Anonymous #1 7w

I mean Kamala lowkey got fucked bc she couldn’t run a full campaign plus I don’t really think she had the rizz to have Obama vibes

15

Anonymous #1 7w

Being very blunt he has the advantage of being a white man and that makes a huge difference.

1

Anonymous #4 7w

I don’t think it’s as big as you think. Speaking from a blue part of a blue state, Kamala was an incumbent from one of the most unpopular democratic admins in recent history. She also missed the mark majorly with all the celebrity endorsements. I don’t think the centrists in Kentucky were vying to vote for her well before her race and gender came into play. As for not having the rizz, yeah, most definitely. And dodging every question about every policy on every interview was a horrible look too

1

Anonymous OP 7w

I just find it hard to sympathize when she got fucked by her own admin trying to run a second term after claiming it’d be an interim presidency earlier on. Like she definitely had some say in keeping Joe in the race. I’m sure not all of it, but part of that DOES come down to his cabinet being fucking stupid, and she was a major part of his cabinet.

1

Anonymous #5 7w

Tbf if they’re a grad student it’s entire plausible they were cognizant during his 2006 campaign. Hell I even remember bits and piece of it, though I was very very very young.

5

Anonymous #1 7w

I’m not saying she was a great candidate and Ossoff (I’m a constituent) is way significantly better, but if you are not able to see how racism and misogyny played a role in her not getting elected idk what to tell you.

0

Anonymous #4 7w

I just don’t understand why people think anybody who would refuse to vote for someone bedside of their gender or race would vote for a democrat regardless of such. I think the demographic of people who said “well I loved Joe Biden but I would never vote for a brown woman. Trump it is.” is genuinely very very small, and not really the audience a democratic campaign should be targeting. Assuming race or gender were the deciding factors invalidates how genuinely terrible her campaign was.

0

Anonymous #1 7w

I will remind you that Hillary Clinton won popular vote in 2016, following two terms or Obama. Both women and poc are clearly electable, assuming combining the two suddenly invalidates that is very odd.

0

Anonymous #1 7w

Because* of their gender. Typo in my first reply.

1

Anonymous #5 7w

People were recording Obama speeches in ‘06 bro you can still just go watch one to get a feel for the vibes

5

Anonymous #1 7w

I’d also remind you of the open misogyny and racism that was hurled at them throughout both of their campaigns. People were very openly talking about thinking women couldn’t lead etc. It’s not odd to acknowledge the fact that we have very old and very deep misogynistic and racist elements in our nation and that bias, conscious or not, is absolutely a factory in how people vote. I actually think acting like it wasn’t a factor is a much more odd position

0

Anonymous #4 7w

You’re also kind of dismissing how powerful and ubiquitous unconscious bias is. You don’t have to outright say or even think “I won’t vote for a black person or a woman” to have been impacted by the overwhelming systems of racism and misogyny that we’re surrounded by every day. I’m not saying it’s good that it’s a factor or that women or POC are “unelectable,” but it’s just not accurate to say that race and gender were not a factor. If this were all about competence and charisma 1/2

0

Anonymous #4 7w

These women wouldn’t have both lost to a completely unqualified, incompetent candidate like Trump.

0

Anonymous #4 7w

TLDR we live under centuries of oppressive systems that mean race and gender are always a factor at the macro level even if it’s not in a way people can immediately recognize in themselves or others.

0

Anonymous #4 7w

Obviously it was not enough, given again, two terms and the popular vote by around 2 million if I’m not mistaken. The people who are openly racist and sexist during those campaigns, and I cannot stress this enough, ALREADY WEREN’T ALIGNED WITH DEMOCRATS. “Bigots are bigoted, and therefore the country isn’t ready for a black/female president”. No dude. Bigots have always been bigoted, they always will be, at least as a demographic. You’ve moved the goalpost from to “affects how people vote”-

1

Anonymous #1 7w

-which I never disagreed with. My claim was that Kamala lost on her own merit, and the incumbent merits of biden, not because she’s a brown woman. That’s an irresponsible claim, as it implies the only solution is giving in to the loud microcosm of people who will only turn the dnc further right then it’s already gone. This is a disingenuous argument wnd you know it.

1

Anonymous #4 7w

First off, again, Hillary SOMEHOW (Pokémon go to the polls) won popular vote by over a million, It’s not a matter of prejudice, it’s a matter of not getting enough electoral votes lol. Idk what you’re talking about there. And we’ve been over why Harris lost. Generationally terrible campaign. These were both weak candidates, and Trump, even if we don’t see it, is a VERY strong populist candidate. Doesn’t rly matter if he’s qualified.

1

Anonymous #4 7w

TLDR, this has nothing to do with Kamala Harris’ campaign, and you’ve gone off on a rail. Bias exists in everything we do but your implication that bias is the leading factor in why these people weren’t elected is in one case, just blatantly wrong and misunderstands our stupid ass electoral system, and in the other, completely ignorant of the dozens and dozens of slip ups Kamala “unwavering support for Israel” Harris made in an effort to appeal to moderates who already hated her, by association-

1

Anonymous #1 7w

To Biden and Obama.

1