POTUS/General Election Thread 2020 + Aftermath

[Hooahguy]

I disagree. Even Republicans are willing, remember Palin ?

Just because they too are willing doesnt mean it was a great idea electorally. Palin was a terrible terrible choice as we all know. But what I am trying to say is that woman candidates are largely still unfairly treated compared to male candidates.

All that I read suggested she prioritized adopting a more conservative law-and-order persona (and we know what that means) than was justified electorally, as may have been discussed here. One can weight different factors, or emphasize aspects of her more recent career trajectory, but overall I wouldn't call her LE record progressive.

I think this take is missing major context of what was going on at the time and a "tough on crime" stance was electorally justified. In 2004 when she first took office as DA of San Francisco, they were in the middle of a major crime wave with a homicide rate of 11.57. By her last year in office, 2010, the homicide rate was 5.86. So basically cutting it in half. Her predecessor Terence Hallinan (who was regarded as super progressive) had a terrible conviction rate of just 50% which frankly means that he was pretty bad at his job. Harris on the other hand had a conviction rate of the mid to high 80 percentage range. But I digress. I can list you 40 different actions she's taken as either DA or AG that were pretty significant progressive initiatives. Things like the country's first Back on Track program that reduced recidivism and was later adopted by other jurisdictions across the country. As DA she created the LGBT Hate crimes unit, the environmental justice unit, and the child sexual assault unit. As AG, Harris created the Bureau of Children’s Justice; Division of Recidivism Reduction and Re-Entry; Mortgage Fraud Strike Force; Human Trafficking Work Group; Racial & Identity Profiling Advisory Board; eCrime Unit; Privacy Enforcement & Protection Unit. The list goes on and on if you want me to expand on this.

Of course there will be missteps. Nobody in the DA or AG position has a spotless record. I think it comes with the territory. For example, progressive Keith Ellison is the current AG of Minnesota and we all know whats been going on there. Where I think Harris tends to trip up on is explaining some of the actions shes taken. Like let's take the whole truancy thing. Despite being on the books as a law since the 70's, shes still being criticized for it even though a lot of those criticisms are being made with incorrect or missing information. But the thing is, studies show that fighting truancy helps kids stay in school which then helps prevent them from ending up in prison or worse. In SF, 94% of homicide victims under the age of 25 were dropouts. Where Harris was involved was refining the current law to make it so the school district could better identify at-risk children and find the best times to intervene to make sure they stayed in school. It wasnt about throwing parents in jail, it was about making sure that schools, students, and parents had the resources to fix the truancy issue with harsher penalties only being used as a last resort. But the narrative is already past this sort of explanation and I think a big part of it is Harris' inability to effectively counter these sorts of misconceptions. That being said, I do think she is the frontrunner for the VP spot (its clear she really wants it despite being the best at hiding it *cough cough Stacey Abrams*) since shes the only one who seems to be doing events with not only Joe, but his wife and top advisors too. So I guess we will see in the next month who gets picked in the end but my money is on Harris.