US Politics XXIII: Law & Order SOU (Stupid Orange Unit)
Omg, polling, voting, whatever you want to call it. Neither of them polled well with black voters. Why? Many reasons.
https://www.politico.com/news/2019/1...rs-2020-075651
Most arguments you will read will pretty much say the same thing. They assumed that that target audience would just gravitate towards them, rather than actually possessing a strong reason to be the nominee. If that was a problem for their polling numbers, why on earth would you think it’s going to fare well on a ticket?
No I’m not “putting it aside.” I’m also not going to just fire off a million articles at you. You can search for yourself. There’s tons of commentary on why Harris wasn’t well received by black voters. Electability as a female, sincerity, track record, assumptive vote. She didn’t just run out of money and say “oh well geez, I’m out of money good golly!” She failed to attract her target demographics and had no viable path to the nomination, and that’s why the money stopped pouring in in the first place. Or maybe this is just me using a token black female socialist’s journalism again, who clearly writes for white millennials.
This is all I have time for today:
My problem with your posts on this topic began when you said:
“the “kamala is a cop” thing will pretty much destroy her value to the black community in the current climate”
That’s where you went wrong, and that’s what’s led you down these rabbit holes. You didn’t say “BLM voters.” You said “the black community.” That’s why the MJ article felt like you were saying “look, here’s a black woman telling us that the reason that she’s not doing well with black voters is because she’s a cop” and you supported that view with your statement that being AG of California has already “destroyed” her value to black voters.
I disagree. I think black voters especially have much more nuanced views on this topic, and on Harris, because she’s a complex, nuanced candidate. To think that she has no value because of a single meme is silly, and my flip response was to say that it’s the “white Jacobin millennials” – certainly a much, much smaller group than “the black community” – who are most persuaded by this meme.
Further, law enforcement and reform also doesn’t come close to explaining why she didn’t go further in the campaign. In fact, that article you posted literally supports exactly what I’ve been saying, and it has nothing to do with criminal justice reform or “Kamala is a cop.” But don’t take my word for it, let’s look at the article you posted:
That collective choice by black voters so far in this campaign has been one of the most misunderstood dynamics of the Democratic primary. Harris’ campaign and others initially expected South Carolina, with its majority-black Democratic electorate, to be a source of strength for her. But Biden has prevented any other candidate from breaking through there this year, even as his poll numbers have flagged in other, whiter early primary and caucus states.
A review of public polling and interviews with black strategists, activists and Democratic officials explains why African American voters have largely gotten behind non-black candidates: a medley of concerns about Harris’ and Booker’s electability, their authenticity and their campaign styles, all of which prevented them from effectively challenging Biden’s enduring — and, to some, surprising — strength among African Americans.
It was always about Biden. I’d rather a Booker or Harris be the nominee. But that’s not what happened.
While I myself am a center-left slow progressive who values process and legitimacy gained through reason and debate to win hearts and minds, I don’t think BLM itself is. It’s a protest movement with demands. I’m fine with that. There’s space for everyone.
I do think, however, that the tens of thousands of protesters in the streets are more in my lane than not. I do think they would have policy differences with the leadership of BLM. But guess what? That’s ok. Marching with BLM doesn’t mean you support their every position. It means you support them in this moment, and that everyone has agreed upon a common enemy: Donald Trump.
most people in the streets do not want a candidate that isn’t poised to deliver large scale and immediate reform that you call “radical.”
You’re probably right that the core of BLM would prefer someone other than Harris. But the tens of thousands of people marching under the banner of BLM, many of whom are black and white and brown and mixed-race and old and young, are probably going to be just fine with a VP Harris.
You’re also ignoring what Harris – as you say, “of all people” – has been up to this week, as has been pointed out in this thread by others, that she’s actually doing a really good job explaining what the movement is about.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/kamala-harris-schools-the-view-host-meghan-mccain-on-defund-the-police
I’m pretty sure black voters,
even BLM millennials who write for Mother Jones, will give her props for this. I do not think Harris will turn away black voters in any sort of significant numbers if she’s on the ticket. You have no evidence that she will; her inability to breakthrough in 2019 is not evidence, as the article you posted makes clear.
I also understand that it’s easy to personalize comments in here. I don’t think you’re a white Jacobin Millennial. I didn’t say that you, personally, want to defund the police. I do agree with understanding rioting-as-expression in context – I pointed to Stonewall the night things started burning. I agree with “disarm” as a better D-word. However, DTP, which I’m typing in shorthand, is absolutely the topic of conversation this week. And it is not popular, as the polling posted by Headache makes clear.
Kamala Harris is a cop. Get back on track. You think BLM voters would be enthusiastic about her selection because no reason at all but facts don’t support that, and she has a history of not standing for the current immediate demands of the BLM movement, and in many cases actually stood for the opposite demands (“tough on crime”).
I hope I have gotten back on track with this post and it's clearer to you now.
Great and all for you to criticize these young activists for not understanding how it works, but maybe you forgot that this type of response was triggered by 60+ years of telling the same people “that’s not how you get change.” Yet nothing had changed. So, great on you, you tell em how it’s done. They’ll be sure to control their views so as to not upset suburban white Trump voters.
If you don’t think that things are better than they were in 1964, or 1984, I don’t know what to tell you. Of course it needs to get better. But, yes, things have changed. And if folks would like to win back the white house and the Senate so that they can enact real, substantial changed, they will absolutely watch the political center.
Anything beyond that is ego.
The argument you’re putting forward works better for Demings and not for Harris. And regardless of what argument you put forward here, the one you’ll never win is reality vs actuality. Harris’s name is tainted as California’s top cop, and it really doesn’t matter if you think that the actuality of that isn’t what meets the eye. If you give this movement zero enthusiasm and zero hope, they will stay home. Harris will do so, because of how she is perceived.
I just don’t agree with this.
I think Demmings would make for an interesting VP choice, but she literally was a cop.
)
