Too Early, Folks! Kamala Harris Gives a Campaign Launch Speech

[MineralMan]

and people on GD are already dissing her, her campaign logo, and her chances.

I watched her speech, which she gave at a rally that turned out 20,000+ people. Yes, it was on her home turf. But, I looked at the crowd carefully. I suggest everyone do the same. I saw faces in the crowd we really need to show up in November of 2020. It was a strong, populist speech. She speaks well and clearly. She's on point and doesn't waste words. Her audience was enthusiastic. Not a bad showing at all.

Even so, it's too early to judge potential candidates for the Democratic nomination. Way too early. More Democrats will be holding campaign launch rallies and giving impassioned speeches. They'll all be speaking about similar issues that need to be addressed. All will be saying pretty much the same things.

It's going to be a primary field full of people we like. We'll see the future presidential nominee, along with several potential VP nominees. They're all going to be on our side. What's not to like?

Here's my suggestion: Tell us who you like the best. Don't tell us why you don't like the rest. Tell us why you prefer your favorite, in real terms that affect how well a campaign does. Don't tell us why the others can't win.

We didn't do it that way in 2016. Trump is President. Let's not make the same mistakes we made then. Really!

[riverbendviewgal]

1. Exactly !

So many Dems are good. Watch and listen to each one. Write what you like about what they want to do.

Make an Excel sheet of the candidates you see and only write the positive. When it comes to decide see who fills the glass the most.

Hopefully it will be a hard choice.

[MineralMan]

4. Thanks.

It's a long time until the Democratic Nominating Convention in 2020. Candidates will declare from now through the rest of the year. Some will rise; some will drop out. Only one will become the Democratic nominee, and it's way too early to even guess at who that will be. It's not time yet to start attacking individual candidates. Really, it's never time to do that.

Instead, if you really, really like a particular candidate, it will be far more effective if you talk that candidate up. Dissing other candidates isn't particularly useful, really.

About Kamala Harris, I've seen one negative post that was 100% inaccurate in describing what and who she supports and who supports her. it was a pure attack post with no truth in it at all.

What's that about? How does that help Democrats choose a nominee?

[PatrickforO]

28. If it is helpful, I did a preliminary policy post on Harris just the other day.

It links to four sites, and shows what I perceive as her strengths, weaknesses and general electability.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=11734867

[MineralMan]

34. Thanks for that informative post.

That's what we need right now, on each serious candidate.

[CTyankee]

64. I agree. However, it is a good thing to compare and contrast our candidates' positions and their

past voting records and ask hard questions.

I have learned something about how I look at our candidates now. I was truly shocked at what Bernie said recently about how Dem candidates having to be female, a minority or gay. I was sorry as hell that I cast that vote for him in our CT primary. I wish I knew then what I know now.

So let's scrutinize our candidates, ask questions, do our research and get all the facts we can (and I do mean facts, not hearsay).

I'm strongly for Kamala but I read pieces that are critical of her if they are not from RW trolls. I want to know all I can find out, but from truthful sources (and that is going to require a LOT of scrutiny). Thank god for DU.

[snowybirdie]

2. I suspect

Many, like me, find it too taxing to decide on 2020 candidates yet. We just had an election, tRump is acting worse and worse, and our country is in turmoil. Lots on our plate. I'm going to wait til summer before concentrating on the next step. The American people need take a breather.

[MineralMan]

8. Good decision, I think.

Why don't we just let potential candidates launch their campaigns and introduce themselves to us? Once everyone has announced, we can begin whatever process we want to follow. There will be plenty of time for that. Right now, there are some really, really important things going on in the foreground.

[David__77]

3. Oh I'm sure there will be "deep vetting" on this site of all candidates.

From Warren to Harris and all the rest. I cannot see how it would be otherwise.

[MineralMan]

5. Oh, no doubt. I will be publicly demanding that anyone posting dirt

on any candidate back up their claims with actual facts and links to those facts. Most often, no such facts and links will be forthcoming. We don't need false claims in this long, long campaign period.

[David__77]

7. That's good.

I think people will be adding to their copy and paste blurb collections for posting.

What I think is particularly toxic is the use of insulting nicknames and such. Disagreement with policy or action or words is quite another.

[Grasswire2]

71. yes, and that falls under the rule of "not re-litigating" the primary, IMO.

Calling Dems who voted for Bernie in good conscience in the primary (as was their absolute right) names and insults, and calling Bernie supporters now the same inflammatory language is just stirring up old trouble.

And it's a distraction from our bigger problem. Will Trump kill us all with his troubles? We need to focus on supporting our Dems in office as they work to eject him.

[lark]

6. I like Liz Warren - reason - wealth tax is the single best idea I have seen, maybe ever!

Of course, having said that, I love Joe Biden too. I so look forward to the first debates. I think Kamala, Liz & Joe are all such super strong candidates plus there's those I barely know like Julian Castro. I look forward to "meeting" them all and seeing what they are made of and what they propose. I am so thrilled to have such a strong field and just pray that asshole Schultz will not do PUtin's bidding and get in the race ito stay. If he does, I and my family will definitely boycott his business.

[MineralMan]

9. There's plenty to like about all of the potential candidates.

Let's talk about that, instead of looking for ways to hurt any of them at this stage.

[honest.abe]

10. The Bernsters wont follow your rule.

They cant tolerate a Democrat more popular than Saint Bernard.

[MineralMan]

11. I'm not calling out any group.

I'm asking for a positive discussion on each candidates merits and ideas. I remember what all of the infighting did for us in the previous campaign period. I hope we don't do that again.

[honest.abe]

12. Totally agree but many didn't seem to care back in 2016.

Yes, hopefully that doesn't happen again but once Bernie starts his hard core, scorched earth campaigning, attacking the Democratic Party and the other Dem candidates, all bets are off.

[efhmc]

14. I want to know the exact rules on this since the only

time I ever had a post removed in 16+ years was when I dissed Bernie and this was after the election.

[mentalslavery]

18. Its not really a rule so much as if you get involved in a Bernie/Hillary debate....

or a proxy debate around the same dynamics....your likely to have a post removed...

[efhmc]

43. It is way too nebulous.

[Autumn]

51. The exact rule is in the jury guideline.

[Mariana]

57. There's no telling who's going to be on your jury

if someone alerts on your post. You've had one post hidden, I'd guess that's more a problem with the jury you drew rather than a problem with the rules. Some jurors vote to suppress views they don't like, rather than to enforce the rules. That's the huge flaw in the jury system on this site.

[mentalslavery]

99. YYyyyeeepppp!

[watoos]

17. With all due respect,

you just broke the rule, correct me if I'm wrong.

[honest.abe]

22. As of this moment Bernie is not a Democrat.

He and his followers are fair game until he morally, ethically, spiritually, physically, sincerely, positively, absolutely, undeniably and reliably declares he is a Democrat.

[efhmc]

46. It was after the election and he was an independant again.

[Autumn]

54. This is the jury guide.

Don't bash Democratic public figures
Do not post disrespectful nicknames, insults, or highly inflammatory attacks against any Democratic public figures. Do not post anything that could be construed as bashing, trashing, undermining, or depressing turnout for any Democratic general election candidate, and do not compare any Democratic general election candidate unfavorably to their general election opponent(s).

Why we have this rule: Our forum members support and admire a wide variety of Democratic politicians and public figures. Constructive criticism is always welcome, but our members don't expect to see Democrats viciously denigrated on this website. This rule also applies to Independents who align themselves with Democrats (eg: Bernie Sanders).

No divisive group attacks
Do not smear, insult, vilify, bait, maliciously caricature, or give disrespectful nicknames to any groups of people that are part of the Democratic coalition, or that hold viewpoints commonly held by Democrats, or that support particular Democratic public figures. Do not imply that they are fake Democrats, fake progressives, conservatives, right-wingers, Republicans, or the like.

Why we have this rule: Substantive disagreement on important issues is always welcome on this website, but our members should not be made to feel unwelcome simply because they hold a different point of view. Democratic Underground welcomes all people who are members of the Democratic coalition, including the full range of center-to-left viewpoints and supporters of all Democratic public figures.

Just thought I would post it for you since I was called to this thread I

[honest.abe]

59. Thank you for that.

Bu that may need to be revised if Bernie starts attacking our likely nominee.

[Grasswire2]

58. thank you

I found that post to be highly inflammatory, breaking the OTHER rule about not re-litigating the primary.

Calling out Democratic voters by hate names (and it WAS Dems who voted for Bernie) is a sign of a disruptor, IMO.

And there are already deliberate disruptors here. I've seen them ply their craft.

[HopeAgain]

45. So we don't attack their candidate, but we attack them?

Or Bernie doesn't count with the intent of the OP?

[honest.abe]

50. Yeah, Bernie doesnt count until he declares he will run and serve as a Democrat.

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/391459-dnc-panel-adopts-rule-requiring-candidates-to-run-serve-as-a-democrat

[HopeAgain]

52. Okay going with the letter, not the spirit..

I get it...

[honest.abe]

55. I dont see the difference.

[HopeAgain]

74. obviously...

[Grasswire2]

62. but Democrats who voted FOR Bernie DO count...

...and if you sow discord by calling them names, you are re-litigating the last election and breaking DU rule.

Yes, I'm looking at you. Stop it.

[honest.abe]

65. I'm sorry but Im just sick of Bernie and his game.

He is not our friend. He damaged Hillary in 2016 and he is likely to do the same again to our nominee this election. We simply cannot afford that.

[Mariana]

100. So, when he does that, point out those specific examples

rather preemptively bashing as a group everyone who has supported him in the past. That's divisive and destructive.

[honest.abe]

101. Where did I bash everyone who supported Bernie??

My gripe is with Bernie and with those bashing our current Dem candidates, especially Kamala as it seems many fear her already.

[progressoid]

119. Uh, four hours earlier...

"The Bernsters wont follow your rule. They cant tolerate a Democrat more popular than Saint Bernard."

[honest.abe]

120. I didn't mean for that to suggest all Bernie supporters.

The term for me is basically the same as "Bernie Bros" or "Bernie or Bust" types. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

[Grasswire2]

110. you seem determined to start a fight over 2016

..and I hope you will stop that soon. It's not useful.

[honest.abe]

111. Nope, but Bernie and his gang seem determined to do just that.

[Grasswire2]

114. This is America.

The marketplace of ideas is where democracy blooms.

A candidate must win on the power of his/her policies and the ability to sell them.

So badmouthing candidates and voters for making that appeal is not useful.

[honest.abe]

115. At this point in time America and democracy are dying at the hands of a lunatic..

and his henchmen and a complicit congress. We have to win in 2020 or else we are likely finished... forget about blooming anything... we will be dead.

[Grasswire2]

67. How about not devouring our own potential voters?

How about focusing on the forces that would hand America to autocratic rule this moment if we look away?

How about focusing on attracting people to liberal/progressive values, not fomenting discord and pushing people away?

14 MILLION Dems left the party after the 2016 primary because of the discord. It was called DemExit. And now we know that Russian propaganda fostered something called Walk Away to encourage more Dems to leave the party.

Infighting is deadly.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

60. I see lots of posts here on DU saying much the same,

that the Bernie supporters will never give up or support anyone else, but I never actually see posts here of Bernie supporters vowing Bernie, only Bernie. I wonder why that is?

I do see a fair number of posts from people like me, who were Bernie supporters in 2016 and voted for Hillary, and do not want to see him run again.

[LakeArenal]

81. Thank you. I'm tired of people saying they are tired of ex Bernie supporters

When we have no interest for Bernie now.

[Politicub]

92. I'm going to use the alert function

Early and often this year. If someone on DU doesn’t support dems or use Bernie as a way to disparage dems, they don’t need to be here.

[honest.abe]

93. Exactly.

[David__77]

98. Is comparing Sanders' positions with others' positions using "Bernie as a way to disparage dems?"

...

[Politicub]

106. It depends. If it's done in a way that's snarky or intended to sow discord,

then, yes, I would consider the post to be one that disparages dems.

[David__77]

118. I do think snarkiness can get in the way of good communication.

Snarky:

1. testy or irritable; short.
2. having a rudely critical tone or manner.

I don't think that there's necessarily a group commitment to not be rudely critical or irritable. The world would be a better place without snark, in my opinion!

[Botany]

13. Way to early.

[MineralMan]

15. It's the Previews Right Now.

We're in our seats. We have our popcorn and our over-sized soft drink. Our cell phones are off. We're watching the previews to see which ones we'll go to see later. The "Featured Attraction" will be on the screen soon, but the previews are always interesting.

[Lefta Dissenter]

31. Sorry,

The popcorn is a good choice, but can I get wine instead of soda?

[MineralMan]

32. Depends on the theater.

Here, only a couple serve wine.

[mentalslavery]

16. Not my first choice on some issues....but...she is qualified and good enough

plus...I would not mind seeing her grill trump. She is definitely one of the best options for that!

[MineralMan]

20. Well, she's just the first to have the big launch announcement.

There will be several more to come, no doubt. I can wait until I see them all.

I liked Harris's speech. She did good. But, I don't decide on a favorite candidate until I see the entire field.

That seems best, somehow, to me.

[lynintenn]

19. Whoever can win Florida and Ohio.

I don't think we have to worry about CA or NY. I am not a one issue voter but I want someone young and energetic. I still pinch myself that we were blessed with Obama for 8 years.

[MineralMan]

21. Again, still too early to even guess.

So far, we have just one contender who has officially launched a campaign. I can wait. I will wait.

[AllyCat]

23. There is no reason to diss anyone in this race who is a Dem

Listen, learn, support your favorite. This is not the time to get tribal.

[geardaddy]

24. Good post.

I'm looking forward to hearing from all of our Democratic candidates. I like who has tossed their hats in to the ring so far.

[yuiyoshida]

25. So MineralMan did you see my post?

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100211740106

[MineralMan]

30. I did, and liked it, too!

Thanks for posting!

[yuiyoshida]

35. Thanks so very much

どもありがとうございました!!

[PatrickforO]

26. Wise words, as always

Harris will be one of many good candidates.

[Honeycombe8]

27. Too early. I need to see her speeches in other states, in different environments.

I don't have a favorite yet. I'm still waiting.

I watched the Harris speech on Youtube, but found it sort of boring, so wasn't able to watch the whole thing. She'll get better at it, though, as she hones her speech style and makes speeches in the various states. This is VERY EARLY. Time will tell.

People are free to say who they like, and who they don't like, as the candidate. Or the issues to be considered with each candidate. The candidates are human. None is perfect. All have made mistakes. All have particular gifts, and particular problems. One is a gifted speaker, another has not shown leadership in the past, one is charismatic, another would make an excellent leader but is not charismatic...all this is valid. Opinions are valid.

If I'm a supporter of Candidate X, I need to hear varying opinions of Candidate X. Not just compliments. Because that would give me a false picture of Candidate X's appeal and chances.

[Hoyt]

29. Yes. If we were voting today, that's one thing, but we aren't. I like her, BTW, and prefer a woman

at top of ticket. Men have screwed things up royally, past time to try something different.

A few months ago, folks were all excited about Michael Avenatti. Harris does appear to have staying power, however. FWIW, Scarborough says she has the "It factor."

[aidbo]

33. The establishment is behind Harris. That's for sure.

[MineralMan]

36. I don't know that is true at all, frankly.

I guess it depends on how you define "the establishment."

The audience at her launch rally didn't look all that "establishment" to me. So, how about you show me how she has the "establishment" behind her. Who, specifically, are you talking about?

[aidbo]

87. I have too much respect for your political savvy..

..than to explain things to you that you already know.

[retread]

116. Then explain things for those of us without "political savvy"!

[Tarc]

39. Yay, the same coded language we saw in 2016

[aidbo]

84. It's not coded language. Just language.

Maybe if Biden decides to run he will be it, but it’s already obvious, to me at least.

[emulatorloo]

83. Lol n/t

[LibDemAlways]

86. If Biden gets into the race, it will be

his to lose. The establishment will see to it. If he does get in, the others will be running for VP.

[aidbo]

90. Careful! Someone will ask for proof of your claims!

[Ferrets are Cool]

37. Bingo!!

"Here's my suggestion: Tell us who you like the best. Don't tell us why you don't like the rest. Tell us why you prefer your favorite, in real terms that affect how well a campaign does. Don't tell us why the others can't win. "

[BobsYourUncle]

104. I'm with you.

It would please me greatly to see more level-headed discussion about our choices. I don't come here to see what the circular firing squad is up to--people nipping at each other gets us nowhere. Let's all take MM's advice to heart.

I'm not a debater; I wish I were able to contribute to the political discussion but mostly I'll just be watching. There's so much more to get from reasoned discourse than from watching a cat-fight.

[Ferrets are Cool]

117. +1

[LongtimeAZDem]

38. This is roughly the same time Biden got into it in 2007

If you have the early field to yourself, you can raise good issues, but it's hard to sustain, and by the time the election season really rolls around, you're old news.

However, since I'm in favor of Biden this time around, this could work well; Harris can establish herself, raise issues, and get the public comfortable with her. That sets her up as a VP choice down the road, as happened with Biden in '08.

[saidsimplesimon]

40. I have avoided logging in recently.

The use of derogatory terms like "bernie b.." seem destined to send any thread into a food fight. The same is true for threads that insult those who praise Former Secty. of State Hillary Clinton.

When the dust settles and the list of candidates for the primary emerge, I will declare my favorite. It is my desire that we elect a woman for President, but only if she is the the best candidate for this cycle and wins the primary. I am open to considering another run by Mrs. Clinton, or a new star without her extensive list of accomplishments. A candidate who can fund their campaign with small dollar donors will have a larger base of support for GOTV efforts, imo.

You have made a wise and astute suggestion that I will try to honor.

[BBG]

41. Simply put, if you can't say something nice then don't say anything

Seems like that was a rule for getting along that we may have misplaced in the anonymity of the Internet age.

[BobsYourUncle]

107. My Dad used to say that.

(and he never talked about his father.)

About 40 years after my father's death, I learned that the summer cottage of his youth was paid for with money embezzled from the bank where my grandfather worked! LOL

[IronLionZion]

42. Some of those trolls like Putin or Trump the best

and that's why they diss the rest. Some of the folks attacking our Dems from the left are not who they say they are. DUers would do well to remember how many of these types popped up around the 2016 election season to sow division and then disappeared.

[Fuzzpope]

44. I think she's great.

First impressions are lasting ones. She's got great charisma, warmth, and projects sincerity and confidence.

I'll be perfectly honest, I'm no Repuke chick shit woman hater, I think the qualities she projects aren't just inspiring, they're pretty damn sexy, and that doesn't hurt anything, far as I'm concerned.

At this point, what I think is way more important than deciding on "that's my candidate", is simply, "I'm not *against* this person as a candidate.".

Important distinction, I think. Stone-carved decisions aren't necessary.

[bigtree]

47. it's getting late early

...people will actually drop off from considering running in response to some campaigns' perceived reception from the public upon announcing.

This isn't an orderly process, especially in these early days. Momentum is everything.

And, btw, there are significant differences between candidates which will be fleshed out by candidates and supporters in the upcoming months. Calls for unity are good and proper, but let's not confuse that aim with the very necessary process of discerning and comparing these candidates views and records. That's how we produce the best nominee.

[democratisphere]

48. Like your suggestion.

HRC if she runs or Adam Schiff if she doesn't. Nobody knows nothin' right now as it is way too early in the process.

[EricMaundry]

49. Some people just gotta bitch about things

It's the kind of gas that comes out of empty heads.

[Grasswire2]

53. I'm sick of the whole election thing already.

We have a traitor in the White House. Congress is held hostage by a traitor majority leader.

Can't we do one thing at a time?

Can't we focus seriously on this urgency?

[MineralMan]

56. Whatever shiny thing pops up lets some forget about

the current disaster, it seems. We still have a long way to go in dealing with Trump. 2020 will shake itself out just fine in its own sweet time, I think. Meanwhile...

[Grasswire2]

63. agree

Our enemy is not other Dem voters, and some are already working to raise differences and start fights.

Our enemy is an existential one.

Focus, people!

[MineralMan]

66. Anyone trying to start fights between Democrats is either a fool

or someone looking to hurt Democratic Party chances. Either way, such people should be ignored, challenged, or sent on their way to some other place, I think.

[Grasswire2]

68. yep

I'm keeping names as of yesterday, and there are two on it so far who I believe are deliberately working to hurt the Democratic vote.

[cstanleytech]

61. True but its also to early to jump behind her with full fledged support as we have many months

to go so its unwise to get behind anyone to much as someone else could always win the nomination.

[still_one]

69. I am not sure who I have a preference for yet, but I am not sure I like this OP

[Jeffersons Ghost]

70. K&R

[at140]

72. "Don't tell us why you don't like the rest"...best advice!

"Here's my suggestion: Tell us who you like the best. Don't tell us why you don't like the rest. Tell us why you prefer your favorite, in real terms that affect how well a campaign does. Don't tell us why the others can't win. "

Agree 1000%

[Hortensis]

73. On the subject of not dissing candidates,

we need to differentiate between populist and nonpopulist leaders. I despise and fear those who seek power by fanning populist passions, while others flock to them, so the word needs to be used accurately.

I can support Senator Harris because she believes in our democratic institutions and works competently to advance our wellbeing and to protect and improve those institutions from inside. She is the very antithesis of a populist leader, as are all those I believe are good liberal Democrats.

After all, populism by definition is a negative movement that opposes "the establishment" represented by established governments and mainstream political parties. Wannabe leaders who cannot get power by majority vote may try to harness populist passions and convince their followers that the majority are all deluded, exploited fools and that what they support must be destroyed or replaced. What replaces is usually very far from what the discontented ones wanted.

The Guardian: How populist uprisings could bring down liberal democracy
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/mar/04/shock-system-liberal-democracy-populism

... There can no longer be any doubt that we are going through a populist moment. The question is whether this populist moment will turn into a populist age – and cast the very survival of liberal democracy in doubt. ...

Citizens are less committed to democracy than they once were; while more than two-thirds of older Americans say that it is essential to them to live in a democracy, for example, less than a third of younger Americans do. They are also more open to authoritarian alternatives; two decades ago, for example, 25% of Britons said that they liked the idea of “a strongman ruler who does not have to bother with parliament and elections”; today, 50% of them do. And these attitudes are increasingly reflected in our politics: from Great Britain to the US, and from Germany to Hungary, respect for democratic rules and norms has precipitously declined. No longer the only game in town, democracy is now deconsolidating. ...

Human Rights Watch: The Dangerous Rise of Populism
https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2017/country-chapters/dangerous-rise-of-populism

[Duppers]

75. +100

Thanks, MM.

[Enoki33]

76. I have seen criticisms of her campaign logo that in my estimation are

way off base. The simple message is not only easily memorable, it is very relevant to the real life inequality problems faced by the majority of voters. It also says these problems can be solved by we the people if we help her. She is a very formidable candidate with the smarts to run rings around the corrupt GOP.

[MineralMan]

78. But, see, DU is full of experts on such things.

[cp]

77. Big Dem field in Wisconsin gubernatorial primary helped get rid of Wanker

They toured the state with good ideas for the people of Wisconsin, and left the Rs little time to focus their aim of ugly ads on any one of them. Believe this helped Tony Evers win.

[MineralMan]

79. That could well be the case.

Thank goodness he lost! That's all I have to say about that.

[barbiegeek]

80. I'm an Iowan. We have 1st US Primary. she has my & all my friends vote

[oberliner]

82. Actually I see most people on GD praising her, her speech, and her chances

There have been several such threads.

[emulatorloo]

85. I am glad you missed the thread suggesting she wasn't black enough.

[oberliner]

88. Me too

That sounds nasty.

I have been enjoying the many positive threads about her speech and her campaign and her chances though - including one I started myself.

She also seems to be ahead consistently in DU straw polls.

[angrychair]

89. Senator Harris is my first choice

And my pick of who I think is most likely to win a primary. She has been my likely pick for months.

Why?

Some reasons focus on electoral math, some on society and some on issues (in no particular order).

Electoral math: CA moved it’s primary to March. Senator Harris was a popular AG and won her Senate election by double digits and polls solid positive numbers in CA. She is the clear favorite. Even with all other things being equal, she will be the only candidate from CA on the ballot and has every advantage going into that race there. I also think that such a well attended, well received speech, so early in cycle, may thin the field a little and improve the calculus for success.
Making it to the general with strength will allow her to focus on the Midwest (specifically OH, MI and WI) and PA, FL, NC and VA. She will grab the northeast and west coast will little effort (oversimplifying a little for brevity).

Society: being a middle-aged women of color will be a benefit in this environment. Not to old, not to young. A women and a PoC will draw a sharp contrast to anything republicans can put up (my assumption being that trump will not be their actual candidate in 2020, as that seems more unlikely with each passing day).
I think a younger professional women of color is touching on the need for change, in both perspective and appearance that will bring both women, young people and POC to her banner in a general election that no republican could even dream about getting.

Issues: from institutional racism to healthcare, she touches on the issues that people want and need to hear from a candidate right now. Her focus has been on things like Medicare for all, education and training for an economy far more automated and global than any in history. Addressing climate change as an emergency and moving to a green economy. Finally, the cost of college and student loan debt. These are my issues that I care the most about and weigh heavily on my decision to support a candidate. The ideas have to make sense and have real potential to make real progress and most importantly, I need to not just believe they will make real effort on these things but know they will make those changes happen. Senator Harris is sincere in these objectives and wants to make real progressive ideals into a reality.

Sorry it was so long but I wanted to articulate it as best as I could.

[Politicub]

91. She has my vote

[MineralMan]

95. Well, she has my attention, for sure.

My decision about voting comes later - much later.

It's like going into the car dealership and having the salesperson only show you one car. Maybe it's a nice car, and maybe it's the one you will end up buying, but what about that red one over there? That's why car dealers want you to walk around and look at several cars before coming over to "help" you.

[Kablooie]

94. I'm not paying attention yet.

I'd rather wait until the field is winnowed down before getting involved. Candidates messeges can change over time too so I'll wait.

[WA-03 Democrat]

96. Kamala is my favorite so far

The convention is indeed a ways away. I made my mind up about Hillary, Obama, Kerry and Gore early. I’m a political junkie but am sober enough to see the value of supporting the early leader. The media wants a dog fight. How many stories are out there about how the Democratic primary will be a circus? It won’t be. Why? Far too much is at stake. I will vote/help/support/give money to whoever is the official Democratic canidate.

I see nothing wrong with coming together with one strong canidate. I know her record and that she’s a strong leader. She is not a Russian puppet but rather an extremely talented former prescurtor who I believe is pitch perfect at this moment in our fragile body politic.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

97. I'm not going to jump on anybody's bandwagon yet, and it's good to remember

that every candidate will have flaws. There is no perfect candidate (and even if there were such a creature, what might be perfect for you might not be perfect for me). If someone has been in politics for any length of time, chances are almost certain that they have done or said or voted for something you didn't agree with. So we have to consider how long ago that occurred - have they changed their position, or defended it? If they voted for or against certain legislation and you didn't agree with that vote, find out what else was in the bill. Find out the reason for their vote; was there a poison pill in the bill? Were they voting for something their constituents really wanted? Look at the big picture - can we look past the flaws to determine whether the candidate would be a good president over all? Perfection will be impossible so let's not demand it. I'd hate to see more of the nit-picking that made 2016 so rancorous.

[mcar]

102. I like your suggestion

Talk up the candidate(s) you like. Don't talk down those you don't.

[MineralMan]

103. Thanks. It seems to me

that we might have any of the candidates as the Democratic nominee. That's unpredictable. So, since it's clearly better for a Democrat to win the election, no good purpose is served by attacking any of the nominees.

Instead, if individuals talk about the good points of their favorite candidate, while avoiding attacks on other candidates, we don't poison our own well. A poisoned well makes everyone sick.

That's how I see it, anyhow.

[RandySF]

105. There are legitimate questions

Related to her tenures as SFDA and CAAG but I hope we can focus on these and not the trash on social media.

[Pacifist Patriot]

108. That has always been my approach in the primary season.

So far it's suited me well.

I'm guessing I won't have a favorite until at least Thanksgiving and probably more like January 2020. I tend to sit back and observe until the caucuses and primaries begin in earnest. Florida isn't until March 17, 2020 so I have plenty of time.

[JCanete]

109. She's clearly generated excitement. She could do well. I think the debates will be significant. I'll

watch her town hall to see how direct she is with the type of legislation she would advocate for if in office. I don't want vague platitudes, and unfortunately her launch video was that. She believes in justice and truth, oh, and democracy. Way to draw a line in the sand.

But she has said, at least in theory, that she's for Single Payer.

She has pledged to take no Pac money.

She did appear to make a stand on the banks durning the bail-out.

She proposed the LIFT act which sounds excellent. apparently this could lift like 9 million people out of poverty. It may be a little mild, but its still something that at least hints at a kind of UBI, which I think has to be the future.

Her most troubling history is the stuff that exists from her prosecutorial days. Now, I understand that these institutions lean heavily conservative and are incentivized for that matter towards keeping up conviction rates, etc., and that had she tried to break ranks that could have been seriously politically damaging to her career. People often make calculations regarding the greater good that do sometimes come with compromises, but fighting for cops over wrongful convictions really sticks in my gut, and if any time in history this might become an issue and not play well, it might be right now.

[MineralMan]

113. I have no favorite candidate.

I thought her launch went off very well. But, there are many, many other potential candidates.

Like I said, it's too early to pick anyone, as far as I'm concerned. I'll be waiting to see all of them, learn what their message is, evaluate how well they do in a campaign environment, etc.

All will be Democrats. All will be more or less supportive of the Democratic Platform. One of them will end up as the nominee. Until then, the race is wide open and I'm considering all candidates as possible nominees. I'll be voting for the eventual nominee, as I always do, so don't look for me to be dissing anyone who's running.

Everyone will have positives and negatives. Count on it.

[Nitram]

112. I am leaning towards Kamala Harris at this point, but keeping my mind and ears open.