Kamala Harris’s decline in the polls, explained

Kamala Harris’s decline in the polls, explained – Vox

Coalition building?! Don’t make the Peanut Gallery laugh. You can’t build a coalition relying on one firm for advice and only one demographic of voter.

We’re hearing a lot about concerns about her electability but that wasn’t a concern in Iowa or NH, both places that if she put the effort in and garnered a good finish could have really added that aura of electability to her candaciacy as he headed into places where that is more of a concern for voters, places like South Carolina.

Sigh… What a waste.

Kamala Harris Says She’s Still ‘in This Fight,’ but Out of the 2020 Race – The New York Times

Throughout her candidacy, Ms. Harris faced concerns about her political strategy and her campaign’s organizational structure. She relied on a stable of California political strategists, led by the longtime political operative Averell Smith, who did not heed warnings from grass-roots organizers to invest more heavily in early voting states like Iowa and New Hampshire. Instead, the campaign focused on later primaries in states with more nonwhite voters, including South Carolina and California.

Her campaign miscalculated.

…Mr. Biden, campaigning in Iowa, called Ms. Harris “a first-rate intellect, first-rate candidate, real competitor.” He walked away when a reporter asked whether he would consider Ms. Harris as a running mate.

Kamala Harris Says She’s Still ‘in This Fight,’ but Out of the 2020 Race – The New York Times

Did she or her campaign take all of the next/female Obama hype she had been generating since before she ran for Senate too seriously? Because there was a certain arrogance behind some of her bad decisions on the campaign trail….

A lot of talk about where she fell on the ideological spectrum but did she &/or anyone on the campaign ever sit down and plot it out?

If she did a review of the finances this late in the game and made her decision on this where was she in the past six months? Did she even check her spending or have a skeleton budget she adhered to?  (Thinking about that private plane the Peanut Gallery saw taking off after one her events…)

What did unifying goals mean to her? This was the woman who spent most of 2019 not bothering to talk to voters in NH and Iowa because they were too white.

Can’t speak for Iowa but NH is full not only a white state state, it is a gray state, full of successful professional women in their sixties and seventies who were (by virtue of when they started their careers) barrier breakers themselves. …Women who naturally felt a kinship and empathy towards her as another barrier breaker. She blew those women off and their interest in her and they went from dying to hear from her to, “Oh, Well, I guess she doesn’t want my vote.” Not exactly the stuff of a unifier….

Did she not realize she was vulnerable to candidates too her in California? How could she possibly have put together a campaign plan without accounting for that? (Oh, that’s right. Her campaign had no plan!)

As for her breakout moment calling Biden not quite a racist… What kind of politician attacks someone for supporting a position they themselves also hold? (Hint: a total frigging idiot who doesn’t think things through. That’s who!)

Also, Democrats have a tendency to eat their own and attack those on their own side who came before them. Fair or not, attacking Biden was also attack the Obama administration. Candidates who do this might as well be pulling the rug out from under their own feet.

Oy…. what a waste!

Girlfriend of Philando Castile Diamond Reynolds Sues Minnesota Mayor for Defamation – Black Enterprise

Diamond Reynolds, the girlfriend of the late Philando Castile, has filed a defamation lawsuit against Elysian, Minnesota, Mayor Tom McBroom over a 2017 tweet where he wrote that a settlement she won from the city would be spent on “crack cocaine.”

Girlfriend of Philando Castile Diamond Reynolds Sues Minnesota Mayor for Defamation – Black Enterprise

hmmm

Kamala Harris’ failed presidential campaign is bad news for Democrats (even her critics)

Kamala Harris’ failed presidential campaign is bad news for Democrats (even her critics)

For fuck’s sake… Kirsten Gillibrand cut her own legs off before she entered the race by calling for WJC to retroactively resign. She pigeon-holed herself and didn’t expand her message when it didn’t catch on.

It stinks that Kamala didn’t run a better but she didn’t. She just didn’t. Maybe we should anointing people 2,4,6 years before the election? Maybe hiding in backroom with big donors isn’t the way to introduce yourself to voters…

Julian Castro went bitchy instead of finding a less abrasive way to get all of his great wonky points across. He was downright aggressive in trying to make Biden look old and it didn’t make seem forceful, he came across like the mean kids table in a junior high cafeteria. He also never developed a ground game.

The problem isn’t Bloomberg or Steyer, the problem is the three candidates did not enter the race in any way prepared. They needed mentoring and guidance and they either didn’t have or didn’t listen.

I wonder where all of these journalists and posters were while these candidates they loved so much were in the hunt. I wonder where they were in 2016. Did they volunteer or donate for the their preferred 2020 candidate or HRC? No? Then sit down and STFU. Whiny freaking children.

 

I do

 

 

Progressives cite racism, sexism in Harris exit: Women of color ‘get twice the scrutiny’

Progressives cite racism, sexism in Harris exit: Women of color ‘get twice the scrutiny’ | TheHill

Yes, all of this exists.

Kamala Harris also ran a shitty, shitty campaign.  Bad hires, bad policy roll outs, piss poor strategy, and just a ridiculously ineffectual approach to just about everything.

The leadership skills show she showed were abysmal. In the face of racism and sexism, she needed to run a good campaign. She did not. If you cannot run a campaign, how do expect to run the country?

It’s sad the only African-American woman in the race has dropped out but sadder still is that her campaign didn’t have the organization or breath of experience, knowledge, and strategy that would have cast her in a better light.

Unfortunately Kamala’s dropping out is less of indictment of the our country’s lack of intersectionality and diversity and more of a statement on her own apparent lack of leadership and administration skills.

‘One of the hardest decisions of my life’: Kamala Harris ends once-promising campaign

Her candidacy got one of its first major breaks in the first Democratic debate in June, when Harris pulled off a blistering ambush of former Vice President Joe Biden over his previous stance on busing, which prompted another review of his record on race issues. Harris’ performance sent her soaring in the polls, and the campaign raised $2 million in the 24 hours following the debate.

But the attack blew back on Harris when her own stance on busing came under scrutiny in the days after.

‘One of the hardest decisions of my life’: Kamala Harris ends once-promising campaign – POLITICO

Campaign Lesson Number 3: Only a moron attacks a rival for holding views that they, themselves, hold as well.

Also, anyone who thought she wouldn’t be held to higher standard than a white male candidate is an idiot. It was coming. It was real. No, it’s not fair but it is real and she did not seem prepared for it.

The two challenges that doomed Kamala Harris

California, of course, is not the totality of America. Especially in the early primary states, successful Democratic candidates must show they are as comfortable in and with the heartland, as accessible to small-town Iowans as to San Franciscans. The media does not get why Biden holds onto his voters or why a “no malarkey” tour may work in Iowa; they too often bring the coastal elite mind-set to a race that in the early going is decided by people who do not naturally embrace urban progressives. Harris never quite made the leap from San Francisco to Des Moines.

The two challenges that doomed Kamala Harris – The Washington Post

 

Reason Number 1) No. It wasn’t electability. People were dying to hear from her. She just never showed up.

Reason Number Two)  Ahem. The Peanut Gallery may have mentioned this a few hundred times or so in the past year…

Kamala Harris Drops Out of the 2020 Presidential Race

Ms. Harris also faced questions about her political strategy and her campaign’s organizational structure. She relied on a stable of California political strategists, led by the longtime political operative Averell Smith, who did not heed warnings from grass-roots organizers to invest more heavily in early voting states like Iowa and New Hampshire. Instead, the campaign focused on later primaries in states with more nonwhite voters, including South Carolina and California.

…“Sometimes campaigns can tear friendships apart but we have grown closer,” Ms. Klobuchar tweeted. “Her good work will continue.”

“Her campaign broke barriers and did it with joy,” Mr. Booker tweeted. “Love you, sister.”

Mr. Biden, campaigning in Iowa, called Ms. Harris “a first-rate intellect, first-rate candidate, real competitor.” He walked away when a reporter asked whether he would consider Ms. Harris as a running mate.

Kamala Harris Drops Out of the 2020 Presidential Race – The New York Times

Yes, there were fund-raising issues but they only manifested because of all of the other issues in her once promising campaign.  The lessons?

1.) POC and women candidates need to be better than their white/male counterparts. It’s an ugly truth but it is the truth.

2.) Iowa and NH are very white. They are also smaller populations which make retail politics easier and more effective to pull off. Both states like to go their own way though so there is a huge opening for new faces to succeed there. The media markets are so inexpensive it is staggering. The Peanut Gallery’s point here is that although they are very white states there are definite (and relatively inexpensive) paths to success for “outsiders” and “newcomers” who are WILLING TO PLAY BALL with retail-style campaigning. For all of those reasons and more,  blowing them off isn’t just poor strategy, it’s just plain stupid.

3.) Sticking to the message is how campaigns win. Changing up the message every other day is how candidates lose. Period.

4.) California is a big state. It is not the entire country though. Banking on a California campaign strategy while employing a tightly knit, closed circle of California-only consultants and leadership is, well, naive and a bit arrogant.

5.) If you can’t campaign in all of the different regions of the country, what does that say about your ability to conduct yourself among the varied cultures across the globe? Don’t answer that. Because it doesn’t say anything good.

6.) She picked a poor cycle to run as America’s “top cop.” We don’t need a law and order prosecutor. We need a reformer.

7.) Outside of La-la-la land donations dry up when candidates don’t do retail politics. Anyone who couldn’t see her war-chest drying up has never campaigned outside a major media market.

The Peanut Gallery doesn’t really see itself ever willingly voting for a prosecutor in a primary but it still wanted to see her do better than this.

It’s not the press, it’s not white men telling her sit down and be quiet, and it’s not ‘electability’ (whatever that means) that sunk her. It was piss-poor decision making that did her in.

The Peanut Gallery is secretly breathing a sigh of relief she finally dropped out. The country needs someone with more savvy and leadership skills than she showed.

The Kamala Harris Conundrum

The Kamala Harris Conundrum

Exactly.

….Plus, her campaign has been an absolute shit-show. Yes, despite all of the candidates high opinions of themselves, they all have a lot to learn when they start out on the campaign trail. But also yes, Kamala has struggled with management, administration, policy deployment, and acknowledging that it takes different things to run and win in different parts of the country.  And yes, the last item is serious cause for concern. It speaks to her diplomatic ability and whether or not she is prepared to deal with other countries and cultures.

So many of us want to like her. … Or at least want to like her ins pite of her record but she is simply not ready for primetime.

Walk ‘like a man’

The thing is, more women sitting like men requires some men to sit more like women. It requires attention to someone else’s personal space. And more deeply, it requires a perspective shift: that no person inherently deserves to have a larger psychological piece of the universe than another person. Your wingspan might be wider, for example, but your comfort shouldn’t indifferently come at the expense of someone else’s.

I walked ‘like a man’ for a week, and here’s what I realized. – The Washington Post

Devil’s advocate. Let’s assume that ‘more women sitting like men requires more men sit like women.’ Wouldm’t more women sitting like men provoke exactly that? And if less women got out of men’s way on the street, wouldn’t it be more likely to occur to them that they might bump into someone?

How Kamala Harris’s Campaign Unraveled

Representative Marcia Fudge, who has endorsed [Senator] Harris and is a former chairwoman of the Congressional Black Caucus, said in an interview that the senator was an exceptional candidate who had been poorly served by some top staff and who must fire Mr. Rodriguez. But she also acknowledged that [Senator] Harris bore a measure of responsibility for her problems — “it’s her campaign” — and that the structure she created has not served her well.

…“You can’t run the country if you can’t run your campaign,” said Gil Duran, a former aide to [Senator] Harris and other California Democrats who’s now the editorial page editor of the Sacramento Bee.

…Her assumptions about the issues that would inspire Democrats were also muddled: she began running on a tax cut aimed at lower- and middle-income voters and then turned to a pay raise for teachers.

…Then there was [Senator] Harris’s campaign message.

…After months of uncertainty, she’s back to embracing her role as a prosecutor.

[Senator] Harris said she was being deliberate, but several aides familiar with the process said she was knocked off kilter by criticism from progressives and spent months torn between embracing her prosecutor record and acknowledging some faults.

…The fact that [Senator] Harris is now banking on an Iowa-or-bust strategy highlights a major strategic miscalculation early on that set her off on the wrong track.

When she entered the race in January, she bet that the early voting states of Iowa and New Hampshire would matter less to her political fortunes than South Carolina, with its predominantly black Democratic electorate.

…What her campaign did not anticipate was that Mr. Biden would remain strong with many black voters, and that Senator Elizabeth Warren and Mayor Pete Buttigieg would rise as threats in Iowa and New Hampshire. [The Peanut Gallery can not resist interrupting to point out that conventional wisdom says it plainly: “Don’t take NH for Granite.”]

…There are also generational fissures. One adviser said the fixation that some younger staffers have with liberals on Twitter distorted their view of what issues and moments truly mattered, joking that it was not President Trump’s account that should be taken offline, as [Senator] Harris has urged, but rather those of their own trigger-happy communications team.

…[She] bifurcated the leadership between two decidedly different loyalists: her sister, the chair, and Mr. Rodriguez, a trusted lieutenant who had managed her 2016 Senate campaign. Mr. Rodriguez was a central figure at the San Francisco-based consulting firm, SCRB, that had helped direct [Senator] Harris’s rise for a decade; all of the firm’s partners were lined up to advise the presidential race.

The two camps were soon competing, each stocked with people who shared a tight bond with [Senator] Harris but who regarded each other with suspicion or worse. The setup cost [Senator] Harris opportunities to recruit some of her party’s most sought-after outside strategists and left her reliant on a team less experienced in national politics [emphasis: Peanut Gallery] than in California, an overwhelmingly blue state where campaigns often turn on factional infighting within the Democratic Party.

…Dan Sena, a former executive director of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, met early with [Senator] Harris’s team and came away concerned that they were overly reliant on political thinking shaped in California’s idiosyncratic political system

“Winning in California requires a different road map, between a top-two candidate system and the expensive TV markets,” Mr. Sena said. [emphasis: Peanut Gallery]

…One official recalled that during the flight from Oakland to Iowa on the night she announced her campaign in January, [Senator] Harris told senior members of her campaign team that she wanted to “go stealth.” However, instead of pursuing retail politics and introducing herself to voters in more intimate settings, as [Senator] Harris [seemed to have] suggested she preferred, her senior aides determined it was more important to cement herself in the top tier and play for “big, television moments,” as one put it.

“If you go big like that, you’ll never get a real understanding of the American people,” said Minyon Moore, a former senior adviser to Hillary Clinton and a longtime admirer of [Senator] Harris. “Because we don’t live up there.”

…Messages from bookkeepers warning of financial strain went unheeded, according to [Mr. Rodriguez’s] critics, until cutbacks were inevitable.

…Harris and other members of the senior staff were enraged because they did not know the extent of the layoffs until after they happened. Some aides were informed about the mass firing of New Hampshire staff from junior aides and members of the press rather than Mr. Rodriguez.

How Kamala Harris’s Campaign Unraveled – The New York Times

Not. Ready. For. Prime-time.

‘No discipline. No plan. No strategy.’: Kamala Harris campaign in meltdown

Late in 2015, Rodriguez, then a senior adviser to Harris’ Senate campaign, came out of the bullpen to manage her race after she parted ways with her first manager. It wasn’t a competitive contest [emphasis:Peanut Gallery], but Rodriguez helped oversee spending cuts and staff and consultant layoffs as he worked to significantly slash Harris’ overhead.

…[Other aides] question the wisdom of firing junior and midlevel staffers while the main people empowered to make decisions have all been spared.

…The organizational problems have been agonizing for rank-and-file workers who still believe in Harris’ chances and want to do right by her, another aide said. But the person noted that Harris’ well-received speech at a major Democratic event in Iowa a few weeks ago was eclipsed by news of layoffs across New Hampshire earlier that day.

…Still, others point to Rodriguez’s constant yielding to Maya Harris as a reason he should be held accountable for the campaign’s failures. “It was his decision,” another aide said of the fraying pact, adding there were opportunities for him to take control. “He chose to defer to Maya.”

The unorthodox composition of the campaign is further complicated by other factors. Rodriguez’s California business partners — Ace Smith, Sean Clegg and Laphonza Butler — are senior Harris advisers atop a flat leadership structure that includes just a few other outside voices, including ad maker Jim Margolis, pollster David Binder and Maya Harris. Critics of the arrangement say it has contributed to an insular culture and reinforced the business partners’ long-term obligations to one another.

…Under an updated iteration, Clegg formally assumed control of messaging while Butler took over the financial, digital and operations teams. Dave Huynh, the campaign’s delegate expert, was put in charge of the political department. Emmy Ruiz’s turf included states and the field organization. And Kosoglu oversaw scheduling, communications, advance and policy.

‘No discipline. No plan. No strategy.’: Kamala Harris campaign in meltdown – POLITICO

Hiring leadership without experience is a rookie move.

Black Women Want to Be Excited About Kamala Harris. The Truth Is More Complicated.

Harris will have to defend her record on criminal justice just as other candidates have to defend their own votes and positions. And black women know that for a black female presidential candidate, the stakes will be far higher than for her white male peers. Criticism of her character and policies is bound to be influenced by a lethal combination of racism, sexism, and cultural ignorance.

…Still the more I dug into Kamala Harris’ background, the worse I started to feel. I wondered whether I was being too hard on her or even holding her to a higher standard than I would a white male Democrat. Former Vice President Joe Biden admitted that he hasn’t been “always right” on issues of criminal justice. No candidate is perfect, and the idea that I might not support a black woman who is qualified for the job is excruciating. My life’s work is centered on black women and their stories, no matter how complicated those narratives might be. Was my hesitation premature and unfair? But the alternative is almost as painful—giving someone who looks like me a pass on actions that have hurt our communities. I want a black female president. But I want an end to mass incarceration for all black women, for all black families, even more. Who can deliver that? Could it be Harris? Maybe, but I need her to make that case.

Black Women Want to Be Excited About Kamala Harris. The Truth Is More Complicated. | Glamour

hmmmm

Ukraine Condemns Apple For Changing Map To Show Crimea As Part Of Russia

Ukraine on Wednesday criticized Apple for changing its location-based apps to show Crimea as part of Russia, implying that the company “doesn’t give a damn” about its pain, as U.S. tech companies face criticism for complying with controversial local laws in order to keep doing business in those countries.

Ukraine Condemns Apple For Changing Map To Show Crimea As Part Of Russia

hmmm

That Uplifting Tweet You Just Shared? A Russian Troll Sent It

[The] goal was two-fold: Grow an audience in part through heartwarming, inspiring messages, and use that following to spread messages promoting division, distrust, and doubt.

…This tweet didn’t seek to anger conservative Christians or to provoke Trump supporters. She wasn’t even talking to them. Melanie’s 20,000 followers, painstakingly built, weren’t from #MAGA America (Russia has other accounts targeting them). Rather, Melanie’s audience was made up of educated, urban, left-wing Americans harboring a touch of self-righteousness. She wasn’t selling her audience a candidate or a position — she was selling an emotion. Melanie was selling disgust. The Russians know that, in political warfare, disgust is a more powerful tool than anger. Anger drives people to the polls; disgust drives countries apart.

…Professional disinformation isn’t spread by the account you disagree with — quite the opposite. Effective disinformation is embedded in an account you agree with. The professionals don’t push you away, they pull you toward them. While tweeting uplifting messages about Warrick Dunn’s real-life charity work, Tyra, and several accounts we associated with her, also distributed messages consistent with past Russian disinformation. Importantly, they highlighted issues of race and gender inequality. A tweet about Brock Turner’s Stanford rape case received 15,000 likes. Another about police targeting black citizens in Las Vegas was liked more than 100,000 times. Here is what makes disinformation so difficult to discuss: while these tweets point to valid issues of concern — issues that have been central to important social movements like Black Lives Matter and #MeToo — they are framed to serve Russia’s interests in undermining Americans’ trust in our institutions.

…They attacked moderate politicians as a method of bolstering more polarizing candidates.

…Russia strategically employed social media to build support on the right for Trump and lower voter turnout on the left for Clinton. …Russia’s goals are to further widen existing divisions in the American public and decrease our faith and trust in institutions that help maintain a strong democracy.

…Their work was never just about elections. Rather, the [Russia’s Internet Research Agency (IRA)] encourages us to vilify our neighbor and amplify our differences because, if we grow incapable of compromising, there can be no meaningful democracy. Russia has dug in for a long campaign. So far, we’re helping them win.

That Uplifting Tweet You Just Shared? A Russian Troll Sent It – Rolling Stone

Mmmhmmmn.

Federal judge says former White House counsel Don McGahn must speak to House

“However busy or essential a presidential aide might be, and whatever their proximity to sensitive domestic and national-security projects, the President does not have the power to excuse him or her from taking an action that the law requires,” Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote.

“Stated simply, the primary takeaway from the past 250 years of recorded American history is that Presidents are not kings,” Jackson said.

…The ruling stops short of saying White House officials must answer all questions they’re asked before Congress. Instead, the ruling focuses on whether an official like McGahn must appear for testimony once subpoenaed.

Federal judge says former White House counsel Don McGahn must speak to House – CNNPolitics

hmmm