Fairly quickly.
She served her purpose, and honestly is not very useful for the DNC any longer. Harris has proven to be such a massive failure and embarrassment to the Democrat party, she will no longer be able to raise money for them.
She'll fade from the news hastily, and the media won't talk about her anymore other than in historical terms as a black woman who ran for President once.
Well I’m sure there’ll be a spot for her on the view. She’d fit right in.
shareThey owe her a job because The View effectively thwarted her chances to get the job she was seeking with that no-win question as to whether there was anything the Biden administration could have done differently. She's not goingto bash the administration she's still working for and will remain working for until Jan. 20, 2025. She's not on The View to be asked that question. Just softball her the questions to keep her in the White House. It's not as though the majority of that panel did not want her to be president.
shareCry me a river, why don’t you? Break out the violin. No one owes her nothing, she’s supposed to answer the voters damn questions as to “What are your policies and what do you intend to do and how do you intend to change things?” But she was coy, as in giving no answer(s) whatsoever and skirting the issue altogether. No freaking wonder she lost. No one wants that. Oh and YES I supported her and now I feel betrayed. One of Biden’s aides is on record as telling him that “You have more to lose than she does.” And he was right.
There goes his suppposed “legacy” right about the window. This is coming from his own biographer for crying out loud who said that. He’ll always now be remembered for bowing out way too late and not doing enough to propel Harris to the White House. Biden will be blamed more for letting Trump retake the White House. Prove me wrong.
She did answer the questions. She had an actual plan, not just "concepts of a plan." Trump is the king of 'don't ask me how I'm gonna' do it; I'm just gonna' do it.'
I think for a few years, Biden may be remembered the way you describe, but in the long run, history will be very kind to him. And he deserves that. He had every reason to run for re-election once it was clear that Trump would be his opponent. He is the only person, to date, to beat Trump. We can get all granular and try and determine when precisely he should have dropped out of the race, but, as far as I'm concerned, Kamala had enough time to make her case. I think she made a good argument for her election, went where she was supposed to go, appeared where she was supposed to appear.
As far as I'm concerned, I would be greatly relieved if these campaigns were limited to four months or however long she had. As a citizen, it gets oppressive the number of ads, the amount of campaign coverage on the news for close to two years before the election! It would save a fortune if these campaigns were truncated to basically the summer and fall before the first Tuesday in November. If a candidate can not express their views, policies, and engender themselves to the voters in that time, they aren't right for the job.
And, yes, I realize the primaries take time too. Fact-track that shit. Too much money is solicited for primaries.
share"She did answer the questions" 😂🤣
Yeah, we remember. "Look, I was raised in a middle class family..."
Yeah, my guess is she doesn't have much of a future in politics any more. John McCain and Mitt Romney were able to get Senate seats (or hold on to them), but I doubt Harris would be able to reclaim a seat in California. Schiff was just elected, and Padilla was elected in 2022. This means Harris wouldn't even be able to potentially retake her old seat from Padilla until 2029.
shareShe failed because she’s female.
shareNo, she failed because if Americans had to say what they thought her "message" was, it would be "Trump is bad and abortion should be on demand." Turns out that more women want cheaper groceries than want free abortions. It just wasn't that big of a selling point.
America wouldn't have a problem with the right female President. But if you try to install some woman who's never won a primary, that's not going to work. That, "You won't vote for him/her because s/he is [insert DEI category, here]" doesn't work anymore. Conservatives weren't against Obama because of his skin color. We're wild about Thomas Sowell, and he's darker than Obama. We don't like Obama's POLICIES. It's stupid to vote for or against anyone because of their skin color. Or their genitalia.
If she's smart she will. But she shows no indication of that.
shareShe’s done in politics. She proved to be very unintelligent and unqualified to hold executive level office.
Dems may insert her in as Gov of CA. Newsom is a joke and he’s doing it.
I think the best she can do if she wants to try to stay with elective politics is to find a safe but open senate seat from somewhere to run for. Doesn't have to be California. Possibly supreme court somewhere down the line. But I agree she is probably gone from the scene. I remember the 2016 inauguration and had completely forgotten about Dan Quayle until I saw him there.
shareShe'll go down the memory hole faster than the Hildabeast did. Probably slink back to California and go blow the nearest billionaire in the California state senate she can get her lips on.
share