Pretty tepid endorsement but somehow still better than many of her peers
She tried to pivot to others in the party...
No wonder she lost.
It's still fucked considering she was better in every way compared to the other option. That said, yes she has zero charisma and authenticity. Her entire platform is consultancy-crafted buzzwords and ambiguity.
It was exceedingly obvious 2024 was a populist election, and she let Trump take that mantle and run with it. Bernie would have mopped the floor with these corporatists. This is why Mamdani is ascendant.
"Please donate to Harris, it's the only way to win."
That's the only message I got from her. Lots of talk around other messages but the one they hammered home in all their canvassing, sms and such was MONEY.
Yeah, those few citizens not buying their bullshit can make all the difference.
It's why we should focus all of our efforts on making sure people like her never become the nominee, because that's essentially handing the presidency to the republicans.
Nominating hillary fucking clinton in 2016 over Bernie Sanders was bonkers. I don't think the nation will ever recover from that blunder, and we still don't put the blame where it belongs.
Just the worst possible instincts.
Holy shit it's (cops are objects not people) doing the literal bare minimum to technically undermine the specific wording of one criticism. Holy shit.
I domt get this, can you explain
It (Harris) is technically backing mamdani in the least backing least him way possible, while holding her nose and making her disapproval of him very obvious. The bare minimum for making it so that technically one democrat I've heard of–other than DINO's like sanders– has backed him so we can't truthfully make the sweeping dramatic statement that "no major democrat has endorsed zohran mamdani.
It is technically an endorsement, but only technically.
I'm a actually not that cynical of it. In her book she was critical of who the establishment in the Biden administration treated her.
Worse case is she's endorsing him to make her self look good. But honestly I think it's great she did endorse him. It will go a long way with causal/centrist democrats and centerist independents.
It's kinda how I feel about corporations supporting good things. People will point out that they're only doing it for money or whatever, but I don't care. If they all start supporting and normalizing good things, I don't care that it started for dumb reasons.
I studied environmental sciences in school, so the metaphor I think of is that of indicator species, which provide information about the state of an ecosystem. For example, the presence of mayflies indicates good water quality, since poor water quality disrupts part of their lifecycle. Similarly, corporations supporting good things indicates that they feel it is profitable to do so. It indicates the state of public sentiment, and I don't see how that's anything but good news.
Same with Harris (indirectly) endorsing Mamdani: Maybe she's just bending with the wind, but it's good news because of the way the wind is blowing.
I'm taking the broad position that last-minute endorsements of Mamdani are just saving face for the establishment. That window closes in mid-October or so.
Want change in the party This is how it happens. Purity tests leave you a political outsider. Welcome each endorsement and they can be reminded later.
In the most unenthusiastic way possible. But it's better than an outright rejection.
Wow look she does lean left! /s
Only when she's not running for anything.
It's my fan theory that she was only supporting Israel to get campaign donations and would have done what every politician does and abandoned her campaign promises. Iirc while VP she supported investigating Israel in order to nullify the law that says we have to supply Israel with arms.
If you look at her past voting history, it aligns super close to Sanders.
Raising half a billion more than Trump didn't do her a lot of good. Maybe next time a candidate should try running on what the people want instead of the donors.
If the election was decided on the basis of "which candidate is going to give us what we want," Trump would have gotten about 15% of the vote. Look around at what's happening now, and it hasn't even got really ramped up yet. We've got years and years more of this stuff. And it's going to get worse (not just politically but in terms of economic suffering, the final death of American science and education, stuff we haven't even really had on the radar yet).
I don't disagree that some of her campaign strategy was bad, keeping Biden in that long was bad, all that stuff, but also... if the people are choosing diving into the empty swimming pool instead of the full one, then sure you could say you could spruce up the full one to make it more enticing and make sure the water's not too cold, but that's not the core of the issue.
I mean it’s a long shot, but it would have been easier to convince her than it would to convince Trump.
Which was exactly the point of holding her accountable.
There was zero other avenue than try to pressure her with losing voters. She took the AIPAC money and sold out America to Trump instead.
Oh come on! This is just her yet again pandering to the left of the party to get votes. Why won’t she just grow a spine and standup for the values that she stood for. /s
Yeah, but has she fixed her laugh though?
Kamala Harris finally sees which way the wind is blowing.
Watch the whole interview, its so bad. She has terrible instincts.
Her "endorsement": I support the democrat, but there are other stars too, like <insert 2 names I literally never heard of> from other mayoral races. Just pissing on the most popular candidate in the country and taking 2 random mayors down with her, instead of "Mandami is great, and I'm really hopeful about these other guys"
She complains that "titans of industry" didn't step in to stop Trump. Her goal isn't to help the american people, but to "restore the guardrails of our institutions". Isn't her dad supposed to be a Marxist? Have they never been in a room for 5 minutes?
Turns out Newsom is as petty as you would expect, while Pelosi and Obama were so ideologically westwing-brained they were more concerned about Biden "having his moment" than actually winning.
Close friend of Trump and Epstein, Bill Clinton, seemed eager to support anyone who had a better shot than post-shitting-himself-debate Biden.
I'm sure it was based on her deep beliefs, and not a decision made by strategists for her. We are so fucked...
Don't look a gift horse on the mouth
Why would she care. She could likely apply for political asylum in say France and leave the country and never have to work another day in her life. She's 60, she doesn't owe anyone anything. She won't run for president, and I doubt she wants to enter another 4 years of VP from 64-68 years old.
Isn't there overwhelming polling saying he is likely to win? Harris hitches herself to whoever is likely to win. That is her entire career.
Alternately, her endorsement is another way the Democratic establishment is trying to make him lose. 😉
People who have lost to donald trump need to be permanently benched.
The DNC:✍️Women✍️and✍️POC✍️need✍️to✍️be✍️permanently✍️benched✍️
Some support...
We all see right through you Kamala.
I love how what would have been mundane and not news worthy with any other candidates (democratic politicians endorsing a democratic candidate for mayoral office) now makes headlines with Mamdani. And by love I mean hate.
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.