Kamala Harris, who launched her campaign for president, has long been a favorite of Hollywood donors.

Kamala Harris has launched her campaign for the White House, after President Joe Biden stepped aside Sunday under pressure from party leaders.

The vice president has Biden’s endorsement, and is unchallenged as yet for the Democratic nomination, which will be formally decided at the Aug. 19 convention in Chicago.

“I am honored to have the President’s endorsement and my intention is to earn and win this nomination,” Harris said in a statement. “I will do everything in my power to unite the Democratic Party—and unite our nation—to defeat Donald Trump and his extreme Project 2025 agenda. We have 107 days until Election Day. Together, we will fight. And together, we will win.”

In her statement, the vice president paid tribute to Biden’s “extraordinary leadership,” saying he had achieved more in one term than many presidents do in two.

  • Clbull@lemmy.world
    1152·
    3 months ago

    Kamala Harris is probably the second-worst candidate behind Hillary Clinton that the Democrats could field against Trump. She’s disliked, she’s a hypocrite (look at her current ‘stance’ on legalizing marijuana compared to her previous record as a prosecutor where she ruined thousands of lives with criminal convictions for smoking wacky tobaccy), and a vote for Biden was going to be a de-facto vote for her regardless, because we know that if Biden was going to fall seriously ill or die during his second term, she’d take over the presidency.

    The Democrats have many better candidates to run. I hope they don’t make the mistake of backing Biden’s running mate.

    • Kit@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      211·
      3 months ago

      She was a prosecutor 14 years ago. People are allowed to grow and change their opinion.

    • Mirshe@lemmy.world
      13·
      3 months ago

      Who exactly do they have who’s “better”, who ALSO would agree to run, who ALSO doesn’t have a mountain of baggage saddled with them? I’ve seen Whitmer thrown around, but she’s had a serious smear campaign and a credible assassination attempt against her already. Beshear’s another, he said he isn’t going to accept even if the DNC nominates him. Sanders also gets tarred with the “but he’s old” brush, plus the GOP can run thousands of hours of “he’s a literall socialist”. AOC is also similarly divisive, and I don’t think she’d accept anyway.

      • Clbull@lemmy.world
        213·
        3 months ago

        Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Pete Buttigieg, Elizabeth Warren, Andrew Yang, plenty of good candidates.

        Sanders would be a bad choice because he’s too old and while he’s certainly more compos mentis than Biden, he cannot escape that criticism. Michael Bloomberg would also be a similarly bad candidate for the same reason, plus also for running an incredibly expensive and half-assed campaign last time around.

        Ladbrokes currently have Michelle Obama as the second-favourite to win the Democrat nomination. She would actually be a great choice because it means Barack gets another four to eight years in the White House, albeit as the First Man. She also seems like a very sensible candidate in her own right.

        Alternatively, they could go the Reagan/Trump route and usher in a celebrity as their candidate. Someone like Oprah Winfrey, Taylor Swift, Stephen Colbert or Jimmy Fallon would be huge.

        • Mirshe@lemmy.world
          71·
          3 months ago

          Yang? Already flamed out once, and had very few specific policy goals beyond UBI.

          AOC? If she accepts, which I doubt, she’ll face challenges of “she’s too young” despite her being of-age by the inauguration, and would certainly see a federal or SCOTUS case trying to disqualify her. I could see BOEs in multiple states trying to boot her off the ballot because of it.

          Warren and Buttigieg both are saddled with lots of baggage - Warren’s already been tarred as a nut by mainstream media, and Buttigieg’s performance as Secretary of Transportation is…lackluster.

          Michelle Obama would be foolish - it would see the same challenges as Hilary in the “we’re building another dynasty” angle.

          Oprah is a poor choice, Taylor Swift, same. Colbert and Fallon would seriously be BAD choices.

        • xor@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
          7·
          3 months ago

          Taylor swift?! You’re proposing a literal billionaire as a more radical candidate than Harris?

          • Clbull@lemmy.world
            15·
            3 months ago

            A literal billionaire with a sheepish following of mainly fangirls that could easily rival Trump’s supporter base.

    • VinnyDaCat@lemmy.world
      121·
      3 months ago

      They don’t have anyone better right now.

      At least now we don’t have to deal with Republicans attacking Biden for his age and we can turn that around on Trump.

      I could run a full list of pros and cons on the woman but at the end of the day we got an upgrade if this decision should have been made much earlier. Gotta always vote blue no matter who. Can’t let Republicans get in.

    • Match!!@pawb.socialEnglish
      5·
      3 months ago

      enforcing laws that you don’t personally agree with and then advocating to change that law: hypocrisy, apparently