Kamala Harris disappoints in CNN interview: "Do what now?"

No surprise to me with the self-serving assholes who run the Democratic Party. Abortion and the threat of the other monster party that just made safe access to it so much closer to impossible for so many U.S. women has become a FANTASTIC fund-raising issue.

42 Likes

Saw this posted elsewhere:

Republicans are the mass shooters.
Democrats are the Uvalde police.

40 Likes

The had how long since the Roe decision leak to formulate a plan for how they’d respond legislatively. And they chose to do nothing. How about tying abortion access and Medicaid/are funding together? How about requiring that states receiving any ACA funding use it to cover abortion? How about a bunch of state-level bills enshrining abortion rights even more strongly at state levels? How about anything! Any sort of plan.

And the communication. Oy. “Well, we need you to vote for us.” Okay, great, but… what will you do once you have the votes? Like where’s the actual bill? Which seats do you want the public to target for the purpose of flipping them so you get the seats you need in Congress? What is your goddamn strategy here?

29 Likes

There is none, as this vignette on the Dem’s Web site (h/t @anothernewbbaccount) illustrates.

So. It’s about a month after the draft decision removing Federal protection for abortion leaked, and the homepage of the democrats dot org first hits you with a modal, essentially saying “give us money and we’ll do something”, but the headline is about “donating now to help elect Democrats” when honestly, I don’t particularly care about electing Democrats, I care about, you know, not losing rights.

The short version of this is that any content strategy team worth their salt would be able to knock this out of the park. The draft decision has been waiting for a month. A bowling alley has a better content scheduling calendar than this.

As to why this happens, it’s because the Dem establishment hires staff on the basis of loyalty and time-serving(and sometimes nepotism) rather than competence.

23 Likes

Absent some medical issue, there is zero chance of this happening. Nobody in their right mind spends decades trying to get elected, only to go down in history as the second-ever president, alongside Nixon, to resign.

He’ll run again because that’s how first terms are validated–by getting reelected.

20 Likes

I don’t think he’ll resign, but in the last month the Dems have been sending up smoke signals about his not seeking a second term. If it happens the pretext will be some age-related medical issue that will allow him to save face.

10 Likes

I really wish it had been Connie Rice (not Condi). One of the few who seems to have the energy and determination of AOC or the smarts of Katie Porter (not to imply AOC is not smart).

10 Likes

maybe i’ve missed them in the face of waves hands at everything else, but what signals have they been sending that indicate this?

9 Likes

Just articles and TV comments here and there where various Dem party and elected officials mention in passing what’s supposed to be “unmentionable”. No-one in those positions (or the corporate media outlets) says a word about a sitting President not running for a second term or muses about potential primary challengers when there’s no doubt that the POTUS is operating from a position of strength.

7 Likes

I’ve seen “signals” from the NYTimes, CNN, FoxNews, RollCall, The Hill etc. but that’s click and watch bait for the most part.

The press is hard at work fomenting fear and doubt. When they use the word “whispers” it means they are just spreading gossip and misinformation. Hillary has categorically denied she’s even considering running again and yet “whispers” on NYTimes, CNN and the like.

Kamala’s banal performance isn’t helping.

10 Likes

State laws do not apply on federal lands.

Be bold Joe. Allow abortion health care providers and transgender health care providers to operate on federal lands.

26 Likes

I don’t want to be all doom and gloom, but if the GQP takes even just the house, they are going to make life very hard on Biden. His polling numbers are bad as is. I don’t see how he manages to finish the term, much less run again.

And I’m saying this as someone who likes Biden.

11 Likes

He will complete the term regardless.

Sure the House can approve Articles of Impeachment by a majority vote. The trial in the Senate requires a supermajority to convict.

13 Likes

Time to holler at your representative and senators.

The email I sent out a few days back:

(The version I sent didn’t have the “Learn more:” links; this started as an op-ed I wrote for the county Democratic party’s blog.)

My phone script:

23 Likes

This framing of “why can’t the dems pass something with the a trifecta” is disingenuous at best. The slimmest possible Senate majority, complete with two swing voters who are in love with the idea of the filibuster, means that the only things the Dems are passing are reconciliation bills that deal in budgetary matters or painstakingly negotiated compromises like the recent guns bill. There are absolutely not 10 Republican senate votes on any sort of Roe codification bill. This is not something Biden and Harris have control over and it’s wrong to lay it only at their feet.

I think it’s probably worth getting people on the voting record, and I think we should have more open discussions about the structure of the supreme court. The path that gives us actual progress on codification, though, is to get at least 2 more senate seats held by progressive (and anti-filibuster) Dems and allies, and to hold the House. Anybody who tells you otherwise is showboating or, worse, intentionally trying to worsen divides and make it harder to actually get to progress.

14 Likes

Just to address two of the suggestions in the post, Biden cannot expand the size of the Court. Only Congress can do that, and they have to do it by amending the law setting the size of the Court, so they would need a filibuster-proof 60 votes. We know they don’t have that. So that brings us to the second suggestion: ending the filibuster. I’m all for that, but Manchin and Sinema have made it abundantly clear they will never support that. So that suggestion is dead in the water unless Democrats expand their lead in November. I know everyone is tired of hearing “VOTE” as a plan of action, but it is literally necessary before any of the other ideas can happen.

The hard truth is, we lost this battle. The war isn’t over, but Roe is, and there’s no quick fix to protecting abortion rights nationally. Even had Congress codified Roe into law during Carter’s Presidency (I have admittedly no idea if anyone proposed that at the time or how likely it would have been to pass, but let’s just assume it could have), Alito et al would have just concocted some legal justification for declaring that law unconstitutional and we’d be in the exact same spot right now. Clearly, if Congress passed a law today, state Republican AGs across the country would file suit tomorrow, SCOTUS would grant an emergency injunction, fast track that suit, and declare it unconstitutional. If Biden issued an executive order, same result. And I know some people argue that it’s important to see Democrats at least try, but I’m not sure piling up loss after loss after loss would help. It sucks. It all sucks, but I think voting is our only way out of this. Well…there’s another way, but I’m a pacifist, so I’m not ready to go there yet. And I’m not sure that would be successful either.

33 Likes

That’s not how it’s being framed, at least not here where we all understand the current constraints. This is discussing the hapless leadership of the executive branch and of the party establishment. There are things they can both call for in the future as a summons to action for voters (even if it’s not currently possible) and actually do right now, but they won’t.

Instead we get the VP saying “do what?”.

19 Likes

Nobody in Dem leadership should be asking “what should we do”, they should be telling us what the plan is. This is literally what they’re there for…

  • Set a goal
  • Justify the goal and get buy in
  • Identify steps needed to accomplish the goal
  • Delegate the actionable components to people to execute them
  • Monitor progress and report it visibly
16 Likes

FDR lost when he tried to pack the Court - but he actually won because the Court changed its position.

16 Likes

Quoting from the CNN anchor:

What do you say to Democratic voters who argue “Wait a minute, we worked really hard to elect a Democratic president and vice president, a Democratic-led House, a Democratic-led Senate. Do it now.”

That is absolutely how it’s being framed here. Yes, we here know the answer. The CNN anchor knows the answer, too, and if they wanted to they could have set up the question as “what is necessary in addition to what you have already to enact what Democratic voters want here?”

It’s a small but important difference. It acknowledges the truth, that what we have is not enough - that as @danimagoo says, we lost this battle.

6 Likes