The Obamas Endorse Harris: 'This Is Going to Be Historic'
The Obamas Endorse Harris: 'This Is Going to Be Historic'
Barack and Michelle Obama endorsed Kamala Harris for president, providing another huge boost to the now-presumptive Democratic nominee.
The former president and first lady threw their weight behind the presumptive Democratic nominee
Barack and Michelle Obama have endorsed Kamala Harris for the Democratic nomination for president, sharing the news in a joint phone call.
A video released by the campaign suggests the former president and first lady called Harris on Thursday while the vice president was in Houston, where she addressed the American Federation of Teachers and received a briefing on recovery efforts following Hurricane Beryl.
“We called to say, Michelle and I couldn’t be prouder to endorse you and do everything we can to get you through this election and into the Oval Office,” Barack Obama is heard telling Harris in a 55-second video of the call.
“This is going to be historic,” Michelle Obama tells Harris.
You're viewing a single thread.
This is frustrating. She couldn't handle a primary run 5 years ago. Now the entire Party is just lining up as if she's unquestionably the greatest candidate the world has to offer.
Prior to this, the only Democrat less popular than her, was Biden.
Nobody knows what she'll actually do in office because she's only ever said or supported whatever will help her at the moment.
EDIT: Thank you all. I had a good time today debating, discussing, reading, even occasionally learning.
Some of you engaged well, I upvoted. Some of you didn't. I rarely downvote though, and never did here.
I appreciate you all, and hope you all have a good one.
Even Kamala Harris. I hope to see her succeed beyond all our expectations. Even if mine are quite low.Biden couldn't handle a primary run in 2008, but he killed in 2020.
Times change. Circumstances change. People change. And if the enthusiasm that has come out over the past week, both from her and from the party base, is any indication, Harris in 2024 is in a much better place than she was in 2020.
Honestly, after his failed 1987 primary challenge, I'm surprised he ever got back on his feet in terms of politics at all.
He plagiarized a speech by a British politician and got caught, he was involved in a scandal involving his law school grades and he lied about his participation in the civil rights movement (or at least greatly exaggerated it).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Biden_1988_presidential_campaign#Summer_1987
On top of that, after dropping out, he had two brain aneurysms.
It's pretty amazing he got elected president in 2020.
It's pretty amazing he got elected president in 2020.
America is a country where some areas have such high rates of diabetes, people fully expect to lose limbs due to circulation issues.
It seems that you can simply train many people to expect their options to limited.
Biden didn't kill it in 2020. Bernie won the first few states, so the DNC freaked out and pushed the other candidates to drop out and endorse Joe. After that, the media lined up to declare him the presumptive nominee. The DNC hates progressives.
Kamala was a better speaker than Joe in 2020. Her comments about being one of the black kids on the busses aimed at Biden was accurate and scathing. But she followed the party mandate and bowed out.
Why is everyone's memory so short about these things?
She's a far sight better than Trump or Biden.
Bernie won a couple states that never help determine the election. Then Biden won by a lot in swing states. If Bernie won swing states it would be different. He didn't. His appeal isn't and wasn't as good in the specific places the Presidency is won.
It sucks because I picked him in both primaries. But the reality is Biden had broader appeal where it mattered. Any Dem candidate is going get 170 EC votes along the coasts. It's between the coasts where the election is won. And Biden did better in all those places.
To my point, he was doing better until the others started to drop out. But that's all academic now. My opinion hardly matters, but I stand by my belief that the DNC hates progressive politics and would rather lose than support a populist progressive.
Kamala is apparently more progressive than we knew, her voting record was pretty close to Bernie's in the Senate. By being the vp and then Biden dropping out we seem to have gotten a more prog candidate than we could have otherwise?
Pete won Iowa, Bernie won New Hampshire and Nevada. Everyone (6 total candidates) was still in for South Carolina which Biden dominated. Pete and Amy dropped out at that point. But Bloomberg joined and Warren was still in. Gabbard was too but we all know was a joke candidate.
Biden was against 4 options going into Super Tuesday. Biden won 10 of the 15 primaries on Super Tuesday. Came in 2nd for the couple he didn't win. After that is when Bloomberg got chased back out, and Warren dropped out realizing she was stripping votes from Bernie.
Bernie was ahead for all of 3 weeks. And at that point only 3 states were in. What truly happened in that time is a lot of media spin. Because they had nothing much to report on and kept belaboring over almost nothing of consequence. By the time my chance landed here in Illinois it was obvious Biden had it in the bag. Bernie dropped out himself only a couple weeks after.
It's interesting to see the consequences of a two-party system so clearly here. Only focusing on the voters in the middle because the others are secure, it's exactly what the maths predict.
Oh. Look. It's the exact message we all knew was coming. "Good thing we got rid of Biden, but now we have another terrible candidate."
Yes! Exactly!
All the Democrats seem capable of, are terrible presidential candates. Obama seemed like a great candate for a ... Change. But turned out to be quite mid.You know, obviously I disagree with you. But I respect you for not deleting your comments and for continuing to engage earnestly with people who were upset by it. I understand your disappointment with not ever getting a president who really moves the ball forward.
Until a progressive candidate can get elected in the swing states or there is a massive shift in the Overton window, I don't think you're going to get what you want. I'd like the world to be a better place, too. Shit, depending on the next 4 years, it's likely I won't live to see a liberal Supreme Court again, let alone tear down the corporate capture of our government.
Kamala has proven she can inspire people and that she can win. And I said before Biden even stepped down, if he goes, it has to be her or we risk losing black voters whom we can't win without. Now she's bringing them in droves. And the more registered Democrats, the greater our chances of really moving the country left in a meaningful way. She's the right choice, whether she's the best choice or not.
Anyway, be well.
she was in a primary with biden in the center and about 15 other progressives on the left. she was always popular; it's just bernie occupied the left flank of the primary and everyone else was crumbs.
She was in the Senate. She has a voting record. Go look at it.
You know who else couldn't handle a primary run (twice) before they were elected president? Joe Biden.
Yah. I don't know why anyone thought he was a good option either.
And yet he won despite you not knowing why.
Is winning the only hurdle? That's so depressing.
When it comes to stopping Project 2025? Yes, that is the only hurdle. Work on the rest after that.
That's not something we'll ever "stop". That's an ongoing eternal fight. And you don't win by only playing defense. You need to try to score also.
We will never stop a specific agenda that has been laid out in great detail in a plan Americans are souring to the more they hear about it?
The sounds like what some people told me about Biden in 2020. Why vote for him? He's the same as Trump.
Except he isn't. By most measures.
Who said that? Did I? I never said any of that. Read my previous comment again.
Your previous comment:
That’s not something we’ll ever “stop”. That’s an ongoing eternal fight.
My response:
We will never stop a specific agenda that has been laid out in great detail in a plan Americans are souring to the more they hear about it?
Then I told you a different claim that your comment sounded like.
So yes, you did say that it is not something that we will never stop.
It is very depressing, yes. But a candidate that is 10/10 on every possible good measure that loses to Trump due to Democratic infighting, will be a worse outcome to someone that is mediocre in some respects but can win. It is the most important hurdle, and at the very least I can say the Democrats have some semblance of a strategy now that they didn't have before, and that's reason for hope.
I'd be happy for 5/10
I'd be happy
I'll believe it when I see it.
Yah. That's fair.
I'm not sure I've even been truly happy since I was a child who didn't know anything.
Not an attack - but it definitely shows.
I hope things get better for you.
Then vote for that candidate
They've been asked to name such a candidate and admitted they can't. And also that they didn't canvass for anyone. So basically they want an imaginary person to magically pop into our reality and be the nominee. But not Kamala Harris.
You know she was a Senator, right? You know those votes are public record, right?
Biden was in several primaries. Only recently did he get enough traction. Just Obama was more popular. That's actually a common pattern, that eventual Presidents had to lose a few primaries to get where they are today.
Alright. Here's your chance:
Who would you choose?
Be prepared to defend your answer.
No idea.
The party never presented any real chance to compare options. That's the problem. We could've had a dozen debates with anyone polling over 0.1%. Like the Republicans. But that never happened.If we had, maybe it'd be clear she's the best choice.
You know these things about Harris and yet can't supply us with a single potential alternative? Now I am aware you're likely no expert. Though to have a fair opinion one must be able to account at least somewhat for both sides of the equation.
Please stop dismissing Harris if you can't make even the smallest argument for why someone else may be better. It's potentially damaging and right now, as much as I wish we could debate about it for hours, we need to stop fascism first.
edit: By the way, thank you for admitting you don't know. That alone is something we should all respect.
Who dismissed Harris?
Is Fascism the one where leaders are chosen by an elite few, without the input of the public?
Edit: Thank you. I do try to be a honest as I can. Even when I know my ideas are very... Uncommon I guess.
You should read the essay "Ur-fascism" by Umberto Eco. It's an 8 or 9 page PDF, and it does a really good job explaining fascism (including it's seemingly inability to be defined - which to them is a feature).
This should be a PDF of it so you don't even need to Google. Everyone should read this
If you've ever heard of the 14 defining features of fascism, they come from this essay. And he does an excellent job explaining them all and relating them to his life growing up in fascist Italy.
Fascism exists to first justify and in the endgame solidify the tyrannical desire of the elite. Choosing to displace our fears and concerns by undermining, even indirectly, the person we ultimately must support, we do damage to that cause. So while we are not a true Democracy, we have in our laps a chance to stop a slide into something worse.
I feel strongly that despite the many differences we all have, and the discourse those differences often bring, we should seek to put them aside for now. Not forever. Just for now, to work for a better country and a government that exists more for us all. It is optimistic, though I know deep down that those of us not worshipping Trump want for a better life and outnumber the brainwashed and poorly educated red masses by a magnitude. We just have to come together.
Harris is not the country's leader yet. She is likely to be selected as the candidate by the Democratic party, but ultimately the party is a private organization that can do basically whatever it wants to select that candidate. That's not fascism. That's freedom of association. In the end, nobody has to vote for the Democrats nor the Republicans. Anybody can be on the ballot with enough popular support, no party needed.
Parties hold primaries because, ultimately, they need votes to win an election and primaries help gauge the people who will be voting. At the time of the primaries, the voters still overwhelmingly selected Biden. But in the time since, polls show large majorities of those voters support both Biden's departure and Harris as the replacement. So this is still likely the right move if the party is trying to appeal to the public.
All of that is entirely true.
And ultimately entirely undemocratic.
And that's the biggest problem I have with the party at the moment.The Republicans, who are sooo shitty in most every other respect, held an actual primary process. While they're exactly the same kind private company the Democrats are, and could've simply gone with Trump.
All for debate, but maybe don't go around devaluing the term fascism for fake internet points?
You mean all those points I'm losing with every comment?
Just because you're bad at it doesn't mean you're not doing it.
I wasn't commenting on your assessment of what I was doing, just your assessment for the reason I was doing it.
You're not obliged to respond if you don't have anything meaningful or interesting to add to this discussion.
Nobody knows what she'll actually do in office
I don't have any reason to believe Harris would do anything radically different than what Biden would have done. That makes her far from ideal, in my opinion, but nonetheless still much better than Trump. That's the only thing the Democrats really have going for them at this point: they remain better than the only other viable political alternative. Admittedly, that is a LOW bar, in my opinion, but that's where we are in America right now. I have given up trying to make America the way I want to be, and am instead focused primarily on harm reduction.
Agreed. Just kind of more of the same seems likely. I just think we could use and deserve better.
Other than his stance on Palestine, I think Joe (and his administration) did an excellent job under the circumstances. He was the right man at the right time
His domestic work was acceptable. My only gripe there is not pushing harder on the minimum wage. He could've replace the parliamentarian.
What difference would replacing the parliamentarian make? the minimum wage increase lost the vote.
Why blame the Executive branch for something that happened in the Legislative branch?
Prior to this, the only Democrat less popular than her, was Biden.
Well at least she's more popular than Biden then.
Yes. That's our great hope. Someone slightly better than the worst option.
I mean, it is what it is, sadly. It's basically impossible to get good candidates in a flawed first past the post system where there are only two realistic parties and both are controlled by the corporate elite that benefit from the status quo. Good candidates get squashed.