Um.....Obama received the most votes in HISTORY in 2008 by almost 9.5 million votes and won by more than 6 million in 2012. Those white, working class voting aren't enough to stop a candidate that can build that "obama coalition" that voted for him. Most people didn't know about Obama until late 2007.
The sentence that follows what you quoted gives an explanation. In a representativ democracy with a diverse electorate, having that diversity also reflected in the representatives is desirable.
No.....she is what the progress wing of the Democratic Party wants: She is her own woman, but she reminds people ALOT of Obama. She falls in between Warren/Sanders and Obama in the progressive spectrum.
As someone from California, I will say that Harris is the real deal. She's hard working, fair, logical, was a District Attorney, and has the combination of pragmatism, and progressive ideals to have a shot at really getting things done in a meaningful way.
What matters for 2020 Dem candidate is whether he or she can get the 6-10 million voters that Obama got to the polls that Hillary/Kerry/Gore could not. Dems need someone who is charismatic and who can generate enthusiasm.
It doesn't really matter what we think of her as a presidential candidate. What does the DNC think? The DNC has ways of making sure their favorite gets the nomination.
White women will not vote for her. Are we still talking about "experience" and "qualified"? Have you learned nothing?
None of this really matters, what matters is they get someone wanting to expose our corrupt politicians. That's what Bernie was and that's what Trump was. Problem with Trump though is that progressives have always been about this. Trump isn't sincere about draining the swamp, but Bernie is. Any ways all they need to do is exactly what the GOP did. Tell them whoever wants to run to go for it, if it means having 10 candidates in the primaries good. Stand out of the way and may the best person win.
I'm getting the vibe from the President elect of the United States of America that Mexicans are rapists, that Muslims should be banned, that women should be grabbed by their vaginas, that blacks are animals who live in awful ghettos when they're not being born in Kenya and becoming President. I hope he'll take time to judge them by their merits.
...and that's where you need to educate yourself. Diversity isn't just "rainbow optics" and what color you are. That's a very simplistic and ignorant way to define diversity.
So she has no executive experience whatsoever and she caters exclusively to the fringe left....sounds like someone who would struggle in a national election.
A couple things amuse me in this thread. First, those who think Hillary didn't win because those mean white men just refused to vote for a woman. Second, those who believe Kamalas greatest strength is being a woman and black. America doesn't want progressive. Americans want their country to be successful. We can't do that when we are too worried about men using woman facilities or whether one party is going to repeal gay rights or a myriad of other what ifs. Its fine to debate social issues, but we are ignoring the decay of our country.
Well the bulk of the country spoke on election day and you don't see progressives having control of the congress. In fact, the majority of the country went the exact opposite direction.
^Other than the majority of the country voted exactly for this, as they have 7 out of 8 times since 1992.
That doesn't prove that most of the country doesn't want a progressive. You know what a high density area is right? Well...those tend to be blue. You know what is odd? Since election night I've continued to hear "If democrats put up ANYONE else but Clinton they win. If Sanders is the nominee, they win." Now all of a sudden. "It's pretty clear that the majority of the country wanted nothing to do with democrats." Huh? That's a big contradiction.
