"Harris plummets in new 2020 poll... out of the first and even second tier..." (CNN Frontpage News)

[Princetonian]

Last edited Tue Aug 20, 2019, 03:27 PM - Edit history (1)

After seeing this news headline on the upper left of the CNN frontpage this morning, I clicked on the "Live Analysis" tab within the photo of Harris:

"Kamala Harris couldn't recapture lightning in the second debates"

Kamala Harris was off and running after the June debates. She hit 17% in our poll and 20% in Quinnipiac University's poll following her performance on the debate stage in Miami... in our latest polls, Quinnipiac and we have her at 7% and 5% respectively.

The second debate in Detroit didn't cause most of Harris' drop. She was already down to 12% in a late July poll by Quinnipiac... I wrote at the time "why Kamala Harris needs another strong debate." That didn't happen.

Harris is now considerably weaker across the board. She dropped by over 10 points with whites and nonwhites. She declined by 9 points or more with those under the age of 50 as well those aged 50 and older.

Apparently I am not the only liberal that believes Joe is not a racist and who knows how to use Google Search to research Harris' past history as DA and AG in order to verify Gabbard's claims.

Her biggest drop might have been among liberals. She went from 24% in late June to only 4% now... When asked which candidates they'd like to hear more about, 30% said Harris in late June. That was more than any other candidate. Now, only 18% say they want to hear more about Harris... For now, the polling puts Harris not in the first or even second tier.

https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/cnn-poll-08-20-19/h_7b57a7f94aafaddf52a5479b32fdefa1

This headline is still on the frontpage of CNN as of 10:20 AM EST.

[bearsfootball516]

1. If she doesn't win the nomination, she'd make a hell of an AG.

[still_one]

6. No. Unless she wins the nomination, we need her here in California as Senator

[Polybius]

19. Gavin Newsom would appoint pick her replacement

So we won't lose a seat.

[bearsfootball516]

86. It's also California, even in an election, a Republican isn't sniffing the Senate there.

[EveHammond13]

78. I would love her as AG and she would kick ass; restore the Civil Rights division

[brush]

81. Don't know if I buy this poll. Wasn't it earlier this very week that she polled...

as one of the top four Democratic candidates who had a higher percentage of likely voters than trump?

Now she's suddenly not even in the SECOND TIER of candidates?

Sorry, pollsters can make a poll say whatever their agenda is.

[highplainsdem]

2. Great to see some of Harry Enten's analysis of the new poll being posted here!

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287246514


I agree that she's no longer in the same tier as Sanders and Warren. In many recent polls, anyway

[B Stieg]

3. She's never performed with black voters

Right now, Warren has the same issue. I bet she has a plan to overcome it!

[stonecutter357]

4. good let's go Joe !

[cilla4progress]

5. I like Warren/

Castro or Booker!

[SidDithers]

7. LOL...

Knew who posted the thread without even opening it.



Sid

[Princetonian]

8. Those who suffered under DA and AG Harris aren't laughing. Here are some facts...

Last edited Thu Aug 22, 2019, 01:08 PM - Edit history (1)

"Clergy Abuse Survivors Question Kamala Harris’ Record"

'Harris never responded to him when he wrote to tell her that a priest who had molested him was still in ministry at a local Catholic cathedral. And, he says, she didn’t reply five years later when he wrote again, urging her to release records on accused clergy to help other alleged victims who were filing lawsuits.

“She did nothing,” said Piscitelli, today the Northern California spokesman for SNAP, the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests. Survivors of clergy abuse and their attorneys say that Harris’ record on fighting sex abuse within the Catholic Church is relevant as the U.S. senator from California campaigns for the presidency... They complain that Harris was consistently silent on the Catholic Church’s abuse scandal — first as district attorney in San Francisco and later as California’s attorney general...

Catholics make up large voting blocs in the city and the state, accounting for roughly a quarter of the population in both San Francisco’s metro area and across California.

“There’s a potential political risk if you move aggressively against the church,” said Michael Meadows, a Bay Area attorney who has represented clergy abuse victims. “I just don’t think she was willing to take it.'

https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2019/06/26/clergy-abuse-survivors-question-sen-kamala-harris-record/

The attack: Gabbard said Harris “blocked evidence that would have freed an innocent man from Death Row until the courts forced her to do so.”

The context: Gabbard is referring to the case of Kevin Cooper, a Death Row inmate convicted of quadruple murder in 1983. Harris, during her tenure as attorney general, declined to use advanced DNA testing in the widely publicized case.

Last year, after the New York Times published an investigative piece on Cooper’s case, then-Sen. Harris backtracked, saying, “I feel awful about this,” and that she hoped the governor would order the testing. In February, Gov. Gavin Newsom ordered new tests. The results are pending.

https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/Fact-checking-the-Democratic-debate-attacks-14275081.php

From Pulitzer Prize winning investigative reporter Nicholas Kristof, here are excerpts from his expose that forced Harris to backtrack:

"One Test Could Exonerate Him. Why Won't California Do It? Was Kevin Cooper Framed For Murder?"

In 1983, four people were murdered in a home in Chino Hills, Calif. The sole survivor of the attack said three white intruders had committed the murders. Then a woman told the police that her boyfriend, a white convicted murderer, was probably involved, and she gave deputies his bloody coveralls. So here’s what sheriff’s deputies did: They threw away the bloody coveralls and arrested a young black man named Kevin Cooper. He is now awaiting execution.

<snip>

The test tube miraculously contained the blood of two or more people. This indicated that the sheriff’s office may have used the test tube of Cooper’s blood to frame him, and then topped off the test tube with someone else’s blood.

Cooper’s lawyers ask above all for new “touch DNA” testing — capable of detecting microscopic residues... As state attorney general, Kamala Harris refused to allow this advanced DNA testing and showed no interest in the case (on Friday, after the online publication of this column, Senator Harris called me to say "I feel awful about this" and put out a statement saying: "As a firm believer in DNA testing..."

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/05/17/opinion/sunday/kevin-cooper-california-death-row.html

Gabbard is right: Harris owes Kevin Cooper an apology.

"Harris' district attorney's office violated defendants' rights by hiding damaging information"

As DA, the buck stopped with Harris. More evidence from the SF Chronicle Debate Factcheck that backs up Tulsi Gabbard's claims:

'San Francisco Superior Court Judge Anne-Christine Massullo... said Harris’ district attorney’s office violated defendants’ rights by hiding damaging information about the technician and was indifferent to demands that the office account for its failings. “The District Attorney failed to disclose information that clearly should have been disclosed,” the judge wrote in a court order. Plus, Harris’ office did not have a written policy about informing defendants if there were any problems with evidence or witnesses. The scandal led to 1,000 cases being dismissed.'

https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/Fact-checking-the-Democratic-debate-attacks-14275081.php?psid=glXZf

U.S. judges see ‘epidemic’ of prosecutorial misconduct in state

Judge Alex Kozinski asked Vienna if his boss, Atty. Gen. Kamala D. Harris, wanted to defend a conviction “obtained by lying prosecutors.” If Harris did not back off the case, Kozinski warned, the court would “name names” in a ruling that would not be “very pretty.”

Judge Kim Wardlaw wanted to know why Riverside County prosecutors presented a murder-for-hire case against the killer but did not charge the man they said had arranged the killings.

“It looks terrible,” said Judge William Fletcher... a rare and critical examination of a murder case in which prosecutors presented false evidence but were never investigated or disciplined... Kozinski, who in the past has spoken out about an “epidemic” of prosecutorial misconduct... told him to get her attention within 48 hours. Harris would need to take action if her office wanted to avoid an embarrassing ruling, Kozinski said.

“Make sure she understands the gravity of the situation,” Kozinski said, adding that the case “speaks very poorly for the attorney general’s office.”

Harris, a candidate for U.S. Senate, changed course."

https://www.latimes.com/local/politics/la-me-lying-prosecutors-20150201-story.html

Harris’s office fought to release fewer prisoners even after the US Supreme Court found that overcrowding in California prisons was so terrible that it amounted to unconstitutional cruel and unusual punishment! At one point, her lawyers argued that the state couldn’t release some prisoners because it would deplete its pool for prison labor.

"The attack: Gabbard said Harris “kept people in prison beyond their sentences to use them as cheap labor for the state of California.”

The context: This is rooted in the 2011 Supreme Court case that said California’s prisons were too overcrowded. In 2014, lawyers working for the state Department of Justice told a court that if low-level offenders — who are often used to fight wildfires — were freed, it “would severely impact fire camp participation — a dangerous outcome while California is in the middle of a difficult fire season and severe drought.”

In 2014, Harris said she didn’t know lawyers working for her had made that argument until she read published reports of it."

https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/Fact-checking-the-Democratic-debate-attacks-14275081.php?psid=glXZf

Playing the plausible deniability card by blaming underlings - who know better than to contradict their boss - reflects poorly on Harris.

As befitting a great leader, President Barack Obama always took responsibility for those in his administration and apologized when he felt it was necessary.

As San Francisco DA and California AG, the buck stopped with you Harris. Own it.

The attack: Gabbard said Harris “put over 1,500 people in jail for marijuana violations and then laughed about it when she was asked if she ever smoked marijuana.”

<snip>

On Thursday, a department spokesman told The Chronicle that 1,974 people were admitted for hashish and marijuana convictions during that period.

Harris didn’t back legalizing cannabis for recreational use until last year, two years after California voters did. She also opposed a statewide ballot measure to legalize weed in 2010, when she was San Francisco’s district attorney and running to be state attorney general. Harris called that proposal “flawed public policy.”

https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/Fact-checking-the-Democratic-debate-attacks-14275081.php

In an interview with Jake Tapper, 'Sen. Kamala Harris acknowledges that a 2010 state truancy law she sponsored resulted in some parents being jailed. But she misleadingly claims that jailing parents was an “unintended consequence” of the law... the law added Section 270.1 to the California Penal Code to allow prosecutors to fine and/or jail a parent “who has failed to reasonably supervise and encourage the pupil’s school attendance.”...Harris, a Democratic candidate for president, was San Francisco District Attorney from 2004 to 2011... as the San Francisco District Attorney, Harris sponsored a state Senate bill — SB 1317... modeled on her truancy initiative in San Francisco, and did result in some parents being jailed.

Los Angeles Times, April 17: Harris took that advocacy statewide, sponsoring a 2010 law to make it a misdemeanor for parents whose young children miss more than 10% of school days a year without a valid excuse. Parents could be punished with a maximum $2,000 fine, up to a year in county jail or both.'

When Jake Tapper asked about the state law, she did not tell the truth. 'The possibility of jailing parents was not an “unintended consequence,” and the bill did not just change the education code. It also created a new section to the California Penal Code, as we have already noted.

Harris knew this, of course... She also said the arrests were “not under my watch,” and that she had “no control” over the arrests — even though she sponsored the state law that allowed for the arrests, and her office provided guidance to local district attorneys on when prosecutions should and should not be made.'

Source: https://www.factcheck.org/2019/05/kamala-harris-spins-facts-on-truancy-law/

When a Biden campaign advisor described Harris as "slippery" after the first debate, they weren't kidding: https://www.politico.com/story/2019/07/12/kamala-harris-biden-debate-busing-1414911

No to Harris.

[peggysue2]

9. Wow!

This is disappointing. I'm bookmarking to dive further into the articles. Thanks for the links, Princetonian.

[Princetonian]

11. Here's how Harris handled appeals for release by innocent people in prison...

In one case, her office argued against Daniel Larsen, who was proven innocent by the Innocence Project, because Harris’s office claimed he filed his petition for release too late after a legal deadline.

'After 13 Years in Prison, Man Found Innocent of Crime Freed

<snip>

During his trial, Larsen’s now disbarred attorney did not call a single witness to the stand, including up to nine who could testify that they saw someone else — not Larsen — throw the knife, the Innocence Project said.

His conviction was overturned in 2009 when a federal judge ruled that his constitutional rights had been violated.

The court found that Larsen had shown he was "actually innocent," that the police officers at Larsen’s trial were not credible, and that his trial attorney was constitutionally ineffective for failing to call witnesses on his behalf.

But before he was released, California Attorney General Kamala Harris is challenging Larsen's release, saying he hadn't presented proof that he was innocent quickly enough, the Innocence Project said.'

https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/Daniel-Larsen-Murder-Conviction-Overturned-Innocence-Project-198996291.html

"California Innocence Project: Daniel Larsen"
https://californiainnocenceproject.org/read-their-stories/daniel-larsen/

Man behind bars 2 years after judge orders release

Daniel Larsen was in a California prison serving a life sentence when he received the news he had awaited more than a decade. A federal court in Los Angeles had thrown out his conviction for carrying a concealed knife... But two years after he was supposed to be released, Larsen remains behind bars while the California attorney general appeals the decision. The state’s main argument: He did not file his legal paperwork seeking release on time.

California Atty. Gen.Kamala D. Harris, whose office maintains that evidence still points to Larsen’s guilt, accuses him and his attorneys of filing a petition seeking his release more than six years after he was legally required to do so. Prosecutors question whether the judges had the authority to hear Larsen’s petition for release... Larsen’s supporters delivered copies of online petitions to the attorney general’s office in downtown Los Angeles demanding the man’s release... The attorney general’s office declined to comment.... U.S. District Judge Christina A. Snyder...ruled that Larsen could be released even though his legal claim missed the federal court’s deadlines....Then came the attorney general’s appeal. Prosecutors asked that Larsen remain behind bars during the appeal, saying he was a danger to society. Snyder concluded there was no evidence that Larsen posed a public threat. But she delayed her order...“He was about 14 days from walking out the door,” said one of his attorneys, Wendy Koen, who told Larsen about the appeal during a prison visit... The attorney general’s office, in its court filing, cited Congress’ action in arguing that Larsen missed his chance to seek federal relief... As Larsen remains behind bars, the appeal is slowly winding through the system. In June, the attorney general’s office requested a 45-day extension to file its brief. In July, the office asked for an additional 30 days.[f/b]

Combs, his fiancee, said Larsen had been eager to start his new life on the outside.

“Then the conversations turned from weeks to months and now it’s been a year,” she said.

The court disagreed with Attorney General Harris, allowing Larsen’s release in 2013, two years after a judge ordered his release.

In the New York Times, "law professor and the former director of the Loyola Law School Project for the Innocent in Los Angeles" Lara Bazelon lists several more such cases:

'Afterward, the judge discovered that the prosecutor had unlawfully held back potentially exculpatory evidence, including medical reports indicating that the stepdaughter had been repeatedly untruthful with law enforcement. Her mother even described her as “a pathological liar” who “lives her lies.”... The appellate judges acknowledged this impediment and sent the case to mediation, a clear signal for Ms. Harris to dismiss the case. When she refused to budge, the court upheld the conviction on that technicality. Mr. Gage is still in prison serving a 70-year sentence.

That case is not an outlier. Ms. Harris also fought to keep Daniel Larsen in prison on a 28-year-to-life sentence for possession of a concealed weapon even though his trial lawyer was incompetent and there was compelling evidence of his innocence. Relying on a technicality again, Ms. Harris argued that Mr. Larsen failed to raise his legal arguments in a timely fashion. (This time, she lost.)

She also defended Johnny Baca’s conviction for murder even though judges found a prosecutor presented false testimony at the trial. She relented only after a video of the oral argument received national attention and embarrassed her office.

And then there’s Kevin Cooper, the death row inmate whose trial was infected by racism and corruption. He sought advanced DNA testing to prove his innocence, but Ms. Harris opposed it. (After The New York Times’s exposé of the case went viral, she reversed her position.)

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/17/opinion/kamala-harris-criminal-justice.html

[peggysue2]

12. Not a good look

Definitely need to do some more reading and Harris will need to speak to these cases, as in the 'why' of the decisions. The Larsen case appears particularly egregious.

[onetexan]

72. agree, this is rather troubling. Now i'm doubting about her even being selected for Joe as VP :(

i wanted to give Kamala the benefit of the doubt, but this Larsen case is alarming re: the bad judgement here under her watch as AG. I get the feeling her office challenged it because they couldn't stand to be proven wrong.

[Demsrule86]

17. Very fair post...and true. I too researched it.

[Princetonian]

20. When that Des Moines Register puff piece headlined her as "compassionate"...

[StarfishSaver]

23. It seems that, notwithstanding your Biden tag, your primary goal is to tear down Harris

That's been noted before, but it becomes more obvious over time.

[sharedvalues]

32. Princetonian has also posted a lot promoting Tulsi Gabbard

Just to touch on Gabbard’s problems:

Raised in a strange cult she still hasn’t disavowed
Cozied up to Assad, a war criminal and ally of Putin
Boosted by the right and the Russians.

I think it’s important for us to also discuss Gabbard in this context, as she was mentioned in Princetonian’s OP above.

Also the reason the right is pushing Gabbard, and the real nightmare scenario for Dems, is so Gabbard runs as a third party candidate. That’s why the right wants to raise her profile. And her doing that could get Trump elected.

[JI7]

35. yes, it's like when people used Warren to attack Hillary during the last election

but we see now that many of them are not supporting her either.

[Polly Hennessey]

52. Stating facts is

not tearing someone down.

[Raine]

37. THANKS

for posting this info, I'm a Californian but didn't know all this.

[Hekate]

41. I'm a Californian too, and the OP is twisted & quotes Tulsi

So consider that

[Quixote1818]

95. She made a great first impression but I don't trust her.

She would still be a billion times better than fuckface.

[LanternWaste]

16. Somehow, I really kinda doubt you'll see the irony in you having posted that.

[Hekate]

39. My gods, Sid, what the hell is going on here?

Glad you're on it...

[USALiberal]

50. Fairly easy predicting you also. Nt

[SidDithers]

66. Sure, I've got 17 years of history at DU...

My patterns are pretty obvious from years and years of posting.

Sid

[Locrian]

51. lets not forget history....

polls right now are an indicator - but worthless as real predictor of final outcome

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/democratic_presidential_nomination-191.html

[Hassin Bin Sober]

60. "Knew who posted the thread without even opening it"

Just an FYI... In case you haven’t noticed, the poster’s name on DU is right next to the link on every thread. You no longer have to guess or open a thread to find out who posted it.

[Mosby]

64. Not in mobile view. Nt

[SidDithers]

65. Not on Mobile it isn't...

Just an FYI.

Sid

[Celerity]

73. +1

[Vegas Roller]

10. Moral of the story

Cheap shots only give a transient bounce.

[Skya Rhen]

14. +100,000,000

[Princetonian]

21. ZING!

[customerserviceguy]

26. Love it! n/t

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

36. True dat!!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[onetexan]

74. i'm hoping Kamala will learn from this - not to burn bridges

it's also not a good reflection on her character given what she did was for political expediency. Voters like strong candidates, but not those who step on others to benefit themselves.

[question everything]

13. I think that she still is seeking a niche

She started with Sanders and Warren: free everything, eliminating private insurance, etc.

Then she changed her mind, several times, about these topics.

And she moved even further from the "socialist" label by declaring that she believes in capitalism

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287245043

All good programs and good intentions but nothing to distinguish her.

And... to be honest I am not sure that the country is open, at this stage, for an African American woman from California.

[Devil Child]

15. Sen. Harris should never have smeared Biden in playing the race card against him

Thanks for the OP Princetonian. I greatly appreciate the info and links you have been bringing.

[chimpymustgo]

22. Um...what exactly if the "race card??"

How do you PLAY it? I'd love to read your explanation.

[customerserviceguy]

27. It is played

by bringing up a racial issue (like actually dealing with segregationist Democratic Senators instead of choking the life out of them) but preceding your attack with, "I know you're not a racist, BUT..."

[Duppers]

44. Didn't watch the debates?

[StarfishSaver]

47. AA woman talking about a white man's record on race other than to say "THANK you" equals "Race Card"

Last edited Wed Aug 21, 2019, 08:35 PM - Edit history (3)

[chimpymustgo]

87. Oh, Starfish - you 'splained it to well!! nt

[Princetonian]

91. Are you looking for confirmation bias....

Last edited Thu Aug 22, 2019, 07:52 AM - Edit history (3)

... or something that makes objective sense?

Rhetoric 101. "I don't believe you're a racist, but..." means you're about to imply he's a racist.

Sound familiar?

to the squanderer

[Duppers]

43. +10

Bussing in the 70s!

[Kahuna7]

62. That always backfires. Now she knows. nt

[Polybius]

18. She's my least favorite of the top 10 or so

I'd vote for her, but would also prefer any Democrat running.

[Princetonian]

90. Understandable. To discerning minds, Warren is the antithesis to Harris.

Last edited Thu Aug 22, 2019, 06:23 AM - Edit history (2)

It's not just the way they are running their respective campaigns or how one has a crystal clear platform while the other's is muddled.

The biggest difference is in the sense of compassion that Warren exudes with every exhale while Harris' DA/AG history is an anathema to those who truly care about social justice (rather than give it lip service when it is self-serving).

For example, The Innocence Project knows Harris well:

In 1999, Daniel (“Danny”) Larsen was convicted of possession of a concealed weapon after two police officers testified they saw him toss a knife under a nearby car in the parking lot of a bar. Danny’s now-disbarred trial attorney failed to discover as many as nine percipient witnesses, including a former Chief of Police from North Carolina, who saw another man, not Danny, toss the knife. Danny’s trial attorney did not call a single witness, and as a result, Danny was convicted and sentenced to 27 years-to-life in prison pursuant to California’s Three Strikes Law (Danny had prior convictions that occurred nearly a decade earlier).

During the California Innocence Project’s (CIP) post-conviction investigation, CIP gathered statements from many of these witnesses and presented the evidence to the California courts who summarily denied each petition. Then, CIP went to federal court. 11 years after his conviction, a federal district court held an extensive hearing. The court found that Danny was innocent, the police officers who testified at his trial were not credible, and his trial attorney was constitutionally ineffective for failing to call witnesses on his behalf. Danny’s conviction was reversed and the court ordered him released.

Before his release, the Attorney General appealed the judge’s ruling, arguing that even if Danny was innocent, his conviction should not be reversed because he waited too long to file his petition. Almost three years later, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals denied the Attorney General’s appeal.

In March of 2013, in Los Angeles, Federal Magistrate Judge Suzanne Segal ordered Daniel Larsen’s immediate release.

https://californiainnocenceproject.org/read-their-stories/daniel-larsen/

I cannot fathom a candidate who has done this. I cannot imagine Warren doing this to Danny Larsen.

Harris needs to address why she fought to keep an innocent man behind bars and also explain: https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1287&pid=246674

Voters deserve to know.

[oasis]

24. "Unsympathetic" to say the least. I see tough sledding ahead. nt

[ChimpersMcSmirkers]

25. Harris seems done honestly.

I guess she could try to paint Biden as a racist again for points I suppose. The moment she signed up for Bernie's M4A was when her campaign died honestly. You can't out pander Sanders and you can't get points from his cult for trying. They are all in.

Warren's about to learn this as well.

[Princetonian]

96. How prescient. Harris is presently trying to have it every which way with regards to her M4A policy.

"The moment she signed up for Bernie's M4A was when her campaign died honestly. You can't out pander Sanders and you can't get points from his cult for trying. They are all in."

Harris just told her big donors at her Hamptons fundraiser that suddenly she opposes the M4A bill she co-sponsored with Bernie.

I wonder if this was before or after Harris declared, "I believe in capitalism!"

Too clever by half...

"Kamala Says She’s Uncomfortable With Bernie’s Health-Care Plan Two Years After Co-Sponsoring It"

At a fundraiser in the Hamptons this weekend, Senator Kamala Harris (D-CA) told wealthy donors she has “not been comfortable” with the Medicare-for-All proposal pushed by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), one of her leading rivals in the primary... The comments are the latest reflection of the turbulence that the California Democrat has encountered while navigating the politics of health care reform. Just two years ago, Harris was comfortable enough with Sanders’ bill to become the first senator to co-sponsor it. And back then, she exhibited no discomfort in doing so.

“This is about understanding, again, that health care should be a right, not a privilege. And it's also about being smart," Harris said in August 2017.

“So it's not only about what is morally and ethically right Harris argued. “It also makes sense from a fiscal standpoint, or if you want to talk about it as a return on investment for taxpayers.”

At the time, Harris’ announcement was hailed as a shrewd reading of the direction of the Democratic Party on health care—one that would boost the senator’s progressive cred ahead of a possible White House run. And as recently as April of this year, Harris' office sent a press release saying she had joined Sanders to formally introduce the Medicare-for-All Act of 2019. “Medicare for All finally makes sure every American has affordable, comprehensive health care,” she said.

https://news.yahoo.com/harris-says-shes-uncomfortable-bernies-160509737.html

"Kamala's rivals seize on health care stumbles: She's getting hit from all sides as her poll numbers are dropping."

Kamala Harris offered her health care plan expecting to bridge the party’s divides and decisively answer doubts about her see-sawing positions.

But in the month since, the California Democrat is still struggling to rebut attacks from her chief rivals who are poking holes in its specifics and accusing Harris of putting political calculation before true conviction. Joe Biden’s campaign dismisses it as a “have-it-every-which-way” plan while Bernie Sanders’ camp ripped it as “cobbled together to address various poll numbers.”

<snip>

It's testing whether a senator not known for her health care expertise has the dexterity to thread the needle between Sanders and Biden on a complicated policy. And it’s accelerated questions about why Harris supported Sanders’ plan for nearly two years, standing with him at the 2017 unveiling, before admitting this week to long harboring doubts about the Vermont senator’s proposal.

For Harris, the health care morass is also threatening to become an ominous symbol for why, after her surge following the first debate, she's fallen back since early July to where she started. She now polls closer to Pete Buttigieg and Beto O'Rourke than Sanders and Elizabeth Warren.

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/08/22/kamala-harris-health-care-1471421

"I guess she could try to paint Biden as a racist again for points I suppose."

The past being the best predictor of the future...

[LakeArenal]

28. She has a prosecutorial style.

But she lost me at the Franken Railroad stop anyway.

[Princetonian]

94. That was a bad day for the Democratic Party, Lake Arenal.

Warren has to answer for that as well. I hope Al runs again!

[ismnotwasm]

29. Verify Gabbard's claims.

Huh.

Have a gif

[Princetonian]

93. I have verified all of Gabbard's claims via impeccable sources not tainted by partisan pablum.

Link: https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1287&pid=246674

Since you and others are so interested in the truth about Harris' DA and AG history, I have reproduced what is at the above link for your edification. Harris parisans ought to be grateful that Gabbard only had 60 seconds. There are a lot more she could have said (see below).

Former Vice Chairman of the DNC, Iraq War veteran and National Guard member Representative Tulsi Gabbard's claims are all verifed herein:

"Clergy Abuse Survivors Question Kamala Harris’ Record"

'Harris never responded to him when he wrote to tell her that a priest who had molested him was still in ministry at a local Catholic cathedral. And, he says, she didn’t reply five years later when he wrote again, urging her to release records on accused clergy to help other alleged victims who were filing lawsuits.

“She did nothing,” said Piscitelli, today the Northern California spokesman for SNAP, the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests. Survivors of clergy abuse and their attorneys say that Harris’ record on fighting sex abuse within the Catholic Church is relevant as the U.S. senator from California campaigns for the presidency... They complain that Harris was consistently silent on the Catholic Church’s abuse scandal — first as district attorney in San Francisco and later as California’s attorney general...

Catholics make up large voting blocs in the city and the state, accounting for roughly a quarter of the population in both San Francisco’s metro area and across California.

“There’s a potential political risk if you move aggressively against the church,” said Michael Meadows, a Bay Area attorney who has represented clergy abuse victims. “I just don’t think she was willing to take it.'

https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2019/06/26/clergy-abuse-survivors-question-sen-kamala-harris-record/

The attack: Gabbard said Harris “blocked evidence that would have freed an innocent man from Death Row until the courts forced her to do so.”

The context: Gabbard is referring to the case of Kevin Cooper, a Death Row inmate convicted of quadruple murder in 1983. Harris, during her tenure as attorney general, declined to use advanced DNA testing in the widely publicized case.

Last year, after the New York Times published an investigative piece on Cooper’s case, then-Sen. Harris backtracked, saying, “I feel awful about this,” and that she hoped the governor would order the testing. In February, Gov. Gavin Newsom ordered new tests. The results are pending.

https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/Fact-checking-the-Democratic-debate-attacks-14275081.php

From Pulitzer Prize winning investigative reporter Nicholas Kristof, here are excerpts from his expose that forced Harris to backtrack:

"One Test Could Exonerate Him. Why Won't California Do It? Was Kevin Cooper Framed For Murder?"

In 1983, four people were murdered in a home in Chino Hills, Calif. The sole survivor of the attack said three white intruders had committed the murders. Then a woman told the police that her boyfriend, a white convicted murderer, was probably involved, and she gave deputies his bloody coveralls. So here’s what sheriff’s deputies did: They threw away the bloody coveralls and arrested a young black man named Kevin Cooper. He is now awaiting execution.

<snip>

The test tube miraculously contained the blood of two or more people. This indicated that the sheriff’s office may have used the test tube of Cooper’s blood to frame him, and then topped off the test tube with someone else’s blood.

Cooper’s lawyers ask above all for new “touch DNA” testing — capable of detecting microscopic residues... As state attorney general, Kamala Harris refused to allow this advanced DNA testing and showed no interest in the case (on Friday, after the online publication of this column, Senator Harris called me to say "I feel awful about this" and put out a statement saying: "As a firm believer in DNA testing..."

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/05/17/opinion/sunday/kevin-cooper-california-death-row.html

Gabbard is right: Harris owes Kevin Cooper an apology.

"Harris' district attorney's office violated defendants' rights by hiding damaging information"

As DA, the buck stopped with Harris. More evidence from the SF Chronicle Debate Factcheck that backs up Tulsi Gabbard's claims:

'San Francisco Superior Court Judge Anne-Christine Massullo... said Harris’ district attorney’s office violated defendants’ rights by hiding damaging information about the technician and was indifferent to demands that the office account for its failings. “The District Attorney failed to disclose information that clearly should have been disclosed,” the judge wrote in a court order. Plus, Harris’ office did not have a written policy about informing defendants if there were any problems with evidence or witnesses. The scandal led to 1,000 cases being dismissed.'

https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/Fact-checking-the-Democratic-debate-attacks-14275081.php?psid=glXZf

U.S. judges see ‘epidemic’ of prosecutorial misconduct in state

Judge Alex Kozinski asked Vienna if his boss, Atty. Gen. Kamala D. Harris, wanted to defend a conviction “obtained by lying prosecutors.” If Harris did not back off the case, Kozinski warned, the court would “name names” in a ruling that would not be “very pretty.”

Judge Kim Wardlaw wanted to know why Riverside County prosecutors presented a murder-for-hire case against the killer but did not charge the man they said had arranged the killings.

“It looks terrible,” said Judge William Fletcher... a rare and critical examination of a murder case in which prosecutors presented false evidence but were never investigated or disciplined... Kozinski, who in the past has spoken out about an “epidemic” of prosecutorial misconduct... told him to get her attention within 48 hours. Harris would need to take action if her office wanted to avoid an embarrassing ruling, Kozinski said.

“Make sure she understands the gravity of the situation,” Kozinski said, adding that the case “speaks very poorly for the attorney general’s office.”

Harris, a candidate for U.S. Senate, changed course."

https://www.latimes.com/local/politics/la-me-lying-prosecutors-20150201-story.html

Harris’s office fought to release fewer prisoners even after the US Supreme Court found that overcrowding in California prisons was so terrible that it amounted to unconstitutional cruel and unusual punishment! At one point, her lawyers argued that the state couldn’t release some prisoners because it would deplete its pool for prison labor.

"The attack: Gabbard said Harris “kept people in prison beyond their sentences to use them as cheap labor for the state of California.”

The context: This is rooted in the 2011 Supreme Court case that said California’s prisons were too overcrowded. In 2014, lawyers working for the state Department of Justice told a court that if low-level offenders — who are often used to fight wildfires — were freed, it “would severely impact fire camp participation — a dangerous outcome while California is in the middle of a difficult fire season and severe drought.”

In 2014, Harris said she didn’t know lawyers working for her had made that argument until she read published reports of it."

https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/Fact-checking-the-Democratic-debate-attacks-14275081.php?psid=glXZf

Playing the plausible deniability card by blaming underlings - who know better than to contradict their boss - reflects poorly on Harris.

As befitting a great leader, President Barack Obama always took responsibility for those in his administration and apologized when he felt it was necessary.

As San Francisco DA and California AG, the buck stopped with you Harris. Own it.

The attack: Gabbard said Harris “put over 1,500 people in jail for marijuana violations and then laughed about it when she was asked if she ever smoked marijuana.”

<snip>

On Thursday, a department spokesman told The Chronicle that 1,974 people were admitted for hashish and marijuana convictions during that period.

Harris didn’t back legalizing cannabis for recreational use until last year, two years after California voters did. She also opposed a statewide ballot measure to legalize weed in 2010, when she was San Francisco’s district attorney and running to be state attorney general. Harris called that proposal “flawed public policy.”

https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/Fact-checking-the-Democratic-debate-attacks-14275081.php

In an interview with Jake Tapper, 'Sen. Kamala Harris acknowledges that a 2010 state truancy law she sponsored resulted in some parents being jailed. But she misleadingly claims that jailing parents was an “unintended consequence” of the law... the law added Section 270.1 to the California Penal Code to allow prosecutors to fine and/or jail a parent “who has failed to reasonably supervise and encourage the pupil’s school attendance.”...Harris, a Democratic candidate for president, was San Francisco District Attorney from 2004 to 2011... as the San Francisco District Attorney, Harris sponsored a state Senate bill — SB 1317... modeled on her truancy initiative in San Francisco, and did result in some parents being jailed.

Los Angeles Times, April 17: Harris took that advocacy statewide, sponsoring a 2010 law to make it a misdemeanor for parents whose young children miss more than 10% of school days a year without a valid excuse. Parents could be punished with a maximum $2,000 fine, up to a year in county jail or both.'

When Jake Tapper asked about the state law, she did not tell the truth. 'The possibility of jailing parents was not an “unintended consequence,” and the bill did not just change the education code. It also created a new section to the California Penal Code, as we have already noted.

Harris knew this, of course... She also said the arrests were “not under my watch,” and that she had “no control” over the arrests — even though she sponsored the state law that allowed for the arrests, and her office provided guidance to local district attorneys on when prosecutions should and should not be made.'

Source: https://www.factcheck.org/2019/05/kamala-harris-spins-facts-on-truancy-law/

When a Biden campaign advisor described Harris as "slippery" after the first debate, they weren't kidding: https://www.politico.com/story/2019/07/12/kamala-harris-biden-debate-busing-1414911

"Kamala's attack on Biden was months in the making: She and her advisers assiduously plotted the attack — and how to capitalize on it afterward."
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/06/28/kamala-harris-joe-biden-debate-1390383

No to Harris.

[jcgoldie]

30. Man I can't believe you guys are falling for this shit again

We have seen this show.

[sharedvalues]

31. Princetonian, welcome to DU! And thanks for another post amplifying attacks on Harris!

You have been clear that you don’t like Kamala Harris and you’re promoting Tulsi Gabbard.

But please remember that this is a rightwing talking point. The rightwing press works hard to attack Kamala on this and to repeat Gabbard’s claims. Again, it’s fine that you’re reposting a CNN article on Harris’s poll numbers while adding your own commentary and praise for Gabbard. Your opinion is your right. But this clearly is a talking point the right wants to push.

[Hekate]

40. Thanks for your observations.

This is my first encounter....

[StarfishSaver]

48. Thank you for pointing this out

I also notice how consistently some people go after Harris for raising questions about Biden's civil rights record (even though Biden is running on his record and therefore should have to defend all of it, not just the parts he wants to talk about). Other candidates have criticized him for other aspects of his record but haven't gotten attacked the way Harris has for talking about race. I think this is intended to discourage her and anyone else who might want to talk about race from discussing it. And getting fellow Democrats (or people who claim to be Democrats) to pile on only makes the task easier. She wasn't a good girl and must be punished.

[Hortensis]

55. I started to count Tonian's anti-Harris posts but it took too much time.

If only we were paid for the time we put in here I might have continued, but I'm not.

Btw, when Tonian says Joe's "not a racist," which is a constant theme, he's DEFENDING Joe, including in this OP and even from the top of his journal:

I support VP Joe Biden who is not a racist.

[Princetonian]

98. Harris needs to address her troubling history as DA and AG because they speak to her character.

Democratic primary voters deserve transparency from the candidates who want their votes.

Rhetoric 101. "I don't believe you're a racist, but..." means you're about to imply he's a racist.

[Demsrule86]

56. After all the anti-Biden posts? Really. There is one up right now that says he is mentally deficient

Cry me a river...and the Gabbard stuff is based on facts...I did look into it. Sen. Harris should address this and I have no idea why she hasn't ...really hurting her campaign. Have you read any of the project innocence stuff? And that is a good organization.

[Hortensis]

58. We should seek truth and damn the pain. After all,

the only fools any of us manage to trick are ourselves.

[Demsrule86]

59. You are right...I try and mostly succeed in not posting anything that will harm a

candidate who is the eventual nominee...we need to beat the orange cretin squatting in the people's house.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

33. I know we here are averse to observations about

demeanor..but doing it anyway. Think she has a 100% good liberal heart. Think she is absolutely bright, knowledgeable and more than capable. Think she would be a very good president.

If you are talking surface demeanor only...if I was consulting for her on her image...just speak from your heart..forget about others..stop squinting/frowning. Tone down the giggling/laughing. Face forward on camera.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

46. I think that's a fair observation.

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

38. Kamala has flamed out... didn't take long.

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[VarryOn]

42. Im beginning to think you're right...

I didnt particlarly like her going after Bide, but I didnt think it was overbaord either. I knew that at sometime our candidates would have to get aggressive with each other. Not fun to watch, but necessary. You just dont want to go too far.

I just dont inderstand why she tanked so quickly and significantly. At one point I was near declaring her my choice. Now, Im not sure she can even recover.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

45. Kamala just seems a bit too "politiciany"... people caught onto that.

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[StarfishSaver]

49. She's too something, but "politiciany" ain't it.

[Hortensis]

54. Good grief. We know, she's not Sanders.

[Demsrule86]

57. I agree...and the AG/DA stuff...is troubling.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

79. Very troubling... but, it won't matter in the end, as Kamala won't be on the ticket.

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[Demsrule86]

89. I don't think she will either.

[BannonsLiver]

97. Then Bernie will have something in common with her.

[Ace Rothstein]

53. I still don't know what her platform is.

She really came to this thing very unprepared.

[Kahuna7]

61. I wondered if her, "that little girl was me," stunt made voters believe

she supports mandatory busing. That would explain her DRASTIC plummet in the polls. Not to mention how mean she was to good old Joe. Nobody wants to see that. Trump is the enemy, not Biden.

[Princetonian]

68. That occurred to me as well.

And yes, being so mean to Joe who is such a nice man turned off a whole lot of folks.

I'll bet there's a big ol' pile of T-shirts gathering dust somewhere.

[onetexan]

75. i think it's a combo of things - the "throwing Joe under the bus" situation, her records as DA & AG,

and her overall lack of name recognition and experience at the national level. I think it would have been better for Kamala to stay in the senate for a couple more terms, then run. And during the "down cycles" (in between general elections), reaching out to black voters and getting more involved with black communities, and issues relating to black families, would help improve her image. She'll also need to explain her record as CA AG.

[namahage]

80. Explain her record as CA AG?

Why not ask the voters?

You know, the ones who voted her back into office in double digits.

[onetexan]

83. check the several thread specifically mentioning her record as AG - in particular the Larsen case

good luck with that

[namahage]

84. And yet, she won.

She won the 2010 Democratic primary by double the votes over her closest competitor.

One would think if her record as SF DA was so troubling she should have lost to one of the other Democratic challengers.

Instead, she won the primary handily and then, despite the Republican candidate's early 8-point lead that caused him and other news orgs to call the race (prematurely, as it turned out) she got elected over the former 3-time LA County DA.

But of course the voters were so dissatisfied with her tenure as CA AG that she should have been sent packing in the 2014 primaries.

What's that? She beat ALL of them combined?

Anyway. Her clear nonfitness for the office was responded to by CA voters, who made their voices regarding her performance heard.

By double digits.

So when this obviously ambitious politician decided to run for Barbara Boxer's open seat her history would clearly be a negative when considering endorsements from prominent Democrats.

Maybe you heard of them? Jerry Brown, Dianne Feinstein, Boxer herself and President Obama.

Oh, almost forgot one. You calling his judgment into question as well?

[onetexan]

85. Sure she did win, but this is race is for the POTUS, and she's tanking

In the polls... 'nough said!

[emmaverybo]

82. +1

[Princetonian]

99. I agree. Without honestly explaining her troubling DA and AG history, Harris will always be an...

... unviable prospect for a presidential ticket. Would Harris survive the vetting process? What would be the effect on swing voters and the Democratic base if there were poignant interviews with Daniel Larsen and his lawyer during a GE, painful chats with stonewalled Catholic abuse surviviors and their lawyers or discussions with pissed off formerly jailed parents of truants - all during a highly-charged general election?

No, we need a candidate who has already been vetted. A candidate who has performed at the highest levels of both the legislative and executive branches of government who President Obama has called "the best Vice President America has ever had. We need Joe Biden.

[Skya Rhen]

63. The purpose of debates is for voters to get to know the candidate - it works for some...

[brooklynite]

69. If you look at the Economist poll summary, she peaked after the June debates...

...and has been dropping since.

[Princetonian]

70. Would you please post a link?

Thanks in advance, brooklynite.

[brooklynite]

71. Here

https://projects.economist.com/democratic-primaries-2020/

[Princetonian]

92. Joe at 27%. Liz at 18%. Bernie at 17%.............Harris at 7%.

As you indicated, Harris appears to have peaked:
https://projects.economist.com/democratic-primaries-2020/

One wonders whether there will be a Hail Mary at the next debate... hopefully, Harris won't be so foolhardy as to attempt to imply Joe is a racist for the third time in a row.

Thanks for sharing such a data goldmine with me, brooklynite.

[EveHammond13]

77. this I just don't understand

[gldstwmn]

88. She will come back. We are far, far away from the finish line.