody else out there?
13
@Guido
What on earth do you mean?
2
Kamala Harris needs to answer questions about her refusal to address criminal misconduct in the death investigation of my 10 year old son by the first Women Sheriff in the State of California , Sheriff Laurie Smith. Harris was Attorney General when the investigation opened in 2014. Take a moment and read what California has been willing to do for politics and the protection they offer each other, especially women in power. Her policy is justice for some but not my son who suffered in life from deputy involved domestic violence while the system in California watched - "Truth. Justice. Decency. Equality. Freedom. Democracy. Her policy has seemed to change since she was Attorney General of California not too long ago . .Justice for some isn't that correct Ms Harris justice4joshua.com
12
i am so sorry for your loss.
1
I don’t think the Obama magic - running as first term senator - will work for her. She, like DJT-lite Gillibrand, has too much baggage to enthuse Dems. More changes in positions and outright lies will emerge.
8
@Martin. You are too caught up in primary politics and losing sight of the larger picture, which is the general election. And there, it's the electoral college that counts. While the Democratic party is increasingly a party of diversity, it is a bit unfair to place the burden of beating trump onto this or that ethnic minority (or "identity group" if you will). Particularly with groups that don't have a long-standing track record of getting out and voting. This will be a critical election, so we can't be that Democratic party that Will Rogers spoke of: "I'm not a member of any organized political group. I'm a Democrat." That said, someone will emerge, just as trump did from the large field of candidates in 2016 and then we will have an "Of course" moment but this can't be focus-grouped into existence.
Kamala Harris was one of those who ousted my senator. Al Franken spoke truth to power and was an effective voice for the people.
Why am I not surprised that the two who were most vocal about Franken's resignation are now running for president? In retrospect, it seems that Gillibrand and Harris prioritized their personal ambitions over both the common good and the rules of responsible governance.
I don't have patience for ambition over nation. Shame on them. They will never get my vote.
30
@Katiek
Nobody "ousted" Franken. Sure, Harris, Gillibrand & others put pressure on him to resign. But at he end of the day, he CHOSE to resign, and that decision is all on him.
3
I would vote for Harris or Booker enthusiastically but they have to follow a daunting predecessor in Obama, not because of their skin color but because Obama faced intense criticism for his brief resume as a senator. I believe either of them would be formidable on a ticket with Biden. That would be a broad representation of the party and position either of them well to succeed Biden.
4
No one is perfect and everyone makes mistakes, including the mistakes of not realising they've made a mistake. I'm referring to the mistakes made by Kamala Harris as written by another op-ed writer referenced here. In an evidence based world, all one can do is weigh the good things a person has done against the mistakes they've made. Or take a risk on the potential "good" things a person can do (from the Republican party's perspective, this is Trump - SCOTUS and tax cuts).
I am pleased to announce that I will NOT be running for president. Since you already are overwhelmed with too many Democrats to choose from (and since my name recognition is zero), I do this as a public service.
You're welcome.
24
In my honest opinion, I believe that America is not ready for her, or possibly another female presidential candidate to run in 2020. There are republicans Dems NEED to flip and they won’t flip for Hilaryesque candidates, let alone ethnic women that Republicans fear and do not understand. I, as a liberal democrat, wish this was the case and that a progressive change can come to the US. But so far, our best bet to avoid a Trump re-election is Beto. A white male Texan with a progressive agenda that showed promise to true red blooded Texans (Americans the Democrats could not imagine were possible to flip). I don’t want to scare anyone away with this opinion, but the Dems need someone to bridge a gap between this political divide before a true change can come and we can elect a diverse representative. We’ve done incredibly in the midterms but not well enough to expect Republicans to flip for someone they didn’t want. Beto has a Kennedyesque effect that guarantees republican female vote, guarantees the support of republicans that want health reform and doesn’t scare away the republicans that are too afraid of diverse change. Anyway - leave this to debate. But the media’s liberal take is not the truth that’s spread across our country.
8
The election of POTUS is won in the electoral college and specifically 7-8 states. So toss out those who cannot flip back Wi. Iowa, Mi, Pa, and compete in Fl, NC, Oh, Co........I really think the Democrats are fully prepared to nominate someone from Ca, NY or Ma and hand the election to Trump. I've seen this before. Get smart or things will get much worse. I don't live in those battlegrounds but will vote for who can win in those, and toss out my state as a given.
7
@Northcountry. This is it in a nutshell. You nailed it.
2
When you run for president, the press puts you under a microscope. There are things that are not generally know about Ms. Harris. For, example, that she had a long-term affair with Speaker of the California House, Willy Brown, to get to the top.
However, I doubt this would hurt her in the Trump era.
9
Here's what I'm not hearing from anybody. Correct me if I'm wrong. I see no list of must-do items that include: solving the problem climate change and rebuilding those lives ruined in the last decade by hurricanes and fires; a job economy that will address and reduce homelessness; meaningful medical reform to include all; meaningful education reform to include all. These things would take care of our own people, and build a new generation of self-sustaining citizens. This comes first for me.
Instead I'm hearing about the thousands at our gates. I don't want to hear about helping others until I hear that we are helping our own people. I'm hearing about the "Dreamers." Please include in this group the many millions of US children who deserve to become contributing citizens. We are a nation of dreamers. Make sure our children have the opportunities to live their dreams. THEY COME FIRST.
We have a president who wants to spend 5 billion on wall, but not 1 billion to help the poor in New Orleans or California, or the homeless, or the ill or the young.
As they say in airplanes: put on your own oxygen mask before you help with another.
Our oxygen masks are just dangling . . .
11
The more the Democrat's cornucopia of candidtaes fills, the more I hope they realize one of the Republican cadidates they will potentially face during the election campaign will include Nikki Haley, and she'll be one tough opponent.
So, sharpen your knives folks and please plan on bringing a knife, not a spatula, to this emerging knife fight you'll find yourself in. Nikki Haley is to be feared.
12
You are right. Nikki is a formidable candidate should the Republicans dump Trump before 2020. She has great executive credentials as a two term governor of a southern state as well as expertise in international affairs as UN Ambassador and the political savvy to get far away from Trump leaving her post when she did. As an extra plus, she is a minority...and did I mention -- a "likeable" woman? She would be a dream candidate for the Republican party trying to redefine itself. The current Democratic candidates should never underestimate Nikki should she be their potential opponent.
5
@HP
She will make candidates like Gillibrand, Gabbard, Ojeda, and Julian Castro look like teenagers standing in the wings at their first highschool sock-hop waiting for someone to ask them for a dance.
And please don't get me started on Joe Biden. Haley will make him look like the grandpa candidate he is during this push to vote younger, more with it.
I don’t think so Kamala. Your record as California attorney general disqualifies you, and I am an anti Trump independent. Now that we know what a truly incompetent President looks like, how could we consider someone with your atrocious record as an AG? You cannot rewrite your record, only Trump is allowed to do that.
13
I disagree.
I’m open to almost all Dem candidates at this point.
But it’s for her reasonable stands about accountability, and choices about when to be tough or less so, based on cases that I’ve read about so far, that I’m paying attention to her candidacy. I’ve done a little research.
I’ve read nothing so far to dissuade me. Nothing.
But I’m open. Just don’t try to dissuade with “she was too tough” about this, all the time.
1
@Barry
Oh, yes indeed. God forbid an AG actually prosecute some crimes. If the Dems try to cater to the "Free College / Free Healthcare / Abolish ICE/ Ice-cream for Dinner" 'progressives,' they will fail to pick up any independents or Trump voters, and lose again.
4
Another phony political opportunist. Just what we don't need, again, from the Democrats.
18
A cave man's view: She's the best so far.
Warren lectures. Gillebrand (sp?) was nasty to AL Franken -- and Caroline Kennedy before that.
Kamala Harris reminds me of the first president I worked for at 12 in Obama's Mama's hometown: JFK.
A sleeper ascending. Good looking. (That counts, don't kid yourself.) Tough. She laid wood on the Trump dirtbags. Smart.
With pull among blacks and Indians.
(Suspect some good billionaires will step up to be her Joe Kennedy)
I wish her the best. But, as a presidential junkie immersed in TR, FDR and JFK -- and who worked for Jimmy -- let me offer thanks to Bernie Sanders.
IMNHO, he lost 2016, in the New York primary because of AIPAC and the best newspaper in America -- (I suspect because of personal relationships) -- which tilted for Hillary.
Remember, Bernie proposed American aid to ALL The Parties in the Mid East, not just Israel.
And while Hillary and Trump BEGGED for AIPAC's endorsement, promising that Netanyahou would be their first guest in the White House, Sanders SKIPPED their dog and pony show. AND Refused to kiss that ring through our nose.
(KUDOS to the Times this week for publishing that PALESTINE column. If only it could have replaced Safire's drumbeat for the Iraq Invasion 16 years ago)
My favorite ticket: SANDERS AND HARRIS.
The two most progressive senators from the two most progressive places, (Brooklyn and California), to cure this sickness we are suffering from.
7
@frankly 32 Sanders and Harris would be better than good, but it may be that Bernie has missed his moment--at least the moment to be President. Kamala Harris could get the Presidential nomination--she may be wily enough.
1
@frankly 32
"Remember, Bernie proposed American aid to ALL The Parties in the Mid East, not just Israel."
NEWSFLASH - We DO provide aid to all the countries in the Middle East, not just Israel. Egypt is right behind Israel, as the #2 recipient is US foreign aid.
All these Kamalas and Kirstins and Tulsis, and Corys and Joes and Betos, to be followed by a bunch complete unknowns, make you wish that Bernie told everyone he is running, and let's be done with it. Warren can be his VP. Best ticket with a (slim) chance of beating President Trump.
4
I could beat Trump. Anyone can though it won't happen because he will not be running.
But if he wins it will confirm my belief that the USA is irretrievably evil.
1
@John Xavier III
If your slate can only muster a "slim" chance of beating Trump, you need better candidates.
@GMooG
I think you do need better candidates ... any ideas?
1
This whole Democratic cast of potential presidential characters is becoming ridiculous. There will not be enough room for them all on the debate stage. It looks like a floundering party without a cohesive message and a few viable messengers to put it forth. What a colossal waste of our tax dollars paying them to represent our voices in DC while they crisscross the country stepping on each other's feet to amass fundraising money.
I am unemployed and have an open schedule. I am a bilingual woman, mixed race, Harvard educated liberal with a background in international affairs. An extra plus-I live in a purple state and can fund my own grass roots campaign. I think I'll throw my name into the hat.
10
How ironic that this cog-in-the-wheel of mass incarceration should announce on MLK's birthday.
15
Ms. Harris intelligent, driven, and knowledgeable. Her initial message addresses the importance and strength of words reminding us of those basic values that does make America great. The policies will follow, as they should , with the input of experts and those with in-depth subject matter experience. On this very first day, we see the stark contrast between what is and what could be, we see the difference between the jester and the intellectual. We may all be able to rest again knowing our country is in safe hands, in the hands of someone who can tell truths and work for all of America. We will hear America singing again emerging from a dark time.
1
Harris' treatment of black people in California deserves serious scrutiny. Not sure how she can drum up support among such a crucial block when she has thrown so many of them behind bars and destroyed their lives. Also, the trans community will likely never forgive her.
6
@Magicwalnuts
"Not sure how she can drum up support among such a crucial block when she has thrown so many of them behind bars and destroyed their lives."
You don't think that maybe those people she put in jail played some role in the process? Maybe by, say, being convicted of committing crimes? Just wonderin.'
1
I believe Kamala Harris will be the nominee. I think her unabashed playing of the Race Card out of the Gate is practical and effective. Black Folks are 33 to 38 percent of the Democratic electorate. If you can corner 65% that gives you about 20%. In a 15 to 18 person field, that should give her a plurality in the early elections even before say 10% of the white vote getting her to 25 to 30% total. She is dramatically more charismatic than Cory Booker, and she checks the women card as 2ndary attribute. If you’re in Vegas throw a Grand on Kamala before the odds drop.
1
I like Kamala Harris as in I did not like Hilary Clinton. Harris is calm, speaks thoughtfully, intelligently, confidently, respectfully and to the point. Especially impressive was her interrogation of Sessions and Kavanaugh. Ok the Times pointed out a few major things about her past ideas that I do not agree with. So what if she recently became more progressive. She changed her mind for the better IMHO..yet there seems to be a tone of criticism about this. Would we criticize " don the destroyer" if he suddenly changed his mind and opened up the gov't. and reversed other of his adverse decisions and turned off F&F. Even Emerson was criticized for changing his mind. Once I had a Chinese fortune cookie circa 1980 that read "Wise men (people) change their minds when they grow wiser." I believe that is a great quality...to admit one was wrong and given new information, one goes in a better direction. I also like Elizabeth Warren who is not afraid to stand up for & against what she believes . I support candidates for who they are and what they stand for and not because of their gender or race and I hope one day soon there will be no mention of these. I was 100% for Bernie & I believe he would have beat trump if not for Clinton and Wasserman-Sh. He so deserves to be president, but I feel his time has passed. I pray that he will have a special appointment in 2020 with a Democratic president, Cabinet , House and maybe Senate..Then God will surely be blessing us.
4
Review the case of Daniel Larsen.
In 1999, he was sentenced to 28 years to life for possession of a concealed weapon. !0 years later he declared "actually innocent". Harris objected to his release because of a paper work technicality, his lawyer had missed the deadline to file writ of habeas corpus
10
Hollow argument. Prosecutors have their job to do as do defense attorneys. It’s supposed to be an adversarial system.
1
Underestimate Trump’s marginal base at your own peril. Nothing would get them out of their double wides like running against a black woman. No offense to Harris, but we would suffer 4 more years. So I’m betting on Beto as anathema to the Donald. Don’t mess with Texas, Mr. President.
10
Leave it to the dems to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. She is a horrible candidate. If she wins the nomination prepare for four more years of Trump.
12
@Robert Howard She is certainly a better candidate than Biden--too late, Joe!--or Gillibrand, Booker, et al
1
This is so exciting. This group just takes your breath away. How many billions are going to be spent on this election cycle? Good self-marketing opportunity. Everyone has decided to play the Trumpster's game. Wow. Fabulous.
2
Go ahead Dems sign up 45 candidates and let them start a 2 year nobody’s-listening parade around America. And let them all shoot the party in its collective foot.
21
She has my vote and I am going to get to work to see to it that she is on the ticket.
4
Before I consider her candidacy, I would very much like to hear her explanation for her resistance to DNA testing for Kevin Cooper, currently imprisoned on the basis of alleged police and prosecutorial misconduct, during her tenure as California AG.
8
Trump was the most exciting Presidential candidate since Obama. It looks like Harris could be the next one. It’s kind of disappointing because these candidates won because they are attractive television characters not experienced leaders. Obama had the ability and character to grow into the job. But the Republicans were determined to oppose him with recalcitrance. Trump has shown to be unqualified as well as inexperienced, he won’t try to learn the job. His ineptness is epic. Harris may have the ability to grow into the job but she will not unify the country. What we need is a leader for everybody to end this era of partisan divisiveness.
6
I'm sure I'll develop a favorite among the democrats at some point, but let's be frank: whoever emerges as Trump's opposition will have my full support, including the $1,000 that I've set aside as a campaign contribution. There is no democrat that is worse than the very best republican.
10
@yoloswag. So it really doesn’t matter who runs.
@Jackson
Yeah, it matters. The candidate's platform is important. But there is nothing that would sway me to vote for a republican. Even the most disappointing democrat beats the best republican by leaps and bounds. The republican party is an existential threat to humanity.
4
Senator Harris has an excellent path in front of her. She will certainly do well in the delegate hunt in the South and the West.
For the general election, she will certainly win such big electoral states such as New York and California. She certainly will borrow heavily from the Obama playbook and learn from the Clinton mistakes of 2016. That plus a fracturing Trump base and an energized women's vote will help. Finally, the disasters that Trump is bringing the country will energize more people to vote in 2020.
Somewhere in the background I see Shirley Chisholm's smiling face and hear Odetta singing "We Shall Overcome".
3
So many excellent Dem candidates. Senator Harris is from my state. Senator Warren is from the state in which I was born. It will be hard to choose from such a field of champions of the people.
3
@Tatateeta
Yesterday on a plane, i sat next to a guy from Texas; that's where Beto is from!! How will I choose?!
Honestly, do people really pick Presidential candidates based on their nexus to the candidate's state of residence? How moronic. And sad.
1
Why is it that Kamala Harris is qualified but Nancy Pelosi isn't?
3
Would it not be great to see the diversity of elected representatives correspond to the diversity of the people who the represent? Yes.
Is the solution to apportion eligibility to run for office according to the diversity of the general population? Not really. That is not true diversity in a democracy.
True diversity would reflect a voting public that chooses the most qualified from a population of people who have not suffered from systematic injustices. People should be given whatever opportunities to compete that they want and be able to be judged by fair minded people. As a society we have a lot of work to do to learn to judge others fairly. People who appeal to fear and loathing from their audiences should be instantly found repulsive and disgraceful by fair minded people.
1
Let's hope many of the Democratic candidates throwing their hats into the presidential ring get plenty of media coverage. Let's meet them all and really get to know them.
And every second of media coverage of these Democratic candidates will drive Trump nuts because it means airtime that is not being allotted to him.
And
Dear Media,
Please do not simply play horserace with all the Democratic candidates running in 2020. Most of all let us know how they were raised (sure turned out to be important in understanding Trump's bad behavior), and let them expound on the problems needing to be addressed and the policies and practices to take this country forward, not backward.
The backbone of democracy is a strong middle class. Only the Democrats will fight to bring the middle class back.
1
I'm afraid I don't share my fellow Californians' enthusiasm for Harris, though I did vote for her in her Senate bid (didn't have much choice there). This seems, more than anything else, like a vanity project for a very ambitious person who is getting out way ahead of her skis. Sure, she is fine-tuning her credentials to reflect more what her handlers view as what the primary voters (i.e. enthusiastic progressives) might be looking for, but she will fall short in any national election. She has zero chance of defeating Trump. You heard it here! Sorry to all those who think by dismissing her one is dismissing a woman's chance to run (and win), but that's not the case. She's just not the right person. Also, even now she's tightly scripted and deftly avoids answering questions (as in a recent NPR interview) in order to deflect to "talking points." If the People's Republic of California could have an election for President, then maybe she'd have more than a snowball's chance. Just my two cents.
15
A freshman Senator in Washington who is still retains the big head from previous successes. Lacks humility that anyone needs to learn new responsibilities with competence. She makes no effort to broaden Democrats’ inclusiveness by working to see the world from others perspectives. The rest of the younger Democrats are equally hobbled by lack of understanding and motivated by the attitude that they deserve a chance to exercise power. They appeal to simple messaging but fail to grasp day to day needs that are not addressed by simplistic perspectives.
Conservative Republicans focus upon preserving what they have and resisting significant changes to remedy systematic injustices. They are complacent towards other people’s difficulties and think that they can insulate themselves from having to address those others’ concerns. They fail to see life as a dynamic biological process that includes all.
Liberal Democrats tend to misperceive the difficulties that most people face these days, focusing upon those suffering the most want and treating everyone else as having their needs well served and secured when those people are seeing both becoming less and less so. Again, a failure to see the whole context because of a self absorbed perspective.
Democrats must take the position that all Americans have a common set of interests which we all must address in common. They must transcend the real gripes resulting from real injustices so that even adversaries can work together.
3
It's been very clear for many years that a lot of people run for president to raise their visibility. 98% of political campaigning is name recognition. There is only one POTUS job. But there are a hundred other jobs to fill in each administration.
The more the merrier should campaign but to be considered for the next administration. In making their case, the number one qualification should be teamwork. What is their prime specialty?
I think the ideal candidate would be Nancy Pelosi. Won't happen but I'd give her a listen regarding her recommendation for Team 2020.
1
A woman of incisiveness and intelligence who should govern a constituency at a major city or state level for a substantial period of time before contemplating the presidency. Speaking of Californians and a wide open field...maybe Jerry Brown can be convinced to run for a single term, appoint a couple of Supreme Court Justices, get the nation focused on the climate change issues he has been championing since the 1980s, and then let his vice-president step in.
1
@Observer of the Zeitgeist You know he’s 80, right?
Throughout her career, Harris has displayed a pattern of taking actions that flout the law, the Constitution, and the public trust in order to move up the ladder or gain publicity to help her at election time.
Often these actions have hurt the people she claims to advocate for or were prosecutions without merit that predictably lost in court but still cost her enemies time, money, and freedom to resolve.
Isn't there someone else with the same policy platform who is above abusing her authority out of ambition for power?
5
I'm waiting for one of these candidates to make climate change the top priority. We're well into the sixth extinction. Time is running out. It was never brought up in past elections, to our peril. Time to wake up.
3
One of my least favorite parts of US politics is that the primary season is basically a year and a half long. It doesn't actually encourage engagement, as evidenced by our tradition of low voter turnout. And it just encourages clown car antics and circular firing squads. With the way the left is already going after each other, you'd think victory is already assured and Donald Trump has left the White House. If I were a Trump campaign official, or a Russian operative for that matter, I would just tell Trump to lower his profile a bit and let the left take each other out.
I don't need a year plus of that nonsense to make an informed decision, so I'm going to tune out of the pointless internecine warfare among Democrats until 2020.
2
As a Philadelphian, I've always been impressed with Senator Harris based on limited exposure. She is definitely worth serious consideration in my view and anxious to see her debate the issues. (P.S. I am an Independent.)
3
Harris is not electable, plain and simple but what she does bring to the table along with Warren is an attack dog personality who will attack Trump at every turn. I can hear the Trumpster's start in that she is this and that. To them I say is she any worst than Carly Florina; Rick Perry; Marco Rubio etc.
I'm just glad that, for the first time, there will be several women running together, not merely one token woman.
2
@CH
By all means let's pick people based on their gender.
4
Choosing today for Sen. Harris to announce her candidacy was, understandably, symbolic and for good reason. For fans of the silent films (<1925), 'Within Our Gates' (1920) aired on Turner Classic Movies this morning.
Here is a link to the early struggles faced to get education for poor black children and voting rights for black women. (Brief) http://www.tcm.com/tcmdb/title/324125/Within-Our-Gates/full-synopsis.html
Great silent film, too bad some parts were lost.
If Sen Harris can focus on one or two key issues in her campaign she stands a better chance in this (D) prim.., er, marathon.
3
Kamala Harris is not presidential material. The Democrats will certainly lose the 2020 White House race if Kamala Harris is their presidential candidate. She is more suitable to be vice president. She has no executive experience. Perhaps Governor Andrew Cuomo would be a compelling presidential candidate for 2020, but not Kamala Harris.
12
I find it ironic that Kamala Harris chose to announce her bid on MLK day. Martin Luther King used his voice to put a spotlight on the injustices inflicted upon those individuals whose voices were constantly silenced and their civil rights denied. This included the ever increasing number of individuals incarcerated without the hope that a fair justice system would apply to them. Kamala Harris contributed to California's over population of prisons and the outrageous rate of Reversals of Parole Grants after parole boards found individuals have earned their parole. Kamala Harris routinely sought to reverse parole grants at a rate that contributed directly to what has become a stain on the history of the California's prison system and their overpopulation. We need to carefully examine the background of all candidates, regardless of party line, to uncover their true character and body of work to determine whether their record demonstrates that they will serve all the citizens of this country especially those whose voice has been silenced by an unfair system and individuals focused on their own ambitions rather than moving this country towards a more perfect Nation as Martin Luther King did during his lifetime.
14
so, you're for bernie? got it!
1
@shum
I appreciate you reading my comments but you reached a conclusion not based on fact or truth. Ms. Harris' work experience and her decisions require scrutiny especially when they have contributed to California's proven record of prison and due process abuses. Every candidate should welcome the scrutiny especially one considering this high position.
1
Let's be honest: no one knows who is going to emerge from the pack or who will be the best candidate to defeat Trump.
Let anyone who wants to, jump in. Ms. Harris is certainly appealing in many ways. The show is just starting.
6
Senator Harris's plan to supplement wages of working Americans to the tune of $6,000 for a married couple, is an important expansion of the earned income tax credit. The EITC, in turn, is a working person's version of universal basic income. If Harris proposes to balance this earned income tax credit with higher taxes on the top 10% (reversing the Trump tax cuts), the majority of Americans will support it. This would actually help the middle class and it would resonate with Midwestern voters.
4
@David G
The EITC is used by many as a scam. Ask people who work in tax. The IRS has to conduct audits of income tax return preparers who prepare many returns claiming this credit because many of these returns are fraudulent.
1
@BK. Interesting point. The EITC still stands out as a redistributional mechanism to boost suppressed middle and lower middle class incomes due to technological advances and foreign competition for manufacturing jobs. It sounds like it needs some work, though, to make it more transparent and fraud-proof.
It is mind boggling. Kamala Harris
and Tulsi Gabbard, presidential
candidates, have barely begun their
terms and now consider themselves
to run the country. It is a strange system
where anyone can run and voters start
debate on gender and a tough question
asked of Jeff Session. Without significant
experience in the congress and executive experience,most
desirably as a governor of state, with
solid accomplishments, it will come down to slogans and demonization of the
opponents. Mr. Trump did that successfully. Are we looking for more
of the same in 2020?
13
In the promotion of Kamala Harris’ new book she states she was raised in Oakland, California. According to Wikipedia Harris's parents divorced when she was 7, and after the divorce, her mother moved with her 2 children to Montreal, Canada where she worked as a researcher at the Jewish General Hospital and taught at McGill University . Kamala graduated from Montreal's Westmount High School . So, from 7 to 16 years of age she was raised in Montreal. So, in fact the most important years of her youth were in Canada. Some would say that is a good thing
2
No one will say this out loud but running for president in the US is a reality show and we need an actor that say the right things, look the part and just be charming. Someone like a George Clooney or Oprah will be perfect. It’s all a show. Say whatever needs to be said to get votes, then do actual serious policy work once in office.
Voters in middle America decide elections and they have proven that they aren’t interested in issues or listening to actual policy proposals. Not in this social media 30-second news cycle day and age. All these folks care about is who looks and acts the part of a President.
So: Oprah Clooney 2020! Or Clooney Oprah 2020. Either one works for me.
2
@Faisal I agree with your middle paragraph.
1
"The first 'insert adjective' president" is a losing strategy for Democrats. I'm an unabashed liberal, I believe firmly in New Deal progressivism that made the US the most dominant nation in the world in the 20th century, and FDR is far-and-away my favorite president; this article made me audibly groan more than once. I could not care less that Kamala Harris would be the first woman, black woman, or whatever other way she wants to describe herself as person to hold the office.
I welcome Senator Harris running, but that's because of her progressive agenda, not because she's a black woman. Run on the fact that this country has historically flourished under liberal administrations and the fact that most of the woes in our past have occurred under the banner of conservatism. Shame Republicans for disparaging the character of Lincoln by trying to claim him as a representative of the modern GOP. Proudly proclaim a New New Deal and usher in a new era of proud liberalism that will help the proletariat. Win people over with ideas, not with adjectives.
7
The most loyal long suffering base of the Democratic Party are black women. Kamala Harris is half- black African via her immigrant Jamaican ancestry. And she is half-Asian Indian Hindu via her mother.
Like Barack Obama she combines an exotic ethnic mix that is the antithesis of the enslaved and free person of color black African American prevailing history. African Americans do not know the name nor the ethnicity nor their tribal nor their nation state ancestry. Nor do they typically have a known white European nor known brown Asian heritage.
Little black girls do not rationally and reasonably aspire to be Hillary Clinton nor Ruth Ginsburg nor Elena Kagan nor Elizabeth Warren nor Kristen Gillibrand nor Ivana nor Melania Trump.
2
Obama identified with both African American and European American perspectives without being able to solidly affiliate with either. Our country has a long history of pluralism that fundamentally is based upon tribalistic groupings who demand that people choose a group who who to identify and to see all others as outsiders. Leaders who can appeal to groups who make up majorities can become powerful leaders. Obama could do that and was successful.
Harris is not someone with much experience in national nor international government and law. That should disqualify her candidacy but it won’t. She symbolizes an underrepresented demographic, non-white women, which makes her candidacy historic but she is not got a lot of support. She faces some real difficulties with Democratic factions because she was a prosecutor who “progressives” (left wingers who mistrust liberal democracy) see as “lackies” of corporations and right wing reactionaries. Harris will be pressured to support a lot of things she would not have as a prosecutor.
We need a person who is able and ready to be President. We don’t need another flavor of outsider who defies the image of a politician who is just another master of marketing herself/himself.
1
@Blackmamba
‘Identity politics’ are toxic and divisive, as evidenced by the recent Women’s March ugliness. If you’d like individuals to be judged according to their merits rather than their race, ethnicity, religion, and/or gender...best to stop indulging in the sanctimony of identity politics.
2
@Blackmamba
You may be interested-- I read an article in the Times many years ago about an African chieftain (I think?) who visited NYC, and was the guest of honor at a big event with many African-Americans attending. The chieftain said that as he looked out at the guests, he could pick out many different tribes he saw represented. Isn't that something?
1
The fact that Democrats are actually taking this foolish woman seriously is the only evidence any Democrat needs to prove how far your party has gone to the Left.
Check yourselves Democrats. If you embrace the Left, you do so because you are ignorant of the damage that they cause.
The Left is literally responsible for hundreds of millions of innocent deaths.
If you are not aware of this it is simply because you are ignorant. Please educate yourself before you vote.
13
If you mean Iraqis, Afghans, and US troops, that's be W. and Cheney
2
The irrational hate. Smells like fear.
1
@Paul
Um, Dubya started a couple wars that are still draining resources and causing casualties.
Your fictional post is absurd.......
3
Thank you, next.
8
I’m in.
2
Harris is a wanton opportunist in the vein of the Clintons. She allowed crooks like Mnunchin to skate away after illegally foreclosing on thousands of Californians while at the same time defending the state’s horrible Three Strikes law. She is thoroughly wedded to Wall St both figuratively and literally. She’s a triangulator like Bubba Clinton and would compromise any progressive agenda to save her own political aspirations. Her record as AG is not one of a progressive Democrat. Beware!
24
Minority? check.
Woman? check.
Vaguely Moderate/Liberal? check.
Discomforting voice that reminds one of an angst-burdened schoolmarm chastising the class? check.
So we basically get a GEN 2 Hillary.
YAY! Seems to be tailor-made for the crowd who waits for the NYT to tell them how to think. Personally, I'm all in for Booker-OAC: go big or go home.
10
Just another authoritarian. Nothing to see. Return to your daily activities.
6
The so-called ‘progressive’ and pro-illegal migrant agenda will not win the hearts and minds of moderate and independent voters across our nation. Millions of moderates like myself will abandon the Democratic ship in a New York minute if Kamala Harris wins the nomination. Be careful what you wish for...
23
Hillary was tough and smart but unlikable and old news
Harris is tough and smart and likeable and charming and multi-ethnic and a fresh face
If we’re smart enough to nominate her she”ll destroy Donald Trump
6
Trump will be re-elected.
13
Lara Bazelon said it best.
Harris needs to radically break from her past.
8
Is this the right time for Kamala Harris? It will be difficult. The fact that her presence on the stage will bring out the racist Republicans is without a doubt. Can she handle the hatred that she will be bombarded with in addition to being an intellectual and a woman?
4
"Republican National Committee" is obviously afraid of her! Yay!!
1
Zero chance against Trump.
10
No one may want to admit it, but the run for President is a performance. We need someone who doesn't talk down to people, thinks America is a great country (which it certainly is), and doesn't come across as angry all the time.
We can all pretend that it isn't like this, but it is.
And trust me, this is neither the time nor the place to run on open borders, gender identity or socialist policies.
We need solid answers to the problems that most Americans worry about and face.
We have the gold ring in our sites. Please don't mess it up. Trump could easily win if we're not careful.
8
She's an empty suit with a mercurial temper - People conflate that with strength. I call it inexperience and not ready for Prime Time.
27
I find the RNC statement "Kamala Harris is arguably the least vetted Democrat running for president, but it's already clear how unqualified and out-of-touch she is" almost as funny as it is hypocritical. Trump has repeatedly demonstrated just how unqualified and out-of-touch he is on virtually every major issue the majority of citizens of this nation care about. And need I mention just how little "vetting", IF ANY, occurred with many of his campaign officials, and since his assuming office, both cabinet officials and appointees. Seriously? The republican party is what's out of touch! It used to be one of the staunchest defenders of the constitution and our national security, and proponents of fiscal responsibility and balanced budgets. Yet the head of your party routinely tramples the first amendment rights of ALL citizens. The party has become synonymous with gerrymandering and voter suppression. And your tax cuts (and theory of trickle down economics) of the past two plus decades have only served to massively increase our national debt while exacerbating income disparity. As a former republican (now independent) I honestly question the relevance of the republican party. Perhaps they no longer believe in our constitution or the American people, choosing instead, as their leader says, "to make Russia great again".
8
This is great news.
3
Yeah, all you commenters are right. She had a lackluster intro, like she should have ridden an shiny escalator down to the masses after sliming all Mexicans, maybe.
Or maybe she just shouldn't be black and a woman, because, you know, she will undoubtedly unleash a storm of identity politics across the country.
Or maybe she shouldn't be so smart and uppity and maybe on the wrong side of certain cases when she was AG in California. Everything is black and white and certain and she should never have made a mistake after all.
I'm not saying she's my preferred candidate, but wow, considering the GOP put up last time around a stable of 17 or 19 sub-sub-sub mediocre, whistle-brained, low-wattage uncharismatic types and settled on the lowest brow in the pack, Kamala Harris is wonderful.
15
The lady oozes gravitas. Book-ending the sad sack of the one-term DJT with a couple of high-achieving African American presidents would be the most powerful message ever.
11
@The Reverend Stop. She's not "African American." It is ridiculous, and unworthy of Democrats to regularly ignore her Hindu heritage -- the heritage that brought her up, by the way.
1
Some of the things that doomed Hillary Clinton's candidacy included substituting opinion poll results for personal convictions, relying on platitudes instead of concrete policy positions, cozying up to establishment power figures, trumpeting "experience" but but hiding from accomplishments, and a lack of credible connections and experience with the progressive wing of her party. Kamala Harris shares these qualities. Fortunately, she lacks a big money machine to buy control of the DNC. Harris will have to embrace a more authentic representation of the progressive synecdoche she is riding on if she is to break through as a front runner in 2020. I hope she does.
3
@Hugh Wudathunket Don’t forget Huma Abedin - she brought in the big liability of her husband and Hillary was blind, sort of like with her own husband perhaps?
If the RNC already needs to make disparaging remarks about Ms. Harris, then they must be taking her ability to win seriously.
It is hard to reconcile the vision of a prosecutor who puts the guilty behind bars with the image of someone who led "mass incarceration." Could this be a drive to discredit her for doing her job well?
1
@Barbara What I was trying to say, not clearly at all, is that incarceration follows trends. Ms. Harris's career may just have coincided with the trend of more incarceration.
Another liberal woman enters the Democratic presidential race. It is beginning to appear that they all sound alike. There is no distinction between her and her fellow candidates. She may appeal to the coastal elites but she is unlikely to win over those in middle America and rural parts of the country. She is far too progressive for many and the Democrats should aim to nominate a more moderate candidate.
I do not think it really matters who they decide to choose in the end because I think President Trump will win reelection. He has been good for many Americans and they approve of his performance in the White House. If it is not broken, do not fix it. President Trump 2020 and continue making America great.
10
@WPLMMT
Independents feel pretty good about the economy, and that is consistently on the top of a majority of Americans' priority list.
8
@WPLMMT
"There is no distinction between her and her fellow candidates."
Yeah, there is. Warren has the policy chops. I'll give you that her political instincts are just awful. But she's got the beef.
Let us try to set the record straight.
Ms. Harris is not an African American,
her father was from Jamaica and her mother from India.
As such, please do not say she is the first
"Black" or African American Female Senator.
I voted for Shirley Chisholm, she had humility and
humbleness and truly cared about her constituents.
I don't know if the same can be said about Senator Harris.
13
@John Brown Thank you John Brown for saying this. The fact the Senator chose today as her announcement day seems to exploit a hard fought narrative makes me SMH.
4
@John Brown
Just semantics...
Most of Jamaica's population is of African or partially African descent.
I see a lot of phrases such as "...I could not support..", " I can never vote for...", etc.from self-described "liberal Democrats". I must assume that at least some of these writers will be perfectly comfortable with a second Trump term.
PS.
Let us not forget that Trump has confessed comfort with an even longer tenure should the people desire such a thing.
3
I wonder what the right wing white male critics in this pile, saying that Kamala Harris is unseasoned and not ready, were saying about Hillary Clinton when they refused to vote for her. Too seasoned and not ready? Hmmm.
Highly effective and intelligent leaders can’t always wait for lesser intellects to get on board.
That is why they are leaders.
Kamala Harris may or may not win the top slot this time around, but she will change the conversation, push the country forward to a better place, and gain tremendous experience for next time.
4
@BBB
I'm not right wing, and i'm not male. I think Harris is unseasoned and not ready, and has a problematic record and judgement. Not to mention donor list. I refused to vote for Hillary Clinton. I thought she had a very problematic record, judgement, and donor list. Just for starters. Glad to have cleared that up for you.
4
This sounds most like Trump's Rep vetting!
Kamala Harris will be almost as divisive as Donald Trump. I watched her in the Kavanaugh hearing and was utterly unimpressed. The moment when she tried to question/taunt Kavanaugh as to his association with Kasowitz Benson and Torres was painful to watch.
Her only qualification thus far is her race and gender as she has never distinguished herself as presidential in any other way. We as a nation need to stop saying that the shell of an individual is the qualifier and start looking to the content of character contained therein as the decisive reason for supporting a candidate. Kamala Harris doesn't pass the test.
25
@Arthur Taylor
During the hearing, I felt she had one mode only, prosecutorial, which was odd in that setting. Unsophisticated and rookie-like.
12
Not sure a fake role on NBC was presidential, but it sure fooled America!
@Arthur Taylor
Agree; her questioning of Kavanaugh was cringe-worthy. I've seen first-year lawyers fired for better questioning than that.
3
I was in awe when I came to this country where any work was done regardless of gender, race, origin . was in awe where I saw women doing any work that could be done by a man regardless of physical orientation. After two decades I just find this place not prepared to accept a president who is a woman. I may be wrong.
1
C’mon. What “message of unity” isn’t key, especially in the wake of Trump?
Whoever runs, and Harris isn’t at the top of my list, will have to connect strongly with the communities that turned out last November. Healthcare was the main issue, not immigration. I’m betting on Beto as the best messenger the Dems have.
I am disturbed by those candidates that state the electorate wants candidates that look like them. Should I fault the candidate or the electorate? As a 65 yr old white male I am looking for candidates whose policies and ideas would responsibly provide the most good for the most Americans. This is why I voted twice for Obama (would have voted a third time if possible) and the last time for Clinton (disliked the person, not the woman)as her core skill were vastly superior to Trump. The DP must be careful not to replicate the Humpty Dumpty show provided by the last RP primary process. Too many candidates not allowing anyone to get out their message allowing the one candidate with no real message to prevail with "bumper sticker" policies. Thank you
2
I’m 53 years old. For the first time in my adult life, someone I genuinely like & can enthusiastically get behind is running for President. I could not be more thrilled.
Senator Harris is smart, and doesn’t suffer fools. More important than that, though (or perhaps because of it!) may be her message of unity. And boy oh boy, is that a message we need to hear right now. We’re not going to survive as a nation without that principle.
1
"“Kamala Harris is arguably the least vetted Democrat running for president, but it’s already clear how unqualified and out-of-touch she is,” the Republican National Committee said in a statement"
Wishful thinking on the part of the Republicans. If being Attorney General of California and a US Senator doesn't count for vetting, I don't know what does. "Unqualified"? "Out of touch"? Are they kidding? The Republicans would be lucky to put forth such a highly qualified candidate.
1
Kamala Harris' opening bid for my vote is a $6,000 annual tax credit.
Will anyone offer me $7K? Do I hear $7K? Going once...
Lowering taxes on incomes below $100K? She sounds like a decent Republican.
3
The media loves to run the “is America ready for a woman/minority president”
Let me put that nonsense to rest with one sentence
The last time a white male presidential candidate won the popular vote was 15 years ago, in 2004
3
Harris for prez and Beto vp? I know I know conservative ppl would call Beto beta but still I think it could be a winner.
Will Democrats end up in the same situation as Republicans in 2016 with such a crowded field of candidates that a nutcase with committed followers will steal the show? With a serious need to get rid of Trump, we can ill afford a circular firing squad.
4
Kamala Harris...another corporate Democrat behind the veneer of a Progressive.
DOA
18
Republicans were quick to denigrate her candidacy on Monday.
“Kamala Harris is arguably the least vetted Democrat running for president, but it’s already clear how unqualified and out-of-touch she is,”
What a howler!
Proving yet again that irony is as dead as a door nail in the Republican Party, but shameless hypocrisy is alive and well.
3
What I want most for the United States is that we never again have a racist president.
The cost of the Trump presidency is overwhelming negative, opening wounds that if not healed were at least salved.
Harris is intelligent, articulate, ambitious.
She'll do fine.
I'd love to see a female candidate who is African-American and Asian beat Trump in a landslide.
3
Love her, she’s gorgeous, brilliant, tough as nails. Obama, given a chance, got elected, she can too. Go Kamala!
9
The Dems are diluting themselves to a fare thee well. Two years ago we witnessed the Republican clown school grads and now it’s the Dems turn. Who is going to take the low road first?
1
As a liberal Democrat from California I cannot support Ms Harris. Her checkered history as SF District Attorney is enough to disqualify her in my opinion.
11
@Marty She needs to publicly address the mass incarcerations that she is responsible for, and see if she's sincere or believable. Till then, I'm not completely discounting her.
1
At least Senstor Hatris has an appreciation for law enforcement. I will give her that much.
5
@Southern Boy
But also of sanctuary cities.
Great! Another tone-deaf Progressive elitist who has never had a job outside of government---who doesn't understand (or appreciate) capitalism and will argue for more more government, more socialism, more welfare, cuts to the defense budget and open borders. As a business owner, I can't wait for her to utter the Liberal battle cry, "You didn't build that".
What could possibly go wrong?
7
uhhhh no. she was a horrible SF D.A , anemic grandstanding CA D.A. and has done nothing in her short Senator career except posture in committees. if folks want black and woman as defining qualities put Michelle on the ballot. I'd vote for the latter but no bc way for the former.
11
McGovern ‘72 redux. Loss of 49 states in the general.
American presidential politics - as evidenced by the comments here - is a spectator sport where voters engage in conversations about who they like for this or that personal reason. Candidates do the same thing.
What’s needed is a Party that is focused on obtaining and retaining political power, year in and year out.
Instead, we have an army of individual candidates, each extolling their own personal attributes, operating largely outside the Party.
There is no perfect candidate. There is room for a Harris and a Sanders in the Senate. For President, the Party needs someone who can win the voters who did not vote and those who voted for Trump. Harris is not that candidate.
7
I find the caviling about Ms. Harris' qualifications tiresome. The current President has shown that there is no opinion, statement or action which is disqualifying for a candidate.
14
@RM Two wrongs don't make a right.
1
The only solace I take from this comments section is that the misogynists and paid propaganda machine think Senator Harris is a real threat.
Compare the comments section of the other Democrats who announced a run to see what I mean.
Fine by me, as I'd love to see this very intelligent, thoroughly prepared, able to go toe to toe with the worst of them, joyful warrior and highly competent Senator become President.
Not to mention that when people of color and women get fired up over a Democrat, they usually win.
15
I was reading the comments on the LA Times article about Harris running. There were several comments from the the same person using different accounts; writing the same disparaging monologue but rearranging the sentences. The RNC troll machine is afraid of this one!
1
She's been a senator for 18 days. I wonder if the people who voted for her expected this...
6
18 days? Where do you get your news?
3
She's been serving since 2017. An amount of time you can count on your fingers since we're talking about years!
@Son of liberty You're being facetious, right? Because she assumed office January 3, 2017, which is more than 2 years ago.
I'd love to see a woman elected President, but I will not back a candidate simply because they're a woman.
At this point, albeit early, none of the declared, likely's, maybes bowl me over.
If trump is still around in 2020, I think any of these women could take him on and land plenty of punches.
But that's not enough. We need someone who is capable taking on the whole republican establishment, fox, hate radio and trump's base, and the billionaire's who fund them.
The many people declared and otherwise, are for the most part, likable, intelligent, articulate, experienced and worthy. Some are retreads whose time has come and gone.
My thoughts keep returning to Al Franken.
11
It has been said many times that we're not ready for a woman to be president of our country, but I think what bothers Trump no end are educated, knowledgeable, respected, articulate women.
There as never been a time more important than now that we look at our democratic candidates as presidents. Watch their words, their expressions, their understanding of the law and government, and world leaders. Deciding on gender is of little value at this time. Who can connect with our grand community, understand the needs of our country, an ability to work with allies, and an obvious intelligence that bridges everyone together are what I'll be listening for.
125
@Nancie, Agree completely. Every Democrat and everyone who wants Trump or any Republican defeated should watch and see how each candidate does in the campaign. 2020 will be different just as 2008 was different from 2000 or 2016. What we took as conventional wisdom then may be inapplicable now or in the future. Keep an open mind and remember no one candidate will tick off all of the boxes for a particular voter. The best will not be perfect.
14
I agree as well that we should elect a woman president. But, at least a third of America disagrees and will not vote for a woman no matter her qualifications. The consequences of another 4 years of Trump are too great; the democrats need to nominate someone who will win. Until America grows up, that person may have to be a man.
5
Amen, Nancie. The Democratic Party has a golden opportunity to save this country from Trump. Don't blow it.
9
Gerry Brown, please!!
3
He’s aged out, I’m afraid.
1
@Lisa
Ummm... Governor Brown would be close to 83 when drown in. That’s just too old.
Is she going to be 1 of 25 candidates, 20 months before the elections? Are we now supposed to listen to her and her fellow contenders for the next many months, vying for one place, counting the money they squander on their 'campaigns'?
Are we supposed to be in awe that women march so stridently towards presidency, just because they're women?
How stupid and circus-like is all that?
Why do we need so much news on things that are completely unimportant (25 dems candidates 20 months before the elections)?
10
Agree...and what exactly are they doing to represent our voices now in Congress like we voted for them to do while they go about fundraising and crisscrossing the country away from DC where they rightfully belong? The plethora of those throwing their names into the ring is ridiculous. What a colossal waste of time and money!
1
Uh! Remember the clotted GOP field leading up to the ‘16 election.
Kamala Harris is the male version of Barack Obama
7
@BHO
If she has Obama's charisma and personality then she will win. If not, she does not stand a chance.
@BHO
Why? Because she is half black and went to law school?
I didn't like Kamala, at first. Over time I have grown to LOVE her! I couldn't be happier, for her. I know I will continue to follow this beautiful, intelligent and skilled woman, no matter what her title.
6
@HoldYourBreath
You obviously don't know her don't hold your breath too long
3
To everyone who says Kamala Harris has no chance of winning, do you remember in 2007 this guy named Barack Hussein Obama's announcement and people reaction to it?
10
I like the Senator from California but I'm not sure how she will do in a 'national campaign' with more moderate voters. Like Obama, she is running as a junior Senator but unlike our last President, she does not possess the speaking prowess that propelled him to the highest office in the land.
5
Barely two years into the six year term for which she was elected to represent her constituents in California, she will be effectively putting that responsibility aside to pursue a self-interested goal. Why can't we have a rule that if you are running for an office higher than the one you were elected to, you need to step down to do it? At least complete one term, sheesh.
28
@William Hynes
Because the Constitution determines the ‘rules’ for candidates to Federal offices.
2
Actually she will be bringing California’s approach to healthy government to the national stage and that can not come soon enough.
Leaders from other states seem to rise to the top and hog the limelight only after the bright sparks flee to the coasts. We don’t want Kansas’ economic policies, North Carolina’s bathroom laws, or whatever it is that keeps Alabama, West Virginia and Mississippi mired in poverty for as long as we’ve known them. There’s no chance that Mitch McConnell would have been the Senator from California.
2
@William Hynes The presidency is inarguably a "self-interested goal" for its current occupant. For the overwhelming majority of Americans, including Harris, Warren, et al, it is the highest office of public service in the land.
1
Based on her record and some of her views, I don't see why I would vote for her over someone like Elizabeth Warren. For me, my vote will right now be with Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders (if he runs). I fear that Kamala Harris (and her stance AGAINST body cameras on police) is a little too soft and a little too financially involved with large organizations. She feels a bit corrupted, and she has refused to prosecute some large banks.
I think that the DNC will ultimately push her as their front runner, but she's certainly not the person that I want to see at the forefront of the Democratic race for the White House.
5
@Jonathan Cesari bernie is still not a Democrat.
2
Like she said : "lets make it a good fight, because your country is worth it". More candidates from diverse backgrounds and perspectives is what is needed to make it a good fight.
9
I like Senator Harris. There is something about her that is engaging. I am excited to see the debates, find out what all these women are really about. Four women running for the dem ticket!! Wow!
17
I'm happy to vote for her.
California Democrat, you see.
But in all candor, any Democrat who can beat the GOP nominee like a drum will do.
9
I very much want to be able to support Senator Harris but something has really been bothering me since November. What bothers me even more is that it has never been referenced in the press or by commentators. Back in November California experienced the most devastating and lethal forest fire in it's history. Almost 90 people died, for weeks hundreds were still missing, thousands of structures were destroyed and thousands of people left homeless...many of whom were living in a makeshift "Hooverville" in a Walmart parking lot. As far as I could see Senator Harris never showed up to demonstrate how to visit a disaster site without using victims as political props. In Paradise, recovery will require a deep focus on disaster relief, federal support for volunteers and relief workers, bureaucratic expediting and supportive empathy towards victims (even if CA 1st District is GOP)...all of which a skilled and powerful senator and public figure can usually deliver on. Aside from a handful of Tweets voicing support for first responders and noting climate change as a possible culprit that was IT! Okay...so she didn't go and toss paper towels but really....we should expect more from the political party that is the standard bearer of sound government assistance.
Last November I saw her opponent's first attack ad write itself: A "no-show" (even for one day) at the Camp Fire refugee camp because she was too busy in Washington making speeches condemning ICE.
Did I just miss something?
15
@Woodson Dart, she did visit the Paradise area in mid November, met with emergency personnel dealing with the fires, and local officials. Not much press coverage for her except the local news stations. Probably would have had some national coverage if she had already thrown her hat into the ring. But regardless, she was there.
3
Ms Harris did visit the Camp Fire site.
Which other presidential candidates visited the Camp Fire refugee camp?
She visited with first responders in Paradise. Very little news coverage. You're correct though; she did not go to the survivor's area.
1
Ironically, the person who could've been the most viable candidate, had he not been thrown to the wolves over an action that warranted sanction but not resignation, was Al Franken.
Having said that, I would happily see either of Minnesota's two current senators throw their hats in the ring. I need to learn more about both, but my initial impressions are very favorable. Far more so than those who have already announced.
8
Harris offers very little IMO. I mean what has she done or accomplished? Oh please dont say well what about Trump? This is not about Trump ,but about Harris. she is Just another do nothing politician with very little leadership skills. I would like to see a governor , or someone who has managed a large state or organization. Those are the skill sets needed in my view. Senators and congressman just vote up or down based on polls and influence, and ask for money to prevent legislation against your interests. We need leaders! Remember this is not the senate we voting for but running and leading a country!!
25
@greg,
Does Attorney General for the state of California count for something in your eyes?
I wish Harris would serve out her term as Senator. Jumping into the 2020 race just speaks to me of nothing but ambition. Her performance at the Kavanaugh hearing was just that, a performance, and not a good one at that. We need someone with experience, gravitas, and most important, the ability to reach the disaffected Dems who turned to Trump because they felt that their problems were being ignored, ie Sherrod Brown.
That said, she would probably make a good AG.
13
Only Bernie Sanders has the agenda, and as the last election showed, the votes, to defeat trump.
5
@JFP, I was a campaigner and supporter of Bernie in 2016. But Bernie's position on the most significant issue of our time - climate change - has always been naive, and he's another Old White Man - the last thing we need (take it from an old white man).
7
@JFP bernie is still not a Democrat. If he is, and has been, unwilling to associate himself with the party except for when he wants to run for president, why should Democrats support him?
If he were an honest man, he would run on his Independent convictions--which means he votes either side of the aisle and is not committed to the Democrats.
3
This is very welcome news. An extremely intelligent, savvy, progressive, and hardworking woman who knows the law and how Washington works. Would be a most welcome breath of fresh air!
11
As an independent, I think it is time for the first woman president and the Democratic party is providing a choice. Either Sen. Kamala Harris or Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard could have a good chance tp be nominated by their party.
5
She's my senator, but she hasn't really done anything as a senator except seek maximum air time on cable news. She started running for president three seconds after winning her senate seat. I personally don't trust anyone that is this transparently power hungry.
21
Kamala's campaign bought my phone number and spammed me with texts. I asked how they got my name and number, and they were evasive. Told me I had opted in. (I haven't) Privacy is obviously not important to her, but it is to me. I'll vote against Trump, but not for her.
6
I wish more of those folks who claim she’s not their candidate or she’s not ready to be president would at least add that they would support her as the nominee. Otherwise, it’s 4 more years of this chaos and corruption.
5
The Washington Examiner, as all right wing media, want to define Democratic candidates before they have a chance to define themselves to voters as well as trying to define all Democrats.
"The Left decides Kamala Harris is a cop — but she's running anyways" I never knew that and I follow news and politics ~12 hours/day.
Anyone who piled on to run Al Franken out of the Senate will be rightfully rejected by the American people, and not just by those who voted for him. Those candidates don't trust democracy, we won't trust them, and they will fail by the wisdom of a broad swatch of the American people.
5
Democrats would be wise to confer with one another to raise a single candidate to oppose Trump. Fighting against one another for the party primacy and central message may be the more traditional but it serves to divide more that to unite.
2
@Alan Brainerd, both conferring and fighting against one another is how the process works. The more, the merrier.
2
This may be a cynical way of looking at things, but I believe that many of the Presidential aspirants are looking for a Vice-Presidential nomination. Joe Biden continues to be the best candidate for the Democrats. He has the spirit, the experience, the fight mentality and the appeal to voters in states like Ohio and Michigan, which I know well. As much as I admire Kamala Harris, I don't believe she can defeat Trump. But let's face it, Biden is also a bit older. Kamala Harris may become President by default, with Nancy Pelosi next in line.
1
Warren and Harris are perceived as too far to the left to generate mass appeal. Gillibrand and O’Rourke have a better chance to represent a center-left constituency that has been neglected by this administration.
Out of those two, O’Rourke is the most engaging and energetic. Bothe are telegenic, which will help.
I hope Bernie does not run again. I would have voted for him in 2016, but not 2020. As for Biden, he probably has the best chance. And yet it’s time for the Dems to put forth a platform and candidate who TRULY has the needs of the majority of voters in mind and can communicate that message. Healthcare was THE main issue in the mid terms, and will likely remain that way. Trump has beaten immigration to death as a subject and he won’t get the traction from it that he did in 2015-2016. And aside from that, Trump has rendered himself un-re-electable.
We’ll have a Dem in the WH in 2020. My way too early prediction is that it will be Beto. Gillibrand would make a great VP and she’s young enough to run again for POTUS.
1
@HeyJoe
Beto won’t make it into the Final Four......
Mixed feelings about her. She’s relatively new to congress and is going to have to explain some of the policies she supported as state attorney general. She’s clearly intelligent and capable and well schooled and mentored in politics from a master at it, but it’s unclear if she has the wherewithal to be chief executive without more seasoning on the national and international scene. She’s also relatively unknown nationwide. And, like all constituents whose senators are on the campaign trail for the next year or so, who is representing us during the nationwide bus tour and stump speeches in far flung corners of our nation? There will be a winnowing among the Democrats and it will be interesting to see what they have learned from the hubris fueled debacle of 2016.
4
@Wolf, that Harris has the capability to admit she was wrong (about pot, other positions) is one of the strengths that sets her apart from other candidates. A Harris nomination wouldn't be another hubris-fueled debacle - the only thing she shares with the 2016 Democratic presidential candidate is gender.
I am pleased to be represented by Senator Harris and think she did a good job as AG in California. I support her entering the race and expect to support her after national news vets her.
It is great to see so many capable Democrats running. We won't need an independent candidate this year. If the pack hasn't thinned before this time next year, I expect to see Hillary Clinton testing the third times a charm concept. If and when that happens, I would support Hillary, who is most experienced, and highly qualified to do the job from day one. We need someone who will have the ability to repair the substantial damage and sabotage that has occurred with this administration.
4
We've a long way to go, a large group of candidates, and the number one goal is to win!
Most Democrats are going to watch to see how things shake out before committing.
Personally I doubt Harris, or Gillibrand can make it to the finish line.
6
I look forward to hearing her clarify her positions on economic inequality, healthcare and on the environment. I hope she uses her criminal justice background to address police brutality. I can see myself voting for her if she tacks left, but I’m not sure this is going to happen.
8
The more the merrier. I hope we get to know them all so the strongest candidate will emerge from the pack.
I almost wonder more who the republican candidate will be. trump could choose not to run if he isn’t impeached or resigns during this term.
What I really hope for is that we voters will have an intelligent and honest nominee from each side and that either could use the slogan Repair America Next because the country and its needs will come first including restoring relationships with longtime allies.
8
I think it's cheesy for Sen. Harris to exploit MLK, Jr. Day to announce her candidacy. Further, I don't get any sense that she was a very 'progressive' prosecutor in her day. I'm frankly weary of grandstanders, on both sides of the aisle.
49
@Christopher P
She doesn't have to be "very progressive"to announce on MLK day. Her candidacy as an African American woman running for president is historic. There was Shirley Chisolm long ago, but this is a historic run and is not "exploiting" Martin Luther King.
6
@Christopher P
Why must she have been a "progressive" prosecutor?
1
@fast/furious... how do we know KH is African American as opposed to Indian American? Is she appropriating her blackness for political gain...OH NO! Not the left doing that again
3
Kamala Harris is strong, smart and educated, articulate, has legal expertise and knowledge, leadership qualities, an analytical mind...yes she is a good candidate.
24
I agree, that the feeling I have that "We are not in this together" in this country (and which I feel is an intentional subtext of the Republican agenda), brings a sense of despair. Poverty, income and wealth inequality, climate change, social injustice really need everyone (well, most of us) to buy in to solving these gigantic problems with solutions that include an adequate progressive tax on those who can most afford it, not those who can least afford it.
2
@peter bailey: Turning Americans against each other works for the Republicans.
I don’t know if Ms. Harris is going to be the next President of the United States or not, I have a question for folks. Did voters ask if Abraham Lincoln was likable? After reading quite a bit about him I am pretty sure he wasn’t. Why is likable a qualification for President? Isn’t likable more of a qualification for game show host? I want to chose a president that is truly qualified this time - a legislator, an orator, a thinker. I honestly don’t care if they’re likable. I am not voting for a friend.
16
@ScottC
As far as I gather, Lincoln was one of the single greatest orators in the history of the English language (or any modern language). His speech, as depicted in movies, is eloquent, erudite, humane, and almost entrancing. back then, before the world of images, speech as a powerful agent of seduction. Also, he was super tall, which helps wins people's confidence. I'm not sure whether he was likable, but he was very easy to see as a leader. Lincoln is one of the few political leaders whom scholars of literature study. The only other one coming to mind is Jonathan Edwards. Lincoln was a unique case.
5
@ScottC
They would have asked about Lincoln if he had lived in our media age - the obvious difference.
1
@ScottC
Could be "likable" is meant to be "relatable"? But in either case, likable may get us a "lightweight" because so many voters judging likability don't have time to read white papers and deeply contemplate the substance of policy. Lincoln was a very deep thinker with a vision far into the future most did not comprehend. Do any of the declared or hopeful candidates have anything close to his vision, the ability to stand firm on principle, and lead through all the dense smoke and fog?
Harris has no chance of becoming the Democrats' Presidential candidate in 2020. If she is considered a viable candidate for the nomination, the Democrats are in big trouble and should start planning for the 2024 elections when Trump's second term ends. Harris' joining the 2020 Presidential race basically is a p.r. campaign for her career.
29
@Jay Orchard
Her chances are pretty good. She's smart, ethical, articulate, experienced. She's a thousand times the human being Donald Trump is. Sounds good to me.
7
@Jay Orchard
"...basically is a p.r. campaign.."
No, you're wrong. That would be Trump. Same as 2016.
Yes!! I love the symbolism and practicality of the timing and location of her announcements and campaign stops. Hoping she will keep to a smart thoughtful campaign instead of the non-stop derailments we have seen with other candidates. Keep it simple, straightforward and fair!
5
I would vote for Kamala Harris in a heartbeat. She represents everything that I personally believe in. The diversity that she herself would bring to the White House is an extra plus. A biracial woman who is both an African-American and an Indian-American would be an awesome move forward for this country. My question though is would the misogynistic and racist people who brought us Trump also manage to bring us another four years of Trump if Senator Harris were to be the nominee. It disgusts me to even think such a thing, but we have to think about it. Our country can't take another four years of Trump. I think that a better position for Senator Harris might be as a vice-presidential nominee with Biden as the nominee for president. Senator Harris is our future; however, I picture her as a more success nominee for president in 2024 or 2028, not next year. I hope that I am wrong.
8
@What is Truth-By focusing on her skin color and “diversity”, as a positive attribute, you have become what you purport to be disgusted by. Is someone white less worthy of your vote because of their race?
6
@Alex We have to be realistic even if it hurts. I would never vote for or against someone merely because of their race; however, I will vote for the candidate who has the best chance of beating Trump. We have seen what has happened over the last two years. We cannot allow identity politics to drive us down a road in which we get Trump again. Kamala Harris is our future; however, she may not be what we need to get rid of Trump. And getting rid of Trump comes before anything right now.
1
Whoever wins this nomination will have to make a sharp turn to the center in the general election campaign, unless that person is Joe Biden, and Ms. Harris is one of the better positioned candidates to do so. Her jobs as a district attorney and Attorney General are proof that she can enforce the law, and throw people into jail when necessary, which will be a valuable asset if she gets the chance to make her case to the whole country. Hopefully, she will ignore the catcalls from the left on that subject. I could see a ticket of Ms. Harris and the former Housing Secretary Julian Castro as being a plausible winning combination, particularly as they both come from electorally vote-rich states.
7
@David Godinez: Compared to political parties in other first world nations, the Democratic Party is right of center where it stands.
1
Love Senator Harris, but would like to see a Democratic plan for the long term: presidential candidate Sherrod Brown in 2020, running with Julian Castro as vice-presidential candidate. Once elected, they make Kamala Harris AG, put Elizabet Warren in charge of Health and Human Services, put Beto Secretary of State, so that he can get a wide exposure and meet foreign leaders. Then in 2028, we elect Julian Castro president, Beto vice-president. Now Kamala Harris is named Secretary of State. In 2036, we get President Beto and vice-president Kamala. In 2044, we get a very experienced President Kamala Harris. Meanwhile, these talented young candidates could be part of a democratic administration, reforming and fixing.
4
Why is it that everyone is suggesting that the men are ready to run for president but not the women? You suggest that Senator Harris wait until 25 years from now to run for President. She would be 79 years old by then. Would you have made the same suggestion to then Senator Obama?
95
@Elizabeth Salzer, PA-C
What we want to do is reform our society and move forward. What I like about Kamala Harris is that 25 years of actively shaping policy would be meaningful to her. Is being president all there is to public service? We need excellent people in government in all positions and over a long duration. A president only serves 8 years.
1
@Sunspot it's interesting to me that your timeline has Ms. Harris running when she is, apparently "finally" qualified, at 89 years old ....
I am 68 years old and have voted solely for Democrats since 1972 and I would enthusiastically vote for Kamala Harris and I hope that she will choose a female running mate, and someone like Amy Klobuchar, the Senator from Minnesota.
I am saddened that many Democrats believe that a ticket with two women is doomed to failure and that others, no matter how much they wish in their hearts that a woman will be elected President, believe that choosing a woman is not the best way to defeat Trump. I strongly disagree.
We laud Martin Luther King, Jr. and celebrate him today on day or rememberance but we forget that in the 1960's a majority of Americans did not approve of his protests, and indeed, there were many Black folks who thought they Dr King should wait and not "push too far." Thankfully, he did not listen to any of his detractors, White or Black.
Hillary Clinton lost because a large number of Americans did not trust her and many Democrats resented her nomination as being a foregone conclusion and coronation after she announced her candidacy. She was not a very good campaign nor did she inspire anyone.
The best way to take on Trump and Pence would be with two women on the ticket. Senator Klobuchar is from Minnesota and Senator Harris is from California. To many candidates that may run are from the east coast and west coast.
There are those who said Barack Obama should bide his time and wait. They were wrong. America needs a woman President, and we need her now.
9
Rather than a uniter she's seen, as a result of her performance at Senate hearings, as somewhat of a "flame thrower." Bright and articulate but with only two years experience she seems to be in a hurry to climb the ladder. Causing some to critize her ambition.
She will have to explain Lara Bazelon's recent Op-ed revelations? That information has begun to be disseminated nationally. I think it is so damming it may soon prevent her from continuing as a candidate as many on this Comment thread have previously indicated.
@Frank Leibold: Obama jumped the gun only two years into the Senate, and the result was a calamitous presidency.
3
"“Kamala Harris is arguably the least vetted Democrat running for president, but it’s already clear how unqualified and out-of-touch she is,” the Republican National Committee said in a statement, adding “all she has to show for her brief time in the Senate is a radically liberal voting record.”"
This from the party that gave us Donald Trump. Surely you jest, RNC.
The GOP is terrified of a candidate like Kamala Harris. She would be an excellent president, has a good chance of winning and they know it.
11
@L
Republican National Committee: the organization that ran a traitor as its candidate for president.
2
Rather than a United she's seen, as a result of her performance at Senate hearings, as somewhat of a "flame thrower. " Bright and articulate but with only two years experience she seems to be in a hurry to climb the ladder. Causing some to critize her ambition.
She will have to explain Lara Bazelon's recent Op-ed revelations? That information has begun to be disseminated nationally. I believe it is so damming it may soon prevent her from continuing as a candidate as many on this comment thread have previously indicated.
1
In a hurry to climb the ladder?
We’re ALL in a hurry to climb the ladder, run up with the hoses, and put the flames out over at the White House.
The GOP knows what’s coming. Failing to take stock after previous losses, they’re being forced to confront the country as it is...a rainbow of people who are young, vibrant, and educated that look nothing like themselves and can’t stand their backward GOP policies. No wonder they panicked when Kamala Harris announced her candidacy.
In case you're wondering, I remain open to running but am not ready to announce a decision. That is all.
5
I can’t think of any person who would be perceived more threatening to Red States than Kamala Harris, even though I admire her, at least assuming she passes the questions about her years as a prosecutor. She’s sharp as a tack.
But we need someone that can appeal to the ugly America we are today. That is not her.
If the opponent were Kasich, Romney, ... it might be worth the risk. 4 More years of Trump, no. Stakes are too high. We need to play safe, for now.
5
My thumb has "recommended" left, right, center and vertical while reading almost every comment here.
My thumb has "recommended" posts that directly contradict each other; not deliberately, but because there is so much to agree with here.
One thing, however, is clear to me. The current US President is bigoted and so incompetent at "The Art of the Deal" he could robbed at gunpoint over the phone.
And meanwhile, Democrats, among whom I count myself as a staunch, partisan, big-government, liberal, tax and spend, and- proud-of-it, still argue over the standards of competence and performance by which our candidate should perform.
Well, unlike the Republicans,at least we still have them.
2
And the democrats march lemming-like to another implosion.
Assuming for the sake of argument she is a good candidate on domestic issues she lacks any meaningful foreign policy experience that I am aware of.
The democrats will never win if they cannot define themselves as anything other than the party that fetishizes identity politics and is reactionary only, lacking an actual message as to what they can and will deliver.
Trump’s vulnerability is directly related to his general election opponent. The independents and swing voters will determine who the next president is.
13
@Imkay
"The independents and swing voters will determine who the next president is."
*******
A majority of Americans want Trump to negotiate on the wall, which he has just done. Independents are divided on the wall, support for which is inching up, perhaps as it gets more clearly defined.
Trump is doing what independents want. Speaker Pelosi is refusing to compromise.
2
@Imkay
Trump lacked any meaningful foreign policy experience. At least Harris isn't crazy to boot.
She has been a big proponent of civil forfeiture even without even being charged with a crime ( something she has in common with Jeff Sessions) - that and the rest of her less than stellar record as AG of California and city attorney of SF will be on the national radar soon. Her rather sordid history with Willie Brown is another issue we will be hearing more about although I am sure that bringing it up will elicit accusations of misogyny and racism. She has no record as a senator other than #resisting. She is not ready for the big leagues until she can do something that provides a real record to overcome what is already out there if you look past the photo ops she is continually seeking. I am a woman but her gender doesn’t overcome my personal distaste.
8
"'Kamala Harris is arguably the least vetted Democrat running for president, but it’s already clear how unqualified and out-of-touch she is,' the Republican National Committee said in a statement."
No endorsement rings louder or truer than a scathing attack by the RNC on the day of a candidate's announcement.
Harris 2020!
6
The presidential race is a money game horse race beauty pageant that benefits media and gives the candidates a lot of opportunities to collect corporate donations.
I'm troubled by the identity politics inherent to the way Harris and other female candidates are presented.
I don't care the age, gender, ethnicity of a candidate. Just because someone is female and has an interesting ethnic background, that means nothing to me.
What I care about is their voting record, who they take money from, their policies, and their ability to convince voters so they win.
Harris, Booker, Gillibrand, et al are corporate centrist Dems. Better than Trump, but that's a low standard.
We need a true FDR-like candidate now, because our country is in its worst crisis since the Great Depression, with a gangster president and a wholly corrupt GOP.
2
@Steve Davies Sir you are correct.
1
Senator Harris is wicked smart and has a gravitas that I don’t see in the candidates that have so far announced. [Including gravitas of voice, for all of you out there who ‘couldn’t stand’ HRC because you didn’t like her voice.] I appreciate her call for unity. I appreciate that she advocates for the rule of law and ethical behavior. And I will forever admire her for her question of Kavanaugh: “Can you name one law in this country that regulates a man’s body?” IMO Senator Kamala Harris is a force of nature.
9
Progressives need to get it through their heads that most Democrats could care less about electing a "history-making" president. They're not fixated on having a woman or a person of color; they want somebody who can WIN.
Kamala Harris may have appeal on the coasts but her support elsewhere will be nominal. I can't wait to see her in a Midwestern city with a large Catholic population trying to explain how the Knights of Columbus is an organization with "extreme positions." I guess she doesn't like fish fries.
11
Does the Democratic party even know we exist in the purple states? The current roster of elite coastal candidates are not who need. They might as well 'flyover' us like Hillary did. To date, I wouldn't support any of them. Their exploratory committees better spend time with us to hear our needs and they better keep in the forefront that swing states like ours often decide the electoral college.
5
@shstl
You need to get it through your head that Democrats are all different but the one thing we all have in common is that we want the Democrat to win. I'm Catholic and I'm not fond of the Knights of Columbus other than providers of places to hold weddings and catering. And I hate fish fries.
1
Personally I'm excited about Harris's announcement and look forward to hearing more from her. However, b/c it comes up so often and jabs at me every time it does, this bears saying: Democrats (& others) did NOT stay home in 2016. We came out in significantly higher numbers while a pre-rigged election was stolen -- by the current Administration, its corrupt players, Russian hackers and Republican gerrymandering - as well as an antiquated electoral system. WE KNOW THAT NOW. Why is it said that we lost that election? The thing we've lost is our democratic election process - which we could certainly lose again. Democrats & others came out in far greater numbers than the "winner," and they voted for a woman who is experienced, forceful, has a mind, experience, and a background... baggage and all.
What I'm saying is that the problem is NOT about voters not coming out. We have enough problems going into this next monumentally important election without shooting ourselves in the foot. We must speak up with FACTS, and remind everyone of the realities. The other side likes to say that we lost that election: we don't need to repeat their propaganda. We had and have the numbers... Now we need to use them to win.
1
'“Kamala Harris is arguably the least vetted Democrat running for president, but it’s already clear how unqualified and out-of-touch she is,” the Republican National Committee said...'
Credit to the RNC for having enough self-awareness to not use the hyperbole the POTUS surely would have to call Harris the 'least qualified candidate ever'. That title is held firmly by Trump, reality TV personality/professional grifter, and the RNC clearly knows it.
1
This new American citizen is so amazed to vote for the first time and find that one of the candidates in the primary is the name sake of his grand mother. Great country!
1
The Democrats are on fire and good for them! Finally.
So many great and RESPONSIBLE candidates to choose
from.
The Republicants? Not even one.
1
Senator Kamala Harris throwing her hat makes me feel great that all is not lost in my favorite country.
Informed people, well wisher, have been watching with horror Trump America ceding the global moral and ethical leadership without any resistance. When everything appeared lost, the news of Kamala entering the Presidential race comes as fresh breath of hope.
I recollect an aunt of Kamala remarking "Kamala is an ambitious girl; she knew what she wanted to achieve. She wanted to be a lawyer, she did. She wanted to be attorney general, she did. She wanted to run for the Senate and she did. Having known her fighting spirit, I don't think she will stop here. She is not scared of anything and will fight for everything that she aims to achieve."
USA Today said “During his campaign, Trump faced accusations of sexual misconduct and said "I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn't lose any voters." "With Trump, his very platform of running was 'all presidents lie, all politicians lie. Trump has made more than 3,000 false or misleading claims in his presidency. His administration has faced a slew of ethics complaints Trump supporters revealed that they think the president is lying about Stormy Daniels, but they don't care”.
One commentator very well said that the words "ethical" and "morality" define best Kamala’s soul and character.
She couldn’t have arrived at a better time as savior of America.
4
Let's see if she moves more to the center.
1
She would have a much better chance of winning if she changed that forgettable campaign slogan.
1
Lets take a moment to compare and contrast the 4 Democratic women that just recently announced their candidacy. Warren, Gabbard, Gillibrand and now Harris... 3 of them appear to me to be disingenuous identity politics warriors. Warren with her claims to tribal heritage and essentially branding her identity as such in this new and horribly misguided paradigm on the Left where for some reason your sexual, gender, ethnic and racial identity is more meaningful than the policies and positions you espouse... and then we have Gillibrand and Harris opportunistically throwing Franken under the bus, demanding his resignation over a distasteful physical gag he made during his previous endeavor as a comedian. It speaks volumes to who Harris and Gillibrand are as people, willing to sell someone out before all the facts came to light to make headlines and virtue signal to the media and their base.... Gabbard can at least admit when she's wrong about an issue, change her position and admit evolution... doesn't play the race/gender card for personal gain and rather have her policies scrutinized... and most importantly. You can tell she's a genuine person and believer in what she says when she says it. Warren does as well to be honest... Gillibrand and Harris are inauthentic corporatist, establishment Democratic figures and deserve to be openly derided in the media as such.
7
LBJ , despite his horrid Vietnam policy, was the last POTUS who was effective in promoting the necessary change our nation needed (i.e. Civil Rights, 'Great society Program). He was able to accomplish this ONLY because of his decades service in the House and Senate.
Mrs Harris, you have neither. Instead you have a modest record as California's Attorney General, and even more modest record as our junior Senator.
What's your hurry, beyond ego?
3
Senator Kamala Harris is Donald Trump's worst nightmare — an intelligent, insightful, driven, slightly cynical, enormously engaging, tough, spirited and immensely talented woman. She will eviscerate him in any debate, and (hopefully) trounce him in the 2020 election. A Harris/Booker, Harris/Castro ticket would seal the deal. Much as we love Joe Biden, America needs a fresh start and renewed vision, after the Trump debacle.
4
@H. Clark
How wrong you are - Kamala Harris is Trump’s dream come true, second only to Elizabeth Warren getting the nomination. When will we learn how to win?
3
We keep getting this all wrong.
Unfortunately, in 2020, we need a candidate the Republicans will vote for. We cannot present a woman of color born to immigrants - the polar opposite of Trump.
As much as I respect her, the time is not right.
2
@Can
It's not the color or gender. Trust me on this. It's the positions. Anyone who supports sanctuary cities will never get much support from the middle or the right.
5
@Can probably the most astute observation in the comments today.
2
I am African-American. I don't know her complete record, so I will hold my prediction on her chances. However, I heard something while watching the Joy Reid show months ago. Joy Reid asked about Harris's chances at the presidency. One of her three guest said no chance,"interracial" marriage or relationship. I found it interesting that no one else disagreed. I googled to find that her husband is white. When I talked with my black friends, young and old, I discovered there wasn't one that would vote for her. They didn't believe that a black person married to a white could truly represent their interest. She would be influenced by her white husband. When I asked if Harris were married to another race (person of color), it changed significantly. They could vote for her. One friend said to me: black people would have never helped put Obama in the White House if he were married to a white woman. They would not have trusted him.
5
So, according to the Republican National Committee, "Kamala Harris is arguably the least vetted Democrat running for president, but it’s already clear how unqualified and out-of-touch she is". Given the unvetted and unqualified individual they have foisted upon the nation (and the world) as president of the United States it takes incredible gall to put out a statement like that. I guess that shouldn't come as a surprise; they must be scared of her: she's a smart, tough, articulate woman of mixed descent who knows the law, and is a former state attorney general and prosecutor. Given the record of the current president, they surely don't want someone like that to have executive power after he leaves.
When one thinks of Sen. Kamala Harris throwing her hat into the presidential race ring some descriptors come to mind. She is:
1) Very smart
2) Very empathatic
3) Very driven
4) Very lucid
5) Very photogenic
6) Very skilled as an orator
And. . .
7) Very new to politics at the federal level
Remind you of anyone? Hint: A first term and inexperienced US senator who rose quickly to prominence in the national arena and announced his candidacy for the presidency.
As a Democrat I will do all I can to ensure that Donald Trump is a one-term president, but if we have learned nothing from the 2016 election nothing is a sure thing, even when the polls are predicting a 95% chance of one candidate winning right up until the ballots were being counted, and then she lost!
If elected can Kamala Harris restore honor, dignity, intelligence and leadership back into the Oval Office? Sure. But so could any of the other 19 Democrats who will be vying for the nomination in the next two years.
I am hoping that the Democrats don't eat their own in their zeal to get back into the White House, which is one of the reasons I will not support Kirsten Gillibrand for her shameless attack on Al Franken last year.
And I wish Sen. Harris had a bit more experience as a senator before setting her sights on the presidency.
4
Terrible candidate and a product of leftist California politics. California's craziness will not sell well in Peoria.
Though Trump will trounce all declared and undeclared Democratic candidates, the least successful will be Kamala Harris.
Financiers shall not float her candidacy.
5
I am wondering if the three female candidates who have announced their intentions relatively early in the game are sending a signal to a certain past nominee not to bother.
1
...the Republican National Committee said in a statement... “all she has to show for her brief time in the Senate is a radically liberal voting record.”
How is it possible to have a radically liberal voting record if McConnell won't even allow a vote on anything Trump doesn't already support?
We need fresh ideas, dynamic change and hope for the human race. This is what a strong slate of Democratic candidates will bring to the forefront. The slate of hate that the GOP panel of contenders condensed from the country in the last election brought us to our knees with the Trump mistake in the eyes of the free world. The lead up to the election will be thrilling. Intellect is back.
Start thinking about the long-term. She is very attractive as a vice-presidential candidate. Presidential candidates John Kerry and Joe Biden will add her to the ticket in a heartbeat. Ms. Harris will energize youth, ethnic minorities, and progressive voters. Her record as DA and AG will appeal to moderates. Only time will tell.
2
WE have too many ambitious and over ambitious men and women in America. This is democracy American style. Next candidate Nikki Haley. She stands better chance and I will vote for her.
3
I find her uninspiring. She sounded like Hillary when I heard her speak. Appealing to an older generation of women, perhaps. In fact, her identity seems to be a very big part of it.
4
8 candidates in the field and it isn't even February! None of them excites me. Gillibrand and Harris are out for me. Read Al Franken.
In fact Al Franken is the only one who should be in the field .
2
I love her. But we need to take the Presidency back. Given the gerrymandering, voter suppression and other anti-democratic tools, not to mention the math of the Electiral College, the plutocrats and bigots of the GOP have used and will keep on using, she is a non-starter at this juncture in our history. I fear any woman is. And I would love to see a woman in the White House, as a 70-year old white guy.
In the end, I think the realities dictate a candidate for us like Sherrod Brown. But as we proved the last time around, realities don’t control the Democratic Party. I knew we would lose once Hillary was nominated, because regardless of the merits, she had too much baggage. And yes, scorn “likeabiliy” if you will, but neither she nor the Orange Excrescence had it, but he got just enough votes in just enough states to win the Electoral College. Ultimately, that is all that matters.
This is the last thing we need.
It is pretty clear that the fact that Obama's presidency was so polarizing simply because he was an Afro-American. I'm not justifying this, I think such thinking is totally wrong, and wish it was not so. However I recognize that wishes and facts are not the same thing. The fact is that for all the progress we have made over the past six decades, race is still an highly contentious issue in this country.
There is a small but dangerous minority of "deplorables", fanatical hate mongering racists. They however do not decide elections. Those who do belong to a much bigger group I would define as racially ambivalent. They are uncomfortable with racism, but are equally uncomfortable with large doses of expeditious change. The moment they feel a change overload, they instinctively go back to embracing yesteryear's wrong but familiar norms, based on culturally outdated and morally wrong values. Lumping them together with the truly deplorable may make liberals feel good and righteous, but is neither helpful not constructive, and will do nothing to encourage the change we want and need.
We need to choose the candidate with the best chances of generating a Democratic landslide at federal and state levels in 2020. Only such an achievement can change the course of the country from hating and polarization to healing. There is unfortunately no way an Afro-American woman can do that, no matter how qualified. That is the unpalatable reality.
1
@yonatan Ariel
No, it's not clear the Obama was so polarizing because he was African-American. It was his policies and his uncanny ability to mesmerize and sell snow in winter.
1
You will absolutely get my vote if you can bring back the the leadership, honesty, dignity, and to really truly make America great again.
Trump is our President yes, but I do not approve of his message, the way he treats women, the way he treats immigrants who want a better life, and the spitefullness he spills out when things don't go his way. Our country is one of the best countries in the world, and it's a shame how much we have changed since Donald Trump.
Obama was inspirational and positive, whenever you seen him and Michelle in public he always held the door for her, she was always first, and their dedication for each other was evident in the smiles on their faces. I never seen Michelle smack at Obama's and when he reached back for his wife, and I am 100% confident you will never find any suggestions or proof of Obama having relationships with open stars and being chased around in his tighty-whities.
As a veteran and victim of MST/PTSD, in which I am still denied benefits for... I will give you my vote as I stood up for my country because of 9-11 because it's what had to be done. America is based on diversity and equality, that's one of many facts that makes our nation great, which is why so many great people from all walks of life will sacrifice it all to take a chance to be a part of the American Dream.
Let's get America back on track, and this time let's sincerely and honestly Make America Great Again.
God bless America!
We need to continue the generational change that was begun with the election of Obama. In addition to relative youth, we need people in office who can adapt their thinking to fit a new set of circumstances.
Trump's flaws are so deeply ingrained that there is no hope of him establishing a rapport with anyone outside his base. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/20/us/donald-trump-leadership-style.html
We need someone who has a reverse gear, not someone who only seeks to bulldoze opponents.
Stop the spin and the blame games. Don't tell me what to think...tell me what YOU think and why and I'll decide whether or not I agree with you.
This is an absolute free-for-all. If you are (1) Female; (2) Non-white; (3) Under 40 & (last but not least) (4) Smart, you have a shot.
1
It would be helpful if the NY Times reporters would talk about candidates' policies rather than pigeon holing them as left or right. What are their views on the major issues that influence Americans lives? Would that be interesting?
4
I for one will not be supporting Mrs Harris for one reason and one reason only ... her abysmal record as prosecutor ... her stubbornness to right wrongs despite the mountainous evidence that required a course correction ... I, however will only change my mind if she is the last person standing, which I highly doubt !
3
Every single one of these democratic presidential candidates has fully embraced the far left agenda:
- abolish ICE, single payer healthcare, radical green agenda, sky high income taxes, government engineered equal outcomes, rather than equal opportunity. Every single one of them now hold exactly the same positions. Whichever one wins, they will easily win New York and California, but hand Trump a second term.
7
@Dan M, higher income taxes will prevent us from following Greece down the garden path to destruction. Socialized medicine will make life in America affordable for all. Free state universities, I went to one. CCNY. it’s all possible. It would take someone like Bloomberg to figure it out.
1
@David J - we aren’t Greece, we collect plenty of taxes, Democrats just want to redistribute wealth. Bill De blasio actually said that money is in the wrong hands. I went to college and Law School, I didn’t ask taxpayers to pay for my education. It is more meaningful when you earn it. I would vote for Bloomberg
4
I think there's a distinction to be made between the legitimate and understandable excitement that we've finally reached a point of being open and giving real support on a national scale to women and diverse candidates for president (ridiculously long overdue) and the candidates themselves.
And based on what I have read about her, what I would give to be able to have Shirley Chisholm as my president.
1
Our protracted "running" season diverts attention from important and present issues that should be acted upon at the very time when the nation is bombarded with campaigning.
Those already elected to any public office should serve the term for which they were elected. Time limits from "announcing" to campaigning would make government more efficient and we the people would be better served. A potential candidate would certainly be more effective, visible, and transparent by their proven record.
1
Only Bernie Sanders has an effective agenda. Support anyone else and we will have a Clinton-Obama repeat, full of the same
concession to the right that created dissatisfaction and brought about our recent catastrophe with Trump.
Only a complete and thorough agenda that controls the runaway banks, offers a country-wide minimum wage of 15$, universal health-care and free tuition at state colleges will win.
11
@JFP, I went to a wonderful four year college for free. No scholarships, just high enough marks to maintain my matriculation at the City College of New York. What was the calculus then which could maintain a free college? Oh right Mayor Lindsay gave all that money to Michael Quinn. I forgot. And it has cost the city ever since.
Well, that money is gone. Now to recoup funds, we’ll have to stop manufacturing advanced fighter jets that even the pentagon doesn’t want. And then there’s the 5 billion dollar wall. Although not enough, some shekels were saved already. We need a national gofundme.
Oh yeah it’s called taxes. Raise’em!
@JFP
Old, white, male, DC insider for decades, life long politician.
Wow, so progressive.
We need statutory or even constitutional reform that limits the entire presidential cycle to six months, rather than two years. We also need states to hold their primaries always in groups - not the total farce of candidates bending the knee in Iowa and New Hampshire.
As for Harris, I'll take her over Warren, Sanders, and above all over Gillibrand. But I want to hear more from Booker, Gabbard, and Castro, and possibly from O'Rourke, although I think he would be a better choice for VP.
6
I'm a California native, but must admit that I have little knowledge of Harris. When she ran for senate, I did some research and found that she had courted the Indian community with promises of bringing more here on H-1B visas. I found that startling, so I emailed her about this but predictably got no response. I also watched her in action during the Kavanaugh hearings and, as a lawyer myself, was singularly unimpressed with her un-lawyer like performance and rude behavior (and I am no Kavanaugh fan). Thus far I am not a fan, but as an independent I will withhold judgment hoping that the Democrats put forth their best candidate for defeating Trump or any other radical Republican who runs in his place. I believe we do need to return to centrist politics and that we would be best off with a slightly left of center Democrat. Not sure she is it.
43
She is a Tamil which is a very successful immigrant group in the US. And the H 1B visas help the US remain world competitive in STEM. US graduates are simply too costly and too concerned with worker rights and benefits.
@RunDog I agree! She behaves in a way to get attention and always plays gotcha with people when in senate hearings. Always trying to get ya rather then do what best for country. She is a typical politician! Doesnt lead
6
@RunDog
As the daughter of Immigrants from two different parts of the world she is a living endorsement of the H-1B and other visas. Make America Great Again!
1
These longer and longer election cycles are not a good thing for our democracy because it causes elected politicians to spend almost as much time campaigning as doing the job they were elected to do. For instance, Senator Harris has only served one year out of her four year term, but will now spend up to two years campaigning, and if she happens to win, will then not serve out her last year. I happen to think she is a great candidate, but if I was a Californian who voted for her for senator, I would also be disappointed at her change in priorities.
19
@Diego … I think it is the right time for her and she knows our Governor will select someone qualified and a Democrat to replace her in the Senate.
1
Agree. How exactly are senators like Harris, Warren, Gillibrand, and Booker going to be serving their constituents while they actively battle for the nomination as unlikely 2020 winnable candidates (all coastal elites running on the heels of a failed coastal woman). They should stay in their states and make a real difference by promoting fulltime the voices of their constituents in Congress right now. We need them there instead of on the rigorous campaign trail leading to nowhere.
2
It's certainly a wide field for 2020 with many qualified candidates and I look forward to seeing how it takes shape. For all those questioning/critiquing Ms. Harris' experience at this moment in time, may I remind that she has years in public service, the legal field, and local and state government. Our current WH occupant had absolutely zero experience before taking office and look at the conundrum we have now. Ms. Harris would have my vote if she won the primary.
10
@JM
For more on Kamala Harris' years of public service, see this Times article published on January 17:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/17/opinion/kamala-harris-criminal-justice.html
According to Wikipedia, "Kamala Harris was born on October 20, 1964, in Oakland, California, to a Tamil Indian mother and a Jamaican father. Her mother, Shyamala Gopalan Harris, was a breast cancer scientist who immigrated to the US from Madras (now Chennai) in 1960.[4][5] Her father, Donald Harris, is a Stanford University economics professor who emigrated from Jamaica in 1961 for graduate study in economics at University of California, Berkeley.[6][7][8]" Her family and background are quite interesting as you can see from the link below.
Ms. Harris is a very effective Senator and I'm looking forward to hearing what she has to say. Frankly, I think too many previous "prosecutors" and other lawyers are in OUR governments and everything becomes a legal battle. She sounds like she might be an excellent U.S. Attorney General. Time will tell.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamala_Harris
6
@njglea
" Frankly, I think too many previous "prosecutors" and other lawyers are in OUR governments and everything becomes a legal battle."
You are correct! See the following Times article, published just last week:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/17/opinion/kamala-harris-criminal-justice.html
@njglea She resembles President Obama in many ways, not least in her mixed-race parentage. I note that the article never refers to her as African-American, but rather as black. It’s questionable whether a mixed-race person automatically becomes black in the 21st century; one would hope that the old racist standards that looked to any black heritage to assign categories is ended. But Ms. Harris is not African-American, either in the traditional definition (ie a descendant of people brought to America for enslavement) or the literal one (ie the descendant of more recent immigrants from Africa).
Politics being what it is, and the identity politics of the time eschewing nuance, look for Ms. Harris to nevertheless become African-American over the course of the campaign. The sad thing is that she will likely get more traction with the subterfuge than from a detailed enunciation of her positions and her plans for the country.
2
@Shiv
Obama, whom I don't consider black, at least had a black parent. I am not sure Harris's father is actually black. One needn't be black to be Jamaican. Regardless, I consider Harris to be Asian rather than black but I am sure she will claim to be African-American throughout her campaign and she kicked it off by announcing her candidacy on MLK Day. She is pandering already. No doubt she will pull a bottle of hot sauce from her purse at some point.
3
" Senator Kamala Harris, the California Democrat and barrier-breaking prosecutor who became the second black woman to serve in the United States Senate,"
She is half Jamaican and half Asian Indian (Tamil Indian). I m proud of her Indian heritage. In one of her interviews in India Abroad magazine this is what she said about her heritage.
"My mother was very proud of her Indian heritage and taught us, me and my sister Maya, to share in the pride about our culture. We used to go back to India every couple of years. One of the most influential people in my life, in addition to my mother, was my grandfather T V Gopalan, who actually held a post in India that was like the Secretary of State position in this country. My grandfather was one of the original Independence fighters in India, and some of my fondest memories from childhood were walking along the beach with him after he retired and lived in Besant Nagar, in what was then called Madras."
If she wins and becomes the president of this country that will be great news for all Indians.
7
My grandfather lived in Tamil Nadu. She will get huge support from the Indian diaspora in the US.
@Padman
‘If she wins and becomes the president of this country that will be great news for all Indians.’
President of the USA is a president for all peoples of the USA, not just Indians.
You need some one who will appeal to all, not just her own ethnicity.
I could not care less about more Tamils showing up and getting a free green card, but I would love to get some one who reforms our stupid one sided ‘justice system’, and this person being glad she helped Indians get H1B visas is a non starter for me, or frankly any one not a Tamil.
Find some one who will care for all Americans, not just for their favorite voting block.
3
This is the "don't do it again" moment. She's another Hillary. That didn't work last time, not even against a clown like Trump.
36
@Mark Thomason What, specifically is there about Ms. Harris’s candidacy that reminds you of Hillary Clinton’s candidacy? I tried to imagine what you are thinking but couldn’t come up with many similarities between the two, except that both are smart women.
4
@Mark Thomason
Wrong. On so many counts.
1
@Mark Thomason, you’re wrong, Kirsten Gillibrand is another Hillary. Harris is another Obama: no experience, no record, no accomplishments. For all his personal magnetism, style and grace, his Presidency was devoid of significant accomplishment. How long can we go on with all flash, no substance Presidents?
With all due respect to Ms. Harris & the other candidates, the person most qualified to be president is Michael Bloomberg. He has already successfully managed the most complicated city in the country. He understands budgets; He thinks outside of the box which we will need to navigate us through trade issues and immigration reform. He is tech savvy which is important in a world where there are all these cybercriminals trying to harm us and with the coming 5G revolution won't be intimidated by it. Plus he is a known quantity with a record of achievement.
74
@Accordion . Perhaps, but he would have to run. Many people not running for the job may be "most qualified," but until one commits, that's a phantom qualification.
5
@Accordion
He was a very effective mayor, in my opinion, but, sad to say, I just don't see someone like Bloomberg appealing to the rest of the country (ex., everyone in between coasts).
5
@Accordion sure, what we need is another “Businessman” in the White House. Worked out great with George W Bush and Trump. Maybe the 3rd time is the charm? No thanks.
3
It is nice to see so many running in 2020. Only one will get the top spot though. I dearly hope they gravitate to work together and not tear each other down. We need a great team, not a dysfunctional narcissistic TV star with a ragtag team of fighting amongst themselves, a gang of incompetents and underminers such as we have now.
Women are perhaps better at teamwork so it's heartening to see so many running. The team that works together best — for all the American people — is the team we need.
May the best "team" win!
22
As a Californian, I would like to see Ms. Harris do the job she was elected to do. Maybe after a few years of proving herself in that role, she could start vying for higher office. Right now she is vastly premature in this move and, frankly, should be immediately shamed into recanting her unwise candidacy. She's not going to win; she's just doing to spend a lot of energy that could be used serving California in the Senate.
278
@Jim
Agreed. There really should be an unspoken rule against junior senators running for POTUS. I.voted for Obama twice and the reality is his charisma and enthusiasm could not overcome his lack of experience. The GOP ran roughshod all over his administration because he had not built the level of political capital required to move his agenda forward. The most important test of candidates should be their record of accomplishments prior to running. What has Kamala done for CA or anywhere, thus far as a senator that voters should believe in her ability to actually deliver on her agenda?
63
@Jim Agreed. She is extremely ambitious. She is not committed to her responsibilities. Actually, she started campaigning for a higher office virtually the moment she was sworn in as Senator. Her "platform" magically changed from a law-and-order candidate to a true-blue Democrat who champions "the people" because that is where the votes are. Sadly, "the people" doesn't include taxpayers. She is a consummate politician, I'll give her that. California was just a check mark on her resume.
57
“She’s not qualified enough.” I’m so sick of this common trope thrown at women who are clearly qualified the job and often over-qualified. Look at our current standard bearer, #45. Ms. Harris is qualified. Period. Disagree with her policies, sure, but surely we can all move on from this anachronistic thinking?!
41
Have we become so shallow as a nation that “checking all the boxes” qualifies a person for the Presidency? What about experience, a track record, or a list of accomplishments? Don’t point to the current occupant of the White House; to some extent his election was due to the perception among many of eight years of no experience, no track record and no accomplishment.
36
@Larry
...and his election was due to the electoral college. He lost the popular (ie, the only real) vote.
@Larry
"What about experience, a track record, or a list of accomplishments?"
I agree Larry. Also, what about a vision that goes beyond envy and entitlement?
1
@Barbara, it’s one thing not to understand that the Presidential election is, and always has been, state-by-state with Electoral votes apportioned by population and Electors chosen by voters in each state, but to suggest that it isn’t “real” is grossly unfair.
2
She has my vote and I will be contributing to her campaign.
16
our presidental campaign race is such a mess. 2 years we have to put up with this, not to mention the jurassic electoral college which gave us general bone spur. it seems like we have a congress that is so dilapidated, so non-functional that is has no sense of time, of the times we now live in. we must blame the GOP for this, most notably mitch mcconnell. can kentucky really be that backwards? i would rather have hilary as president, with all her flaws and bents, than what our election process has given us. can the electoral college and give runners one year.
6
I am a teacher at a state University in Huntington, West Virginia. I am a registered Democrat, and wish to join as supporter to Ms Kamala Harris’s bid for the Presidency. She has the Qualification, the Personality, the Persistence, and the Ideas that would serve our country well in this tumultuous/divisive period. She has the disposition that would unite our population, and help our country to regain its rightful position in the assembly of nations
13
I'm still waiting for a democrat to announce their candidacy while riding an "up" elevator with their partner. Maybe the whole field could join for a group ride?
4
Enjoyed the image (really, no snark intended), but-- what we need is proactive substance, not reactive imagery.
1
Aren't we just now trying to survive an inexperienced President? The ego of it all.
11
@Ken
She is reminiscent of Obama, except he used up all the platitudes when he ran.
She comes across as too full of herself. Her reason for running is simply about indulging the ego.
43
The Democrats' are busy forming their customary pre- pre- pre campaign firing squad.
As usual, it looks kewl as all get-out, and receives the requisite full adoration of the coastal media.
And, of course, it is a circular one.
Not that the GOP does not act similarly; but there is no venom matching what Dems spew at each other.
5
Democrats don't want to vote for the most qualified candidate. They want a prom king. They need to "like" the person. Hillary Clinton had plenty of great policy ideas and in 2016 many Democrats either stayed home or voted for other candidates. We're seeing this play out again, with the criticisms of Liz Warren, Kirsten Gillebrand, and now Kamala Harris.
As for their statements against Al Franken? Well, had he behaved in a non-sexist manner, his resignation would never have happened. And yet somehow his conduct is these women's fault.
Contrast Democrats' immaturity with the Republicans. They may be racists and bigots, but nonetheless, they are extremely disciplined voters. I was a young adult during the Nixon era. Nobody "liked" him, not even the Republicans. But they understood that they were voting for someone whose views aligned more consistently with theirs. And they have been loyal, consistent voters since then.
Fast forward to 2020. I don't think any woman can win in 2020, precisely because of the kinds of comments we're seeing here, even from a center-left readership. There is always "something wrong" with the woman candidate - she's too old, too young, too weak, too "aggressive". But until Democrats accept that they should vote for those whose positions most align with theirs, they'll never win back the presidency. Because of their immaturity we now have two more far right justices on the Supreme Court, with a third possible.
My message to Democrats? Grow up.
20
@Charles Dodgson Warren is sincere but irritating. Gillebrand and Harris are egotists and not to be trusted. Amy Klobucher however, is great. She could win the presidency. If Nancy Pelosi didn't have the baggage she could win it.
@Charles Dodgson Great points! I am sick and tired of hearing people talk about politicians' personalities. You're not supposed to vote based on how "likable" they are (whatever that means); you're supposed to vote based on how capable and fair they are.
1
@Charles Dodgson Democrats? Democrats didn't elect our president excuse for a president. That was the proud accomplishment of all those red states who, to this day, praise him for his winner-take-all, no compromise, bullying behavior. It sure wasn't for his record.
1
Only one thing matters in the candidate who runs for President in 2020. Can that candidate win the electoral votes in the Cornhusker districts in the MIddle West that Hillary lost. That is what swings Presidential elections in the US. Winning the popular vote means nothing. Being loved in Berkely and Boston, that will go Democratic anyway, does not matter. Hillary did both of those things and Trump sits in the White House.
13
Ms. Harris has the stuff needed to confront the destructive nature of Donald Trump and a Republican Party that represents the worse instincts for American Democracy. We wish her well.
7
@priscus. Being able to confront is one thing, being able to lead is another. Trump actually illustrates this point.
1
Voters cue in on small differences that reveal underlying beliefs and priorities. Small things matter, like tone, verb tense, word choice and sequence. For example, Hillary’s “I’m with her” should have been “She’s with us.” It was very revealing and made a big difference.
Harris is tone deaf when she says:
“Let’s do this together: For ourselves, for our children, for our country.”
That slogan is a loser. For broad appeal she needs to reverse the order of those priorities.
7
@Nate
Interesting how “for ourselves” is first, a perfect fit for our me, me, me selfie times.
1
The perfect ticket would be Ms. Harris and Sen. Tammy Duckworth for VP. Solid, unshakable and able to withstand the various and sundry ad hominem attacks that no doubt will be thrown at the candidate. Not "single issue" candidates, they would be able to pull in many of the independents and younger folks in the electroate who have chosen to sit out too many elections.
4
@David
The problem is that Democrats need someone who can appeal to the center as well as the progressive base. Kamala Harris will have trouble inning over elements of both sides of the spectrum, but she could still garner a sizable chunk of (D) political support.
Personally I like her. Her statements and arguments are concise and succinct and she seems fair.
This individual is spurious and dangerous to the union and our Constitution.
8
@Mark Andrew Sir, are you referring to our current president by chance?
@Mark Andrew Individual 1?
@Mark Andrew You mean Individual 1, right?
She's strong, smart and tough as nails but its too soon for a Jr. Senator to take on the office. Besides, is there anything that gets the GOP more riled up than a brown skinned, smart, capable woman? They'd lose their collective minds at the prospect.
10
@Adam … Obama was a Jr. Senator when he won … and was a two-term President. I think Ms. Harris will be too.
1
If we could bring back Shirley Chisom I'd vote for HER!
6
A Biden/Harris ticket? This possibility has a bevy of attractiveness to it, and a reversal of its Obama/Biden predecessor for our present tumultuous times, courtesy of the no-nothing incumbent Fake President.
5
As one of her constituents, I was excited to vote for Harris in 2016. She is Bay Area to the bone, and represents my concerns and passions.
IF an election was solely held on merits, she would be a slam dunk. BUT, as evident in the current day, a huge swath of Americans have a problem with electing a competent person to the WH.
133
@PattyG
Rather than a uniter she's seen, as a result of her performance at Senate hearings, as somewhat of a "flame thrower." Bright and articulate but with only two years experience she seems to be in a hurry to climb the ladder. Causing some to criticize her ambition.
She will have to explain Lara Bazelon's recent Op-ed revelations? That information has begun to be disseminated nationally. I think it is so damming it may soon prevent her from continuing as a candidate as many on this Comment thread have previously indicated.
8
@PattyG
"She is Bay Area to the bone"
And that's the problem in the first place.
2
"Her native state has moved up its primary to early March, immediately after the first four early-nominating states, presenting the possibility that she could capture a large trove of delegates just as the contest gets underway." So right out of the gate it's about Ms. Harris capturing delegates, not putting forth a platform. Just what America needs.
14
@Kurt Pickard CA's early primary finally makes the most populous state politically relevant. And the people of CA are already aware of Ms Harris' platform.
1
@Mark Tele
Cali is no more or less relevant than any other state of the union, Mark. Your state has the most seats of any state in the House, 53. What else you got?
1
I watched Harris' announcement video. I hate to say this, but I have never seen such a empty campaign intro. There were absolutely no concrete ideas in it, just a bunch of feel good phrases like "fighting for our children's future" and so on.
I know that a 30-second campaign intro isn't the time to outline detailed policy proposals, but compared to people like Elizabeth Warren, I haven't the slightest idea what Harris actually stands for.
I wish her well, but I hope she learns from Hillary two years ago. Saying a lot of vague, nice, uncontroversial things is the same as not saying anything at all. Trump came down the escalators of Trump Tower with one (awful, racist) message - build a wall - and a campaign was born. If Democrats want to fight fire with fire, generalized platitudes about how much you love this country isn't gonna cut it.
161
@Solaris She doesn't need to pack ideas into it at this stage in the game.
And I for one would love to see a Democrat candidate stay away from divisive rhetoric and stick to arguing the basics: rule of law, defense of our liberties, minority rights, civic duty, and defending the Constitution. Those would be good campaign themes. Specific policy proposals are well and good but they don't mean anything if the candidate can't sell people on what they're saying emotionally and persuasively.
We need a candidate who can define themselves against Trump, but in a good way. I want to see a candidate whose motto is "when they go low we go high" and who is really good at
a) actually answering questions
b) making arguments
On the sad side, the Republicans would freak out and get vitriolic. But perhaps that will just remind people they aren't particularly guided by their better angels these days.
@Solaris
Well said, Solaris. "Saying a lot of vague, nice, uncontroversial things is the same as not saying anything at all". And even she doesn't have the slightest idea of what she stands for.
Let's face it. Harris is simply a racist and no where near the calibur of person needed to be president.
1
@Solaris MAGA isn't a "generalized platitude?
Other than to garner donations and build up a war chest I cannot understand why Senator Harris would be considered a viable candidate. Her appeal to a broad base outside of Northern CA is non existent.
74
@Natuimre Voter I'm in Seattle and I have been waiting for this announcement. I've watched Ms Harris at work in hearings. She is intelligent, calm, will not be sidetracked or snowed. She had Jeff Sessions sweating bullets.
16
@Arzurama I do not doubt she is very intelligent, or calms as you state; but her appeal remains primarily metro centric based in the Bay Area, CA and in your case Seattle. There are huge swaths of voters and cities outside of those coastal bubbles. Not to say that her appeal may widen but she currently lacks the name recognition or signature policy to propel her into a viable or nationally electable candidate.
1
I live in very red Ohio and she appeals to me very much.
1
From what I have seen so far, Kamala Harris stands out as the most careful, most articulate and among the very short list of most qualified and ready to hold the office. Admittedly, I am still learning about her but the more I see the more I'm convinced that with her intelligence, her character and strength along with her specific experience renders her uniquely qualified for the job at this country's present troubled time. To my mind it would also relieve the heavy burden off the shoulders of Joe Biden of the "necessity" to step in. Joe is a "warhorse" who has already more than paid his dues. There are a few other promising Democrats I feel are not quite ready for prime time such as Kirsten Gillibrand who should earn more stripes and prepare for "down the road". At the present Kamala Harris is the one my gut tells me is the right choice and the feeling is only getting stronger.
16
@Blasthoff Easy for you to say, out there in Indiana. In the meantime, we in the Golden State have one of two senators now engaged in campaigning for higher office, using time and energy that should be spent solely on pursuing the interests of the nation at large and California in particular.
2
@Blasthoff Would you also feel called to observe that Joe Biden or Kirsten Gillibrand are "articulate"? That is a word white people often use to try to compliment black people. It's not really a compliment -- but that is what Harris is up against in this race. She is intriguing, but she has to overcome her Bay Area context -- almost nobody in the US wishes they lived in the Bay Area -- and well-meaning white people patting her on the head and giving her props for being so "articulate."
2
@Jim
The lesson of the mid-term smack down of Republicans is that Democrats neither need nor care about blind mice in Indiana. They chose Trump to shake up the system. Be careful what you wish for.
I am so glad that Senator Harris finally announced her candidacy! She smart, she’s personable, she’s strong, and she knows what she’s doing in politics! She’ll definitely give any other candidate, Democrat or Republican, a run for the money!
20
I was skeptical at first, because Kamala Harris has defended "identity politics" in the past, an approach that smacks to me of divisiveness, often anti-white and anti-male. But after looking into the context and her record, I don't think identity politics is what drives KH. (In fact, her husband is a white man.) She is a true progressive who cares about all people.
I like Kamala not because of her identity, but because of her policies and toughness. As DA in San Francisco and then as AG in California, she took on the criminals that even Barack Obama failed to prosecute. Namely, she came down hard on Wells Fargo after the bank made fake accounts and stole from their customers; she protected the environment by prosecuting polluters. She favors health insurance for all, and criminal justice reform. As far as I can tell, she's the only candidate who truly will work FOR THE PEOPLE.
27
Sen Tammy Duckworth, with her military; VA; Congress and Senate experience and her articulate focus on the greater public would be the ideal Democratic nominee and the absolute antithesis to Mr. Trump, She would not only win the Democratic nomination; she would attract voters from all sides, but but as a new mother, will probably not run.
11
@Maureen Tammy Duckworth has done next to nothing in the Senate, after doing the same in the House. H0Consequently, her current approval rating in IL - a solidly Democratic state - is 44%. And her performance at the VA, both at the state and federal level, has been questionable at best:
https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/politics/ct-tammy-duckworth-veterans-affairs-met-20161018-story.html
As far as I'm concerned, her campaign is DOA, and for the same reason as Gillibrand's. No, thank you.
70
@Cindy L Gillibrand's campaign is DOA because too much of the Democratic machine, and liberal donor class, hate her for turning on Al Franken. That can't be why the Harris campaign is DOA too, if it is. Why do you think it is?
@Cindy L Modesto ... As far as you were concerned, was Josh Harder's campaign, (who the GOP tied to Pelosi and "Bay Area" values) DOA also?
@TomF
Franken was NOT part of the Democratic machine,
2
She’s my Senator, and she was my state and city’s DA, and I think she’s alright, but I won’t vote for her for President. She just doesn’t have the executive-level experience on a state level (Governor) that personally I expect someone to have when they run for President. Maybe she should at least finish out one term as US Senator first and get some more foreign diplomatic credentials under her belt?
47
@BrainThink
Those things are great to have, but, as President Obama could tell you, not necessary.
@BrainThink
I’d suggest using your “brain.”
Trump put the final nail into the idea of experience necessary to run for President.
Going forward there is only one important qualification - $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$&
Sen. Harris would make a great President . . . Some day. Now, she doesn't have the experience on a national and international level to take on the mess that Trump will leave behind. We will need an experienced person to put the nation back on the the right track when Trump is thrown out.
Sen. Harris, you were hired to represent California. If you are running for President you cannot focus on our needs. Please do the ethical thing and resign, then we can appoint someone who will focus on California.
22
@Bruce1253
I kind of feel the same about Warren. Chances are decent i'll vote for her, but Mass got thrown under the bus in the process.
3
As much as I would love to see a woman president, especially a person of color, we would be overestimating the intellect of the electorate if we think she stands a chance. This is no longer the America that voted for Obama so a white male nominee is probably safest. Second, if a woman as qualified as HRC could lose, I don't see how young inexperienced candidates like Kamala or Gillibrand will fare better.
Finally, to clean up the mess left behind by Trump, we need someone with deep institutional knowledge and vast experience, someone like Biden who might be derided as the establishment candidate, but will nevertheless get the job done quickly - prevent a recession, fix the immigration mess, resolve the logjam between Congress and the executive, and restore balance to the supreme court.
The problem with the left is that they want another "burn everything down" candidate in the mold of Bernie and Trump and refuse to admit that a moderate would be best for the country. Their short attention span also ensures that pointless glamour wins. How else do people like Beto emerge out of nowhere as front-runners? The Democratic primary should not devolve into a beauty contest or a personality test, but a tough and fair assessment of policy ideas and leadership ability.
25
@Ramya Is there any difference between Hillary and Biden besides gender?
@Ramya
You are attracted to moderate establishment candidates like Biden and Hillary.
But lots of us are ready to move on to younger candidates with more interesting backgrounds. The time for corporate Democrats is ending. HRC losing is evidence of that. Experienced or not, people did not want what Hillary was selling. Biden is more of the same.
As we evolve toward more women in positions of power, it is notable that Senator Harris is running for president largely on her prosecutorial experience. To me, that’s the groundbreaking story here.
And so - the devastating Bazelon piece from last week is a must-read. It clearly strips bare any claims that Harris makes about being a “progressive prosecutor “.
I have read Harris’ book, and have found her story to be worthy of a US senator but not a president. At least not now.
11
@Cousy .. I read her book and I think she is more than ready to be President. And I hope she will be.
@Cousy Good. She can prosecute Donald Trump
While I basically like Kamala Harris, I don’t think she is the best choice for president. Her long track record of sidling up to special interests and financial elites in California precedes her. In many respects, think she’s a gifted politician but I would much rather see her as a vice presidential candidate on Elizabeth Warren’s presidential ticket.
24
well I basically like Kamala Harris, I don’t think she is the best choice for president. Her long track record of sidling up to special interests and financial elites in California precedes her. In many respects, think she’s a gifted politician but I would much rather see her as a vice presidential candidate on Elizabeth Warren’s presidential ticket.
2
Harris checks all the right boxes -- AND is genuinely likable. People do business with -- and vote for candidates they like. Please, Democrats, pick someone this time with the magnetism and broad appeal that has worked in the past.
15
Set aside the fact that 4 years of Trump will be tough to stomach. It's time to entertain the idea that a presidential term be 6 years, and no running for reelection. That way, no campaigning, no fundraising, just working. Far too much time, energy and money is spent on these elections.
13
I would be ecstatic to vote for such a qualified progressive, especially a woman of color! To all those who say “Next”, are you kidding me? I say YES!
24
This is an unfortunate dividend of the election of Trump. Now everyone who thinks they want to be President also thinks they have a chance. This woman is more qualified than some, but there will be outliers like Adriati, Baldwin, and Opra who think we should like them as President. Where are the States women and men?
4
Where are the States women and men (white folks)? The last time I checked they’re in positions of power at federal and state levels. The States women and men are digging in to hold on to power.
1
I am afraid that McConnell and the GOP (whether they are in the majority or not), will stonewall Ms. Harris, a woman of color, the same way that they did to President Obama.
Until McConnell and his ilk, are carried out of the capitol, vertically or horizontally, Ms. Harris will encounter hostility from day one.
Additionally, This country also needs a centrist with deep international experience and diplomacy to repair what Trump has done.
It’s not just the USA that is hurting.
3
Seeing how she handles herself in hearings, and never backing down, I believe she’d do a good job. She’s determined to get the government back in line where it should be. She’ll bring back the democracy that has been lacking for 2 years.
8
@M.Z.
An interesting observation, but the bigger test comes when you’re NOT the person asking the tough questions. Many lawyers are great at dishing it out but fumble badly when on the receiving end of the same tactics. Be it the media or other candidates in a debate, how she (and others as well) will perform remains to be seen
3
Sen. Tammy Duckworth is the one person I wish would declare whom no one in the media seems to be mentioning. She is young-ish, a woman, with a young child, diverse, Midwestern, deeply patriotic, good on social media, "likable," and gives often fiery and funny rejoinders to our current madness. She is instantly and viscerally understandable as an embodiment of the sacrifice and honor that sets the best of America apart from the Trumps of America. I truly believe she could be unbeatable.
6
After watching Ms. Harris' sharp, focused questioning of the evasion Brett Kavanaugh, it was clear she would have been the better fit for the Supreme Court. She would make a great choice for the White House, too.
22
@NM -- esteemed daughter of the Cairene scholar;
Senator Harris also handed Rod Rosenstein his lunch during a previous Senate hearing. She's an iron hand in a velvet glove and all business. Since the president is afraid of Nancy Pelosi, he won't want to tangle with Ms Harris.
8
Kind friend Silver,
After all Trump's sexism, how satisfying will it be watching the women in power make him sweat? And Nancy Pelosi is just getting started! When Trump spoke of the House Speaker being scared, it was just more projection...
4
As a constituent I am very disappointed in Senator Harris having announced her candidacy for President. She is a first term Senator with much to learn and much to accomplish for our state before her ambitions are sated. As a California resident I voted for her to represent our state, not spend her time running for president.
86
@Mrs Ming Someone in this comment space addressed the same concern about permanent campaigning. They suggested a six-year one-term presidency as one part of a solution. Worth considering.
3
@Mrs Ming Obama was the worst president of my lifetime.
3
When Megan McCain recently challenged Harris to defend the 70% federal marginal rate, her response was weak and rambling. She could’ve said it was supported by strong economic research and that our country was at its strongest economically fifty years ago with that rate. Maybe she just didn’t want to publicly commit and be labeled a socialist. I’m excited, though, to see so many women in the race. Despite this country’s problems, we’re truly witnessing a seismic shift in our political landscape.
9
She is one candidate, so far, I am truly interested in learning more about.
18
As the number of Dem candidates increases I have a concern:
The more effort they spend debating and going after each other in the primary the less they will be focused on getting a Dem into the Whitehouse. And the more Dem-vs-Dem debate, the more negatives will be raised which will give more ammo to the GOP in the election.
A recent example was the GOP primary in 2016 with its huge number of candidates. As they each appealed to 5-10% of the electorate, none could get a commanding lead or the attention of most of their party. I'm convinced that Trump wouldn't have gotten much notice if GOP focused on a strong candidate or two, but in the chaos of group debates he managed to pick off each one.
If the Dems develop such a large field, it may result in a poor choice in the primaries, or a weaker candidate to take on Trump (or whoever). The party would be wise to have some quiet discussions among the wannabe candidates, about the benefits of narrowing themselves down early in the process. Whoever are the lead candidates and the eventual nominee should be more able to focus on the issues and defeating the GOP.
10
I asked several close friends in California about Kamala Harris after I had read a NY Times article about her. And nobody seems to know anything about her, not to mention her career path. Apparently she keeps a very low profile all along. Unfortunately, a NY Times Opinion article several days ago disclosed her career-path casualties. It was not good. Of course, I will not judge her just based on one or two articles. But I will wait and see what will come out in the future.
13
Ms. Harris may have a bright political future ahead of her, but, as of now, she is not ready for prime time. For some reason, this article fails to mention her unimpressive performance at the Kavanaugh hearings. She was clearly out of her league. Ms. Harris has a lot to learn before she can qualify to run for President.
27
@gigi Not ready for prime time? That didn't seem to stop the last president who was a democrat.
7
how was trump qualified?
5
@me My point, exactly.
6
I can't support her or Gillibrand. A strong liberal voice was lost in the senate when they kicked Al Franken to the curb. One instance in which the MeToo movement went overboard.
140
@Pat, I look at this criticism of two senators and then look at what we currently have in office, where we've not had one week without a scandal or corruption and go "Really?" So her agreeing with getting rid of Al Franken is your rationale for not supporting her?
Seems like Harris and Gillibrand are being held to a separate standard with roots in misogyny.
3
@C Lee
When there are many other candidates and potential candidates out there? I'm thinking a ticket of Klobuchur and Booker (we can work out later who leads the ticket) sounds much better than Harris and Gillibrand.
5
@Pat Gillibrand led the anti-Franken charge - forcing out one of the top Dem fundraisers without hearing his side of the story She is next to last (Biden) on my acceptable candidate list. Don't recall Harris having any role in that mess - enlighten me.
Why, oh why, must the US endure presidential campaigns that go on for years and cost so much? No other democratic nation wastes so much time and money this way. Aside from the media and political activists, most citizens are really put off by this lengthy abomination.
251
@George S and because of the importance of the US on the world stage, much of the world has to endure it as well given its coverage by the international media.
7
@George S
If you don't like it tune out. Should we eliminate the NFL because you and others don't like football? More $ is spent on advertising mobile phones than president.
1
@George S.....
See NPR: Why Are U.S. Elections So Much Longer Than Other Countries?
Quote:
“Big Money In Politics--- Their laws may keep some countries' elections short, but other factors allow America's to go long — big money chief among them.
Candidates can't keep advertising for a year and a half, without millions of dollars at their disposal. Our system makes candidates raise millions of dollars to even mount a serious run.
‘Voters in [Canada] would not have the tolerance or would not accept a system where that kind of money is spent on campaigns. There would be a huge uproar,’ said Don Abelson, professor of political science. "The elections tend to be very short, not terribly expensive."
Indeed, Canadians balked even at the country's recent 11-week campaign.
And in many countries, there's no massive advertising arms race like the U.S. "
Some US voters would be shocked to know many democracies don't let candidates buy TV ads. Their unpaid speech in campaigns is more free than our 'free speech' paid by big money donors. Our media avoids the whole topic. It makes big profit from paid political ads manipulating our voters.
3
Believe it or not America is not quite ready for a female president, as demonstrated with HRC. A black, female president would not be realistically obtainable right now. If KH is the Dems candidate, they will most likely lose.
5
Not sure about that—we have to take into consideration that a white male conservative has not won the popular vote since 2004. Also, demographics are changing and many conservative states will likely begin to be in play. But I don’t think we can really argue whether they country is ready or not for an “x or y” president, we don’t know really until the candidate runs and wins or loses.
4
Indeed. And Clinton had suffered the effects of 25 years of non-stop character assassination. Not to mention foreign enemies actively working against her and for the current occupant.
4
@Joe America wasn't ready to end the enslavement of Africans. Who really cares what America is ready for, and if it's not, the best question to ask is why isn't America ready and try to solve that problem. Capitulating to America's long history of racism and sexism is getting old, and spouting what America is and isn't ready for without trying to change it is worse. Like James Baldwin stated and asked, " It didn't happen in my parents time or my grandparents time, so how long do I have to wait for your so called progress?" In 2007, someone asked me who I was voting for in the primaries, I said boldly, Obama. The person responded America is not ready for a Black President. I'm glad that I didn't give in to that line of thinking and jumped on his campaign both times and worked to get him in the seat, not caring what America was ready for!!!
3
Senators win only when they run against other senators. 1996, 2000, 2004, 2008, 2016.
4
@Djt
Have you heard the problems with proof by Induction?
2
Is there a centrist in the Democratic party anywhere who can come forward and appeal to blue collar pain as well as the economic realities of a changing world? Anywhere? Just one? Because a liberal Californian is not that person. And neither are the rest of the delusional pack that have emerged so far.
37
Centrists hold no appeal for the working class, thus the problem Harris has appealing to blue collar voters in the middle of the country. Dems need to nominate a progressive to do that- Sanders or Brown.
9
Blue collar is so yesteryear.....blue collar is dying off as America progresses to the high tech financial future embodied by the blue states. Blue collar politics sounds like something Sanders would push and we saw what a failure that was.
@PAul Logan
Brown? Which Brown is that?
I expect Ocasio-Cortez to be the next nakedly ambitious Democratic woman to announce her candidacy for President. Why not? Even Oprah thinks she has a shot. The left thinks--simplistically--that Trump won in part because of his reality show background, and in part because it was an electoral fluke. Trump won because he is viewed by many voters as correct in this thinking on immigration and taxes; his reluctance to engage U.S. forces in overseas conflicts, and his contemptuous regard for political shibboleths. All the rest is noise. He is permitted to behave "on the edges" because he gets results. Trump voters are tired of policticians' pretty words and their craven political correctness genuflecting. The Democrats are offering up more of the same with Harris, Gillibrand, and the rest of their diversity nonsense. Quite frankly, if Biden decides to enter, he will smoke them out of the race. The Democrats best chance is a white male, Joe Biden.
44
@Zugzwang
AOC cannot run until 2024 due to her age and a lot can happen between now and then.
3
@Zugzwang
Why not? One very good reason. She is too young to run in 2020. That's why.
4
@Zugzwang And I'm tired of conservatives constantly dismissing what they call 'political correctness' as if respecting the civil rights of diverse people were inconsequential. Diversity is not nonsense. It's our strength. And it includes white people. Blue collar people. All people. Trump's behavior you claim is 'on the edges,' is actually not - it's central to who he is and dominates our nation's crisis. His callous, bigoted, hateful world view is central to the policies he enacts and the politics he plays
1
Alternatively I hear Kamala Harris is a “screaming” progressive and not progressive enough, that she has too much historical/professional baggage and not enough experience. How can all this be true? Lets give objective space for Harris, and the other 2020 candidates to define themselves. There’s time for that (the DT emergency notwithstanding). We have a rich field developing. Its for the best. Can we keep open minds?
13
At last, we have a reactionary Republican running for the Democratic nomination, for President of the United States.
7
Little or nothing actually gets done during election campaigns. It looks like the next two years will be Groundhog Day every day.
6
I voted for Kamala Harris to represent me as my Senator for four years.
The fact that she considers herself ready to be President after only two years in Washington indicates to me an ambition and ego that I find disturbing.
I believe Barack Obama's lack of experience proved a detriment to his effectiveness. Unfamiliar with the ways of Washington, he gave away his power to Wall Street and the health-industrial complex early in the game.
Yes we need new faces in Democratic politics, but let's focus on people like Elizabeth Warren who have paid their dues and have the requisite experience.
Of course Wall Street and the bankers and hedge funds will fight her tooth and nail, trying to make her look foolish because of her DNA test, but let's not be fooled, Democrats. Let's not start parroting the Republican playbook.
Warren took on Wall Street in 2008, and she knew what she was talking about. She knows all their ugly secrets and how they manipulate the economy for their gain and to the detriment of us ordinary people.
This is the kind of candidate I want to vote for: an experienced person who actually stands for something important.
69
@Samsara
Warren’s only been in Washington for 4 years more than Harris. How does this make her vastly more experienced? Your arguments for Warren are great reasons to make her Treasury Secretary — she’d be the bulldog we need in that role.
six years?
@Samsara
An elected senator’s term is for 6 years, not 4. Do your homework first before you opine on the matter or else it undercuts your arguments. Just saying.
1
I don't know how Ms. Harris can survive Lara Bazelon's recent Op-ed revelations? That information has begun to be disseminated nationally. I believe that it is so damming it will soon prevent her from continuing as a candidate as many on this comment thread have previously indicated. It shows such a lack of judgement that in itself is problematic.
12
In American politics today it is best to be unknown and have no clear positions on any issue. That way the people can "believe" anything they want about you. Once you have a record or a plan, it can and will be criticized.
7
'Ms. Harris, when asked why she would run for president, cited the need for leaders who have a “vision of our country in which everyone can see themselves.”'
Agree, wholeheartedly. Leaders need to communicate a vision of by answering 3 questions. How did we got here? Who is to blame for the mess we are in? How do we get out of this mess? It is still early, but after watching several interviews of Ms. Harris I have not heard any specifics to those three questions.
6
It sounds good, (I'm an English major)
but what does it mean?
3
@rls
If Senator Harris has a vision for the future of the country, she is not doing a very good job of articulating what that vision is. So far, I am wondering if anyone at all can see themselves in it.
The more she tries to 'broaden her appeal,' the more apparent it will become how narrow it is to begin with.
5
I don’t know Ms. Harris, so please don’t take this as a commentary on her. Before we end up with a Bozo bus like the Republicans had in the last Presidential election, please, everyone step back from the ledge and take some time to get our act together. Chaos is our enemy. Only real, thoughtful action will bring is progress. I’m not advocating decision paralysis, just deliberate, thoughtful action.
29
@Lynda
It would be nice if the process could play itself out without the DNC putting its finger on the scale - or the media, for that matter.
2
I lived in San Francisco during Senator Harris' term as district attorney. Fair or not, opponents will smear her with the "San Francisco Progressive" label. She is also open to criticism for her handling of the Bologna triple murder by undocumented immigrant and MS-13 gang member Edwin Ramos, her refusal to seek the death penalty for David Hill, the convicted murderer of SFPD officer Isaac Espinoza, and her office's dismal conviction record. Senator Harris' record provides plenty of fodder for those who seek to paint Democrats as supportive of open borders and soft on crime. As a Democrat, I want a candidate who has a decent chance of beating Trump. Senator Harris is not that person.
91
@Lucien Dhooge - If she had a "dismal conviction record" as DA, then why the accusation of others that the prison population jumped when she was in office in California? This doesn't jibe.
4
@Pat Boice
She was the DA of one county and only one country. California is by far the most populous state with 53 counties with 11 counties more populous than SF. Only one county (Alpine) had a lower percentage of the population in the state prison population.
http://casi.cjcj.org/Adult/
This link shows most of the prison population comes from. Conviction rates have to do with local attitudes and politics. As AG, she would not have that much influence on local attitudes of primarily 'red' counties.
1
Shirley Chisholm, famously unbought and unbossed, while Senator Harris spent the summer wooing big money democratic donors. Same old give me money candidate. i'll pass.
56
I wish Kamala Harris well.
If she were to be elected president I would be very glad. She is likely to do a good job.
The problem is to get the nomination, much less to beat a Republican opponent. There is slightly less than 50% chance the Republican opponent to be Donald Trump. But slightly higher than 50% chance the Republican opponent to be Nikki Haley. Either one is all but impossible to beat.
Therefore I would prefer a different candidate to win the Democratic nomination. My choice is Mitch Landrieu. He is formidable and can beat just about any Republican candidate without much difficulty, including Trump.
8
@A.G. Alias
She will never survive Lara Bazelon's recent NYT Op-ed revelations? That information has begun to be disseminated nationally. I believe that it is so damming it will soon prevent her from continuing as a candidate as many on this comment thread have previously indicated. It shows such a lack of judgement that in itself is problematic.
5
Better Harris than O'Rourke but better Biden or Booker than Harris. Harris is too beholden to fringe rationalist political theorists, I prefer political empiricists. Life is messy and doesn't obediently line up into neat little categories of good vs evil. As a prosecutor, she should know this, but like Bush the Younger she seems way too attached to grand sweeps of sentimentality. People do like that though (as bad as it usually turns out) so who knows?
1
I’m honestly frightened to see the way so many Democrats are treating the announcements of potential candidates. This “thank you, next” attitude wherein people are written off immediately makes me worry about the eventual possibility of uniting around a candidate at all.
I understand and appreciate that some commenters take umbrage with her record in California, and I can certainly respect reasoned criticism. It’s the other commenters claiming she’ll use “identity politics” or simply “isn’t the one” that worry me. I see a potentially hugely exciting candidate who deserves more than a shrug. I hope we give everyone a chance and can have a productive primary season that doesn’t turn the party into a snake eating its own tail.
391
@Jamie S. - You are exactly right!
16
@Jamie S. Most of this hand-wringing seems to be mostly against qualified, articulate, intelligent liberal women.
28
@Gustav Aschenbach Kamala Harris is no liberal, and her qualifications are dubious at best. As a California voter, I have consistently voted against Kamala Harris for statewide or national office, my objection to her candidacy is resolute. Kamala Harris is a careerist politician and nothing more. She is the wrong leader for a progressive California, and the wrong candidate for the Democrats to put forward to the American people in a general election.
16
Kamala Harris is a highly intelligent and educated person who would make an excellent leader of this nation.
I think she should run as a VP candidate with Warren or Sanders with a prenup giving her the option to run as President after one term.
She will get some more experience and carry the nation forward after Sanders or Warren led the way.
We need to ask her clear views on Wall Street regulation, health care, public college education and tech industry regulation.
The daughter of a brilliant father and mother from diverse ethnic background (I listened to and learned greatly when her father Don Harris when he was on sabbatical from Stanford at Yale), she is quick and thorough at the same time. If she lays out her policy papers sooner rather than later, she will get superb feedback from academic and general intellectual quarters which will help her candidacy.
Good news overall. Welcome Kamala Harris to “2020 Let’s Save USA.”
15
Senator Harris is impressively qualified and I'm very interested in her as a candidate for 2020. So far, so good. I'm keeping an open mind.
14
Having read the opinion piece on her questionable career as a prosecutor, I would want that addressed. If that is dealt with properly and we’re assured that’s not who she is, I have to think she’s the one to beat. We need to energize people of color and we’re way past the the point where another white man (like me) should even be considered. Also way overdue is a woman president. Let’s make some history people... it’s what Democrats do.
150
@Mr. Fedorable
I agree with your wariness. Everyone should read the NY Times opinion-piece about her. She was, apparently, a frightening prosecutor as far as her judgments and actions were concerned. She reminded me of the worst attitudes toward misdemeanors and minor infringements discussed in Alexandra Natapoff's new book, "Punishment Without Crime."
3
@Mr. Fedorable The MOST important thing we need to do is beat Donald Trump. This is not the time for another risky experiment in pushing diversity and gender boundaries. Part of the reason Hillary lost was because she was a woman! It is just plain stupid for the Dems to put diversity and gender equality breakthroughs ahead of beating DT.
3
@Alan Levitan Link to article please?
I’ll never vote for my state Senator after her charge to have Al Franken ousted.
Al Franken 2020.
97
If Mitch McConnel we’re accused of the exact same things as Franken would you object to Harris calling for his resignation?
I
4
@daveindiego
I don’t understand why women like Harris and Gillibrand should be held responsible for what a man did.
Women didn’t make Franken behave obnoxiously, at the least, and weaken the party’s ethical positions.
I like Franken. He was a good senator. But HE made mistakes, and HIS mistake cost him his senate seat.
I’m not committed to any one candidate, but if one thing is true about the Franken debacle, it is that I have more respect for the women who stood up for zero tolerance than less.
1
Could we please retire the cliche "electable" when (1) we don't know to define it and (2) none of us a crystal ball? It's the word people use as a proxy for all the real reasons they don't like a candidate. Well, I like Harris.
9
Historic, but misguided. She does not have the experience needed to run this county, although she's a lot, lot smarter than Trump.
7
Judge these candidates on authenticity and funding. Are they pivoting to the progressive side just to boost their candidacy? Or were they there all along? A red flag would be claiming the TPP was the “gold standard” before disowning it.
Similarly funding. Do they court rich donors and corporate lobbyists? Do they have PACS seeded with dark money? As a candidate, you answer to those who fund you, and will likely govern for them. A red flag would be not releasing a transcript of a lucrative speech you gave to Wall Street bankers in private, and exclusive fundraisers in the Hamptons.
5
As Democrats rush to run for the presidency they need to get their current job done. Bipartisan work to end the government shutdown, strong humanitarian immigration reform (we are all descendants of immigrants), equitable healthcare, immediate action on climate change, good public education, and to rebuild relations with our allies.
They all seem to have written a book or two. Put that same energy in carrying out their Constitutional duty of keeping 45 in check and making Congress work on behalf of the United States and ordinary Americans.
7
I have followed Kamala Harris since her days at S.F. City Hall as a young District Attorney, then as CA's Attorney General, and now as a US Senator. And let me tell you...she is a power house. This woman whom I respect and am so proud of is as smart as they come, progressive, diverse, and, yes, experienced, too. So importantly the words "ethical" and "morality" define best her soul and character.
Just think about it. In 2019, we have had four women announce their candidacy for president of the United States. Just think of the celebration to be had to elect one of these ladies POTUS on the birth date of the 19th Amendment. It is time, America. We have waited long enough...
490
@Kathy Lollock Have you read about her behavior and record as a prosecutor? How you can say you "respect" her is concerning. Maybe you missed the NYT article from the 17th this month. There are plenty of other women you can support. Elizabeth Warren and Tulsi Gabbard are excellent choices.
41
@Kathy Lollock - announcements wont' get it done. None of them will unseat Trump.
8
President Harris. I like it. A lot.
24
The prisons are filled with low-income black men whose job prospects for non-college positions, such as construction, have been handed to illegal Central American immigrants by real estate empires such as Trump. I know because I live in an African-American neighborhood in Brooklyn, and I work in construction. There really needs to be a centrist leader who acknowledges the whole cycle. The minute I hear one of these progressives talking about how Americans do want these jobs but the real estate empire does not want to pay American labor costs - and they have a solution - that is the day I will start listening strongly to that candidate.
290
@Brooklyn I've been in construction trades for almost 50 years , New England, Los Angeles, Texas, Hawaii and I've seen how what you are saying has played out. As long as there is a surplus of [ undocumented ]immigrant labor to draw from, native Americans of all colors and races will never achieve parity with other middle class citizens.
50
@Brooklyn I agree that USA labor deserves high priority, in the top three. To build economic opportunities, we must respect labor, not just capital.
Automation affects our livelihoods—but for all the freedom it gives, it destroys jobs for human beings. We must create new jobs for human beings when they are replaced by computers and machines.
Laborers who join together can force job creation, job safety, and wages into high gear. People together can harness power to negotiate higher wages. Yes, real estate empires pit worker against worker, so we forget the classic position of American immigrants for 200+ years: immigrant laborers work for less than citizens. Irish and Italian immigrants didn’t “steal” jobs from Americans, they got paid less. African Americans are already ALWAYS paid less. Unions can force legal and legacy infrastructure that advances wages and job creation for African American men and women.
Central Americans aren’t responsible for low wages, high prices, and insufficient job creation. They are immigrants willing to work for less than what citizens rightfully seek.
12
@Brooklyn the trades pay well here in the Midwest, and there's a very serious labor shortage. Everybody is hiring, and I mean everybody. I think young men of all colors that are into the easy-money illegal life shy away from manual labor jobs. Working hard is looked down upon nowadays.
14
Great. We're on our way to a fractured, cast-of-thousands campaign season. When will the DNC learn to coalesce early and use resources wisely?
I like Harris and admire her intellect but she's better as a senator than as president. Especially this time around.
I wouldn't hire Gillebrand to clean my bathrooms let alone be elected to another office. Bernie, go home.
Joe Biden and Beto O'Rourke would have a shot at beating trump or pence.
20
At this point, Popeye the Sailor Man could beat Don-boy or Pence. I like our chances.
2
@Earthling A "fractured, cast-of-thousands campaign season" has a name: it's called democracy.
8
I welcome her entry. As noted in the article, Kamala has unique appeal to both wings of the Democratic Party. Can't wait to see her here in South Carolina!
6
I literally jumped out of my desk chair when I read the headline! The day of the woman is coming, and it WILL happen in 2020. I hope Kamala Harris will be the one to get us there.
105
@Raquel
Do their policies, qualifications and actions actually matter? Does it matter what they will do to the country, or its citizens? Or is gender the only factor?
You like a candidate because she is a woman. Someone else likes a candidate because he is black. It is a Times pick and others applaud.
Rightfully, white men generally are not encouraged to tout their identities. Leaving us with it's only OK to like a candidate because they are non-white or a woman. Which implies discrimination against white males. It's real and used as fodder by white hate groups.
Honestly, I really wish there was a country I could move to where rational thought and fairness prevailed.
9
@James
And they are so outright blatant with it, it is so one-sided that they can't even see all of the hypocrisies.
According to the recent opinion piece in this paper, her record as California Attorney General was cruel and harsh--more Jeff Sessions than Eric Holder. Once it's out in the open, it will be disqualifying. As a 78-year old progressive Democrat, I want someone who's always had those values and was guided by them. That does not seem to be Sen. Harris.
67
@Paul Wortman According to an opinion piece? Keep reading up on her; her past is far from disqualifying.
4
@Paul Wortman - I'm an 85 year old progressive Democrat, and let me tell you, I've changed my views on a lot of very important things 180 degrees since I was 45 years old. People aren't - or shouldn't be - required to stick in the same rut their entire lives.
New information should affect our opinions - people change. Keep an open mind.
5
@Pat Boice
Changing your views based on new information is an admirable quality in one's personal life. But how does changing your views on important issues make you then qualified to become president? Especially when you plan to run on campaign promises of being the one person who will best fight for those same issues on which you have (perhaps even recently) changed your mind?
To quote the comment by Paul Wortman: "I want someone who's always had those values and was guided by them." When looking for a leader, many of us want someone who has consistently been willing to take a stand and fight for the causes in which s/he believes, as opposed to just giving lip service to issues once they've become popular. If anything, a true leader should be the one who fights to change people's minds on what to believe--not the other way around.
It's wonderful that we humans have the ability to change our minds based on new information; I too have changed my views and evolved on certain issues. But unlike Ms. Harris and the other candidates who have announced their campaigns, most of us are not running for president. When trying to convince voters on why we should vote for them, many of us believe these candidates should follow that old saying: "Don't tell us--show us."
1
Please Democrats, select someone who can win!! This may be the most important election in a century & is a must win for the future of our country.
Harris has little pertinent experience for the most challenging executive job in the world. This is not the time to make some sort of political statement. Appealing to ‘White Progressives’ and ‘Millennials of Color,’ can wait for another time.Democrats must run a viable candidate with applicable experience - a governor or mayor of a large city for example - who can appeal to the vast number of voters who are moderates but want a President who can manage the huge federal bureaucracy and bring the country back together.
57
Obama was only a Senator for two years also..
@Laura Gardner
Yes, & unfortunately it showed in the results. Alas, good intentions are not enough.
14
@Richard Huber
I agree to your comment on Obama's lack of experience and the results that followed,regardless of the impact that Senate and House Republican racists provided.
We don't need another "nice guy". We need a experienced political ball-cuter. (on the LBJ template),and that requires experience and courage. I can't see this in any of the rumored presidential candidates.
3
@Bruce Rozenblit
So Mr Rozenblit, what you are really saying is we should lower our expectations even further going forward in this country.
I refuse to do that. Once expectations are lowered then it is a matter of time to lower them further and further until there is nothing left to live for.
We have lost a lot already and the GOP has managed to get most people to accept no healthcare, no publicly funded college education, a terrifying subway system in the most important city in the world, no private company trade unions to speak of and zero intellectual content in the public sphere.
Let us wake up and take matters in our hands. Bernie Sanders and/or Elizabeth Warren will help us by leading the charges.
3
The rising number of unelectable Democraric candidates is alarming. Sooner or later they will turn on each other, all but guaranteeing a Nov 2020 loss. True, the Republicans had a similar large field in 2016 with one exception - streetfighter DJT with qualities enabling him to turn the chaos to his advantage. I see no Democrat with similar characteristics.
Trump will find a way, with the unwitting help of the losing Democrat candidates, to define and then mock whoever emerges before the conventions.
In the 2020 election the Democrats would be better off hammering out the best foe for Trump in a (figuratively) smoke-filled room. A Democrat focusing on the SC primary, a hopeless red state in 2020 is the mark of a Quixotic candidate who will be one of those cooks destined to spoil the broth.
14
@Richard
"The rising number of unelectable Democraric candidates is alarming. Sooner or later they will turn on each other, all but guaranteeing a Nov 2020 loss."
That's a legit fear. Maybe Al Franken would return some of the knives they stuck in his back. They'll need them for the primary.
8
I voted for her twice for CA Attorney General. However, I did not know her full resume. Listening to podcasts I have increased my knowledge about her background. I will vote for someone who literally cut her eye teeth with her parents in civil rights marches (as Senator Harris did) versus someone who believes in not paying government workers.
My advice is to research Ms. Harris and come up with your own opinions.
7
@Rebecca
I voted for her, too. And this despite knowing how she betrayed those people conned and shivved by the likes of Wells Fargo and Steve Mnuchin, (who apparently donated to her campaign, as I learned on these pages recently!).
What was our choice, a California Republican?
7
I've been very impressed with Senator Harris and am very interested in seeing how her candidacy develops. At bare minimum, she would make mincemeat out of Donald Trump in a debate. A brilliant prosecutor, and senator, and a woman? Trump would be flattened.
16
Kamala gives me hope. She's super smart, articulate, tough, and has the "charisma" necessary to win. Many of those straight white men and women who couldn't bring themselves to vote for Hillary can wrap themselves around Kamala. She's warmer, she laughs easily, yes, she's more "likeable." She's the ticket to a win in 2020. Let's all rally around her and support her in every way we can.
9
@Tom
I don't see her as articulate and her toughness if a forced performance and defensive. So, is the laugh and warmth. She has been groomed to climb the ladder by the local powerful political machine. My sense is that she really doesn't want the job but doesn't want to let down her mentors and groomers.
1
The democrats are willingly walking themselves into a trap. Missouri will not vote for a California "diverse, progressive" liberal well to the left of center. It's a non-starter.
If the democrats continue to seek instant gratification of ideological purity of their candidates, the scenes of "shocked" democratic voters on November 2020 will be repeated accompanies by trumpers glee and derision.
19
Now is not the time for this woman to run. Although supporters may ask "then when is a good time"? For now, to beat Trump, you need a middle of the road candidate with wide appeal who will govern from the center-left. We don't need a screaming progressive or we will never win in 2020. Is that what we want? We must keep our eye on the ball. And, my preference is for a candidate who has more than 2 years experience in the US Senate than an identity politician. She needs to wait.
30
Ugh -she held statewide office. Of a big complex diverse state. She’s more experienced than both current WH office holder and VP. She’s described as centrist- one of few still around for Dems. These candidates are an embarrassment of riches so let’s encourage a robust thoughtful primary
I've heard Kamala Harris speak. She comes across as smart, well spoken and powerful. I was very impressed - and she was speaking on behalf of another candidate.
Still, I worry that our conservative back-water of a country is still not ready for a woman president. Lots of us are ready, but millions across the electoral heartland are Fox/Limbaugh ditto-heads who lean to Thump, and a woman isn't going to get their votes.
Only as a nod to the conservative (almost backward) nature of the US do I say that the most tactical approach is for one of the woman candidates to be the vice presidential candidate. Perhaps with Joe Biden at top of ticket, pledging to serve a single term. Then the lady VP runs as a quasi-incumbent.
9
@Ambient Kestrel Great, but no one runs in the primaries as a VP, and she would be a popular running mate option if she were to lose the primary. On the other hand, if she were to win -- which I believe is very possible -- it would be up to her to prove she is ready, just as is the case for any presidential candidate (or at least any presidential candidate not propped up by Russia and a frothing white supremacist base).
Besides, if we are "not ready" for a woman president after 250 years of history, when do you think that will happen?
4
@Ambient Kestrel IIRC, we had such a ticket in 1984 with Mondale and Ferraro. Go back at look at that electoral map. Reagan/Bush by a landslide losing large swaths of Democratic voters including blue collar workers.
If a woman is going to be on the ticket, she has to be tough but tough in the way women are tough and not imitating the way men are tough. Speaker Pelosi is tough. Senator Feinstein is tough. Senator Harris puts on a tough act. Her tough act is the flip side of DJT appeal as a tough guy to his base.
This is just the latest in the Veep sweepstakes. None of the candidates so far would have much of a chance. They are hoping for a spot on the ticket. Whoever the democrats finally and hopefully see as their best chance to beat trump and restore leadership and decency to this country
7
If you really follow politics and you want bold 21st century progress akin to the New Deal in the 20th century then you know that Bernie Sanders is the way. Kamala Harris is a Clinton style Democrat: you can expect very little change for the good and more compromise with the Republican Party (who have gone too far in a bad direction away from dealing with citizens’ huge problems). I don’t want a president that compromises with people that believe in individualism and handing off more to the wealthy at a time that we need the government to help the people deal with huge problems in their lives. We need a much higher minimum wage, a reasonable maximum wage and much more revenue coming in to the government to create infrastructure jobs, especially if the private sector continues to not create enough good paying jobs. We need Medicare For All so that health care stops being so expensive, so that it just takes care of people without handing them insane bills. We need free public education through 16 years instead of 12. We need people’s student loans to be forgiven / paid for / written off. And finally we need to take care of the environment and stop allowing mining / drilling / logging / fracking / hunting / livestock grazing lobbyists to control so much of our public lands. We need to do these things and we can pay for it by doing things right, by getting our military “offense"budget under control, and by demanding that the rich pay proper taxes.
9
@Timothy Dannenhoffer
Bernie didn't show his taxes, and he's voted or abstained from bills that punished Russia. Calculate that.
2
@Barbara
Bernie disclosed his taxes.
2
@Barbara Everything is wrong and you want to nit pick one of the few candidates that can be trusted to get us on a better, bolder trajectory.
1
I'm looking forward to a wide open primary season. But I hope all the candidates present their vision for this country without attacking each other.
Tell us what you believe in. Make serious policy proposals.
Let the voters decide and PLEASE, narrow the field as quickly as possible so that the best candidate is nominated. I don't care if our candidate is a man, a woman, or purple with green stripes.
We have to win.
6
We are a big and diverse country. A President needs to be tolerant of differences. Harris has disqualified herself by the intolerance she displayed toward a judicial nominee who was a member of the Knights of Columbus. Just one incident, yes. But it displays a mindset. Elizabeth Warren would be a better choice in all respects.
2
Two who I will not vote for, Gillibrand and Harris. When they led the pack in castigating Al Franken without due process that's when both lost my vote.
169
@cherrylog754: Franken had written one of those "I am running for president" books. That made him a target for knives in his back.
4
@cherrylog754 Do you really wish to paint yourself into as "single issue voter" in the Democratic primaries? Since the 1960's elections I have mostly been a "pinch my nose and vote" (Democratic).
Although anathema to pundits and politicians, I see "class interests" as a better litmus test,if there must be one. The pipe dream of a viable 3rd party candidate has been the downfall of those on the Left, for 70 years or more. I am very,very far "Left"- but I still find voting Democratic to be the most palatable option today.
The victory in 2020 will decided by the popular vote in the Democratic primaries. All I seek is a pragmatic candidate , and ,in the process, a less fratricidal primary season. I can still hold my nose on Election Day.
We both know that a Republican victory in 2020 means the end of the Republic.
9
@cherrylog754
Did Senators Gillibrand or Harris put a gun to Al Franken's head and make him take photos simulating molesting a woman while she was sleeping? Where is the personal responsibility? Former Senator Franken is accountable for his own ill-advised behavior. Frankly, we all should hold public servants, especially US Senators, to a high standard.
FYI, Senator Harris called for due process in Franken's case - in the form of an ethics investigation.
5
Kamala Harris could be the candidate to shatter the invisible glass ceiling in 2020. She has none of the baggage that bedeviled Secretary Clinton in 2016.
If Harris can appeal to Independents and moderate suburbanites she has a realistic shot at the party's nomination. The time has come, and if last year's midterms are any indication, it's women in America today who are demanding their place at the table.
4
@silver vibes
She has a lot more baggage than Hillary but it will not be exploited by the GOP dirty ops until she's a serious threat. In the meantime, they will be hoping that the Dems put up someone like Senator Harris that will be so easy to obliterate and discredit as a presidential candidate.
4
As a viable candidate to actually be elected as next US President she must not only catch swing states of Ohio and Florida but more be able to take Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan. Can she win more electoral votes than Hilary Clinton ? That is the threshold test.
6
@Will Eigo
We will know a lot more after the California primary for president. She did not have very stiff competition for the Senate seat since Gavin Newsom decided being Governor was better for him. If she were to run against someone like AG Becerra, the outcome would have been very different.
1
I have tremendous respect for Senator Harris and would be thrilled for her to become the 2021 resident of the White House.
But, in 2020, it is imperative that the presidency be taken away from Trump or any other Republican. I tend to believe that if he tests well over the next year, Sherrod Brown will be the Democratic Party’s best hope to get that done.
14
@Barry 64, I agree and he should have Sen. Harris as his V-P running mate. They would make a formidable and highly competent team.
4
@Barry64 I agree. I'm on the Sherrod Brown / Amy Klobuchar bus myself.
2
while I'm totally uncommitted to any candidate at this time, I'm far more impressed by Senator Harris as described than the nitpicking criticism in the article and in some of the early comments. As for her electability, too early to say, lets see how she does in a campaign and in reaching out to non-minorities.
4
I'm sorry, but after reading that NYT article (01/17/19) by Prof. Lara Bazelon, there is absolutely no way I could vote for Kamala Harris or support any ticket she is on. She will play the woman card. She will play the black card. She will play any identity politics card to keep people from examine her terrible record as a prosecutor and to keep her house of cards from falling. How she can look towards the black community for support given her record in the criminal justice system and the Latino community given her support of ICE is pretty brazen, but from what I've learned from Hillary Clinton, these types have no shame filter.
73
well she can't play the white card now can she?
1
@gdf
I don’t support Harris, but deciding not to vote for her based on an Op Ed is dumb. Try performing your own research, rather than forming your opinion based on limited information.
2
It looks like the usual suspects are gathering for a seminar on how awful Trump is. If there is one thing that Trump has taught us is that the presidency is no longer a meritocracy. It's a popularity contest. It's a contest of shared attitudes and beliefs. The president is now a placeholder for these desires.
That means an idiot can now be elected and an idiot was.
We can see from the few reactions so far how the Republicans are positioning themselves. They will call anyone like Harris a socialist. She is Venezuela to them. That will be their strategy and it may very well work.
She is extremely intelligent and that intimidates many people. They liked George Bush. He was too slow to intimidate anyone.
The pre Obama world is gone. We are in the post Trump world now. Minority identity politics have been replaced by white male identity politics.
The ideal place holder for the post Trump era would then be a midwestern white male who is smart, but not too smart, not professorial, who speaks in short direct sentences. Someone who has a more laid back demeanor. A high powered, brilliant black woman, with a killer vocabulary from California is not that person.
8
@Bruce Rozenblit
What Democrats need is a spine. Worrying about what Republicans think is a mindset of pre-2016 mid-terms. America passed the test on that. When Democrats show up, we win. Full stop.
Strongest candidates, without exception, run when an incumbent President is not running for re-election. People remember Bush Jr being 'selected' by the Supreme Court in 2000, after winning Florida by all of 537 votes. People forget, however, that Bush Jr. beat John Kerry in 2004 by more than 3 million POPULAR votes. The 2020 primaries are best thought of, as a dry run to produce the strongest possible Democratic candidate for 2024.
1
@Richard
But who thinks there will be an incumbent president running in 2020? That's why so many of the JV Dems are jumping in early. By that time DJT will be in exile and who knows what will become of the very unpopular -even -in -his- own -state VP Pence.
1
I would not vote for Harris or Gillibrand in the primaries. And if they made it to the general election would only support them because the alternative is 4 more years of Trump. These women are career opportunists, and I see running for president right now as proof of that.
The Democratic party is allowing the victories of women and minorities in the midterm House elections convince them that America is ready for more diversity in the White House. But the Senate is actually a closer barometer for the results of a national election and the senate is still a majority Republican, white, and Male. We cannot force diversity and gender equality on mostly white, low population, high electoral college states. Demographics change a lot faster on the coasts and in larger cities than it does in the interior of the country and small towns.
If Democrats are unenthusiastic about these candidates, how can they even hope to win over moderate Republicans and Independent voters needed to win?
102
@wcdessertgirl
Well, the republicans could run Nikki Haley (in a post Trump impeachment scenario), and would most certainly win in mostly, white, low population rural states (like the one she governed for two terms). It's not about gender and race. Andrew Cuomo wouldn't do any better in those places than Gillibrand would.
9
Well pointed out. The electoral college dynamics with such sorts of candidates doesn’t cotton.
5
@wcdessertgirl
"career opportunists"? Because they have ambition?
16
Appealing to ‘White Progressives’ and ‘Millennials of Color,’ as touted on CNN.
Sorry, that won’t win independents and purple states.
Find someone who can actually win.
134
So . . . that's all the chance you'll give her?
Mind's already completely closed because of a snippet you saw on CNN?
17
I'm glad to see a smart, determined and unintimidated woman like Kamala Harris running for president. 2020 must bring positive change to our very divided and troubled country.
24
@Kathryn Aguilar. I like her too, but how distracting will this be? Need her present in the senate....not running around campaigning and missing votes, which is inevitably what will happen. She wont win...not well known enough and somewhat polarizing to those who are aware of her.
3
Kamala Harris will NEVER get my vote. Her treatment of Black people as a prosecutor was worse than Giuliani when he mayor of New York. She is billing herself as a progressive out of convenience.
115
@Xavier.Esq I’m surprised more people haven’t caught onto this. I’m a second generation Caribbean black and know how she treated prisoners in California. She’s dead on arrival and I would absolutely not vote for her.
7
@Xavier.Esq
The Innocence Project folks will write a good editorial piece on her, I'm sure.
3
@Xavier.Esq what examples do you have that she mistreated black people as a prosecutor? and what did she do worse than Giuliani, which constantly allowing police to shoot and kill unarmed black men?
3
I am so proud of the caliber of all the women contenders and I also want to keep an eye on Buttigieg another strong contender for the Democrats.
"At a recent appearance to promote her latest book “The Truths We Hold: An American Journey,” Ms. Harris, when asked why she would run for president, cited the need for leaders who have a “vision of our country in which everyone can see themselves.”
Unlike Trump who can only see Trump or a white wealthy old male in the mirror. No vision of the majority. I also hope Kamala is more than just a clever turn of phrase. I hope she means what she said.
At the risk of being an agist I want someone younger in Congress and in the oval office. It is more than time to retire some of the fossils especially those in the GOP.
30
@Andrea Landry
Pete Buttigieg would be great, but I don’t think he’s angry enough or pure enough for the far left.
For obvious reasons our slogan should be “ABT” (Anyone But Trump). Question: As to Sen. Harris, is just 2 years in the Senate sufficient experience to be president?
22
@James Osborne
I 'm almost certain that she has more political experience and served more time in public office than Barack Obama. Wasn't he also a freshman 2-year U. S. Senator when he announced or had he even served as much of his first term upon announcing?
13
@Mike Dollar
Yes he was, and Obama could have badly used at least a full term in the Senate before running. Unfortunately, because the Democratic alternative was Hillary Clinton, we were kind of forced to vote him in. There will be other alternatives for the Dems this time around - candidates with more experience and accomplishments, not quite as bought and paid for, less problematic records.
9
Obama had also made quite a national name for himself at the 2004 Democratic convention.
Harris has not done the same, she appears to be an opportunist unwilling to put in the time, but able to move forward aggressively, because, as you say, Obama had done the same.
Al Franken 2020.
9
And let us pray that so many women choosing to run will change the campaign tone to one of civility and respect—and, for the media in particular, to keep the focus on policies rather than puffery. For on this pivots the future of our society.
11
Senator Harris is a leader, energetic, smart as a whip and extremely clear on her positions. She’d be a great President.
52
Anyone but Trump. But Harris is a novice with a record of cuddling up to the elite to advance her career as fast as possible. Not convinced she has any sense about working class struggles, or any evidence of her vision and leadership. She's really an identity politics candidate of the kind that will likely highly motivate Trump supporters.
125
@Jason
She is def one of the identity politics candidates.
42
@Jason
The problem is that ALL the viable Democratic candidates right now are identity politics candidates. And, they may have to be in order to win the primaries.
5
@Cass
Good point...and another illustration of why our current primary system is so deeply flawed, for, left or right, it aims at the extreme ends of both parties.
4
Maybe a VP nominee but not a Presidential nominee.
91
Sen. Harris is articulate, even-keeled, and possesses a sharp legal mind. The first time I heard her speak was in a debate here in California when she was running for Attorney General. Immediately knew she is a force to be reckoned with. She will need a steel backbone to put up with the oncoming uninformed trash talk from the republicans and MAGA-hat crowd. I wish her the very best.
383
@Lisa My concern is when the other Democratic candidates. begin to tear each other to shreds. I envision the primary debates with ten candidates ripping each other apart. The party splintering into pieces and imploding. Big league politics is down and dirty, if you want to win.
3
@FJS If you have watched the previous Democrat debates you would know they do not tear each other down like Republicans. It was the Republicans who ripped into Trump and he beat them at their own game. Hopefully the Democrat candidates will remain civil as in past debates.
13
@Franklin Schenk I watched them. There were two candidates. This race is shaping up much differently in my estimation. I have no doubts that the democratic candidates are as fully capable as the republicans as far as ripping into each other. 2016 is not a great example of having a unified party. Just read some of the comments on this very page. These are very ambitious folks,and all that goes with ambition for the presidency is in play.
3
In an ever widening field of candidates, Ms. Harris for me represents the ideal candidate for the presidency of the United States in 2020. I think that were she to snag the Democratic nomination and chose Beto Rourke as her running mate and VP nominee, this would add even more vitality and strength to her candidacy.
As the article mentions, she really represents a bridge between the change asked for and the experience and wisdom required for the office of the President.
Besides, it is about time for a candidate like Kamala Harris! If the past few years have made nothing else obvious, let it be this fact!
45
@loco73
Hmmm very interesting Harris /Beto. Could be a winner. But I think he has more star power. So while he would play second fiddle to Biden or Bloomberg both winning tickets don''t think he would play second fiddle to her.
1
Remember Ted Mack's amateur hour?
I have nothing against Senator Harris but have not seen any reason to think she should be President. Not happy with the others who have declared or have formed exploratory committees.
Medicare for All will be risky once the GOP compiles scary numbers. I advocate allowing those without any other source of coverage to go into a Medicare Advantage Plan and Pay Part B and D based on income as other members do.
I am hoping Terry McAuliffe runs, I was impressed with how he performed as Governor of VA and think he is a natural campaigner who can beat Trump.
15
@Trying2BObjective
I live in Virginia and think McAuliffe was a terrible governor. Because of a stupid political deal McAuliffe made, Virginia is now an "open carry state." A governor who would foist such a horrible situation on his state isn't fit to be president. McAuliffe wasn't even fit to be governor.
Nope. She’s not the one. Righteous, yes, but leadership is what we need now more than ever.
77
May the best progressive Democrat win.
Bring on the people's primary process and democratic debate.
The stench of Russian-Republican rot in the United States of Greed must be replaced by some common good, like free and fair elections, single-payer/universal healthcare for all, living worker wages, infrastructure investment, sensible regulation of the environment, Wall St, vulture capitalism, ethics, and representation of the people, not the oligarchs.
Welcome to the Make America Great Again 2020 race for the battle of the American soul, Kamala Harris.
199
@Socrates progressive Democrats are the ones with the worst chance to win. The majority of Americans cannot stomach Socialist Democrats.
35
@Stefan There is very little difference between what America calls "Socialist Democrats" and "Progressive Democrats." In fact, I'd be hard-pressed to come up with any policy difference between the two.
2
@Stefan
And yet, a vast majority — 70% — of Americans in a July 2018 poll said they supported "Medicare for all," also known as a single-payer health-care system.
The Reuters–Ipsos survey found 85% of Democrats said they support the policy along with 52% of Republicans.
https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/403248-poll-seventy-percent-of-americans-support-medicare-for-all
It's much more accurate to say that the majority of Americans support socialism, but about half of Americans suffer from acute chronic cognitive dissonance and Pachyderm Spongiform Encephalopathy that creates irrational spite toward Democratic candidates.
There...fixed.
31
I like Kamala Harris but she cannot win the presidency. Neither can Elizabeth Warren. The democrats need to put someone (male or female) who has a good chance of winning the election. I'm getting sick of voting for lukewarm candidates.
123
Oh, I assure you, Sen Harris is not lukewarm.
49
@Moira
I'm sure some Americans felt similarly about Barack Hussein Obama in 2007 and 2008.
But things change and evolve.
Give it a chance before your make Democratic funeral arrangements.
I would remind that a Criminal-Cretin-In-Chief resides in the White House who lost the 2016 popular vote by a record number for an Impostor-In-Chief.
152
His popular vote deficit is irrelevant to who is today and who will next be elected president.
2
Whenever there is an article about Kirsten Gillibrand, there are hundreds of comments (rightly) deriding her for her treatment of Al Franken. Kamala Harris was right there with Gillibrand demanding that Franken resign. Why does Harris not get the same treatment?
251
@RP Smith
Check out the opinion piece from last week on Harris. Don't worry, her many negatives are being examined. Joining the anti-Franken mob is the least of her problems.
39
@RP Smith - Gillibrand led the pack that included Maggie Hassan, Claire McCaskill, Mazie Hirona, Tammy Baldwin, Patty Murray, and Kamala Harris.
I'm trying to keep an open mind and not be a "candidates 1 mistake" voter....but I'll admit, it's going to take some doing.
21
@RP Smith I agree—Gillibrand was the first to call for his resignation but Harris, Warren, Feinstein followed. I mourn for our country’s loss of Franken BUT I understand why these women Democratic senators had to push him out. It’s awful for Franken but they respected one of the norms of our country, that even the appearance of unethical behavior must be unacceptable. Particularly because Trump and GOPers didn’t and don’t respect that norm made it crucial for Democrats to force Franken to resign. It’s heart-breaking.
11
She is a very strong, articulate, astute, caring person who will be in the top teir of some very impressive 2020 Presidential Democratic candidates. One can only imagine her on a podium debating Trump - if he even makes it that far. Good luck Senator.
35
@logic
I imagine pretty much anyone debating Trump.
3
@logic Do you personally know her? If not you have no idea if those traits are true.
1
Now is the time for the Democratic Party to be bold. Her running mate for vice president should be Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar. Two women running on the same ticket.
I am elated that there will be at least four women running for President in 2020. In 2016 the Republicans had 17 people running for President of which only 1 was a female.
I am a lifelong Democrat who wants to see exciting, younger candidates from the age of their late 40's to late 50's. Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders will be close to 80 years of age and Elizabeth Warren will be 72 in 2020. Our Party and our country needs younger, more dynamic leaders.
The day will come when we will watch a debate for President when the nominee for each party will be a woman, but until that day comes there is no stronger statement the Democratic Party can make than by having two women lead their national ticket.
34
@Bob S Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders and the former governor of Maryland were the only people who participated in the Democratic debates in 2016.
5
@Mark Jeffery Koch
Let's put Amy Klobuchar at the top. She has everything Kamala has, but with a less divisive personality.
7
Lincoln Chafee, Gov of RI attended at least one 2016 primary debate.
Go Kamala! I haven't been excited about a Democratic Presidential Candidate since Obama. I will be supporting you from Seattle (and I am sure will many others). So proud of you, and my home state of California. Good luck!!!
211
@Ms Nina G
She reminds me of the feminine version of Obama. Of course there is the obvious, they are both mixed race, similar age. But, they also share a similar personality... an ease with themselves, call it self-confidence? They laugh easily, they share a warmth and sensitivity. They inspire one to listen. I will do everything I can to ensure Kamala is our President in 2020.
18
@Ms Nina G She will have my support in North Carolina!!! I was way too young to support Shirley Chisholm, who was more than qualified and pushed back when the VP slot was recommended!!! I'm amazed at all for the Ron Dellums talk on this thread, but I guess I shouldn't be!
8
@Tom any policies of hers that you like? or is the fact that she can speak in sentences enough for you?
5
Wow - the 2020 field of Democratic contestants is looking to be the largest since 1988 (which ultimately led to Michael Dukakis' nomination) - Joe Biden was one of those contestants in 1988, so he'll set a record if he runs in 2020 (32 years (!) between the first time run for President vs latest time run for President)
4
There will be a true bum's rush to take the White House from the absolute worst president in history (by a margin that reminds me of Secretariat's win at the Belmont).
Harris has always had a lot of top-spin. This would be interesting.
7
@Plennie Wingo
LBJ was the worst. Vietnam and the "Great Society."
1