• Sergio@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    75
    ·
    1 month ago

    Unpopular opinion: Kamala was a solid candidate.

    Biden was headed to a humiliating defeat. Another couple debates, and maybe he loses NY and CA and we have a Dukakis- or Mondale-level annhilation. Kamala stepped in and ran a solid campaign on very short notice. Trump didn’t even have time to come up with a good nickname for her! She kicked his ass in their only debate, and he was literally too scared to do it again.

    In the end, she lost by a couple hundred thousand votes in 3 states. She was wrong about Gaza and the economy, but PA, MI, and WI are credibly winnable in future elections. Kamala was not a garbage candidate.

    • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      I think you are partially right. For starters… this was not short notice by any standard. She ran a “solid” campaign.

      I’d argue the campaign was flawed because the whole premise was flawed… moving to the right does not help the democratic party. And the risk the Dems now face is that never trumpers join the democratic party and complete the transition of the US electoral system to a choice between maga (Christo fascism) and republican.

      If the democratic party had an inkling that the victory of Trump would be as big as is now being said… running Kamala was a doomed endeavor… she was tainted by the Biden years.

      • beebarfbadger@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        Ask Fox News, they will do their best to give you a fair and balanced assessment of her policies and-

        sorry, couldn’t get through that sentence with a straight face.

    • Tinidril@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 month ago

      Unpopular opinion: Kamala was a solid candidate.

      If that is an unpopular opinion then the statement is definitionally false.

      • Katana314@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 month ago

        This statement implies popularity = good, universally.

        In the 1800s, slavery was popular. Hence, should a candidate have run on preserving slavery?

    • KomfortablesKissen@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 month ago

      Honestly, yes. Kamala was the way better choice of the two. Biden kinda fell off for me the moment he did the railroad strike stuff.

      But I’m not living in the US, so my point is kinda moot.

      • Soulg@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        1 month ago

        Biden got those striking workers everything they wanted. He just didn’t scream about it like Trump would have, which was a huge mistake.

        • KomfortablesKissen@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          The result was a compromise, in parts due to a blockage of the republicans. It was good, but it would have been so much better if they could have continued to hold the distribution of wares hostage. It could have been really awesome for workers as a reason to do the same.

          I get that Biden did that to stump broad civil unrest in the whole US, btw. That would have put a lot of people on the streets demanding change. While destroying untold sums.

    • oyo@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      But it’s not the voters fault! America had no choice but to vote for the rapist misogynist xenophobic fraudster traitor con man failed businessman because the woman had a nasally voice!