Someone on YouTube pointed out that she was wearing the outfit seen on this video two days ago, so my guess is the campaign was sitting on this, waiting for the right moment to spring this endorsement. I guess Trump using “Barack Hussein Obama’s” lack of an endorsement as an excuse to 
out of the debate was the right time.
8 Likes
Your lips to God’s ears there friend!!!
6 Likes
Hey @beschizza, the link posted goes to a BBC article about Harris talking to Netanyahu; not the Obamas endorsing her.
Just fyi.
9 Likes
I read that Obama would typically adopt a position of neutrality rather than have undue influence.
9 Likes
most ex-presidents try to stay out of the political spotlight. with one notable exception, who is “unprecedented” ( and who shall hopefully remain unpresidented )
13 Likes
“I am a coconut in the wind. Watch how I soar!”
11 Likes
I’ve seen some articles referencing said insider gossip - they ascribe statements to said anonymous insiders such as “border czar who didn’t go to the border”. Which is basically a direct copy of GOP suggested talking points. Obama may or may not have antipathy towards Harris, but I wouldn’t put any stock in those reports 0.0
3 Likes
I’m sorry, but why would that be a thing?
7 Likes
At this point, anyone in the Democrat camp who works against Harris in any way at all is basically trying to get Trump elected.
7 Likes
Blockquote
The insinuation is that top Dems had ambiguious plans to anoint a well-trained centrist of some kind instead, though there isn’t any evidence for this beyond anonymously-sourced insider gossip. The same media and party “elites” now expect one of the same figures—Mark Kelly, Josh Shapiro, etc—to end up her running mate.
Oh, I don’t think it IS true actually. Like I said, I suspect the rumours are bullshit nonsense spread by republican operatives. But there such rumours - and I have no idea what Obama thinks - and there are certainly democrats who argue (wrongly, I believe) that running as a progressive democrat is electoral suicide. So it’s possible he didn’t believe she should run but was convinced by the initial support we’ve seen. For evidence that rumours are being posted, even in trusted sources (albeit with some skepticism, but slightly less than I expressed) - I point you to the text of the boingboing post we are currently discussing.
1 Like
Which are likely…
Or…
That kind of thing happens a good bit, bullshit getting spread online that the big outlets pick up and run with, instead of doing their jobs of fact checking. How about we NOT take that bait and push “rumors” and do the far right’s job for them. If you’ve got some proof of a claim, then share it. But it seems like this is most likely just the right pushing bullshit.
7 Likes
…I mean, sure i agree… In fact, I was arguing that the rumours in the boing boing article that this is a comment section for were likely from unreliable sources, and giving specific evidence as to why I thought they were unreliable.
So like, I dunno - tell boingboing off?
There is actually evidence that some democrats were initially reluctant in their support, which can also be found from a boingboing article a few days ago - the one about AOC decrying the backroom dealings going on.
It doesnt matter though. What matters is what people do now. The truth is - a lot of people don’t know a lot about her. Some people were nervous that she was too progressive to win. Some progressives didn’t like her because of the cop stop. Some people - even other women of colour - love the idea of her but were unsure if she had a chance due to the baked in sexism and racism of the electorate. There are probably a bunch of senior democrats in one of these camps, and there’s gonna be both real and false rumours about who said what in coming days as the GOP scrambles to form new lines of attack.
When we hear that? Our first thought should be - it doesn’t matter. She’s out their changing minds, and some people’s minds are gonna change.
Kamala is the candidate now. People like you and I know that there’s an existential threat to democracy and getting behind her is absolutely necessary.
But she also has a chance to prove herself now, redefine herself to the skeptics.
I’m sure you’ll agree she’s doing a damn good job of it so far!
Honestly, I don’t think there’d be anything harmful if some senior figure - not Obama, because he’s already endorsed - came out and said “you know what? I was pretty skeptical - because of XYZ, because of how little time? And I have never been so happy to be proven so thoroughly wrong. She’s really proven herself - with A, with B, with C.Who the hell’s with me - go Kamala!”
That’d actually meet a whole bunch of people where they are - people who we really need to get on board. e.g. the undecideds who really wanted to vote for someone other than Trump OR Biden but just don’t know that much about Kamala.
So yeah, I think I’m a bit of mistarget - I was arguing against rumours stated in the article. But I don’t think that these rumours are going to be particularly damaging ones anyway - there’s a really clear answer to them - “So? Fuck me, she’s a lot better than many of us expected! Proved wrong”
1 Like
If it were Trump delaying an endorsement, the media would be savoring his mastery of controlling the conversation by not having his endorsement announced on the day seventeen other announcements of endorsements were made.
ETA: Not because the Obamas are excited about seeing their names in the paper, but because that’s how they best amplify their help for Harris.
2 Likes
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
