She has some criticisms for her past as an attorney, but I’m not sure why she’s so disliked now. What has she done to engender such distaste from the public?

    • sin_free_for_00_days@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah. Right. Has nothing to do with her being some neoliberal cop who has a shit record from the left. It’s because she’s black. And a woman. Got it.

      • Veraticus@lib.lgbt
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        She has a great track record, both personally and professionally, if you had any interest in investigating it. Yes, even on cop stuff and leftist stuff — the details of which (including a lot of great social justice stuff, like trying to pass Federal laws against lynching and banning choke holds, racial profiling, and no-knock warrants) might surprise you.

        But people like you have no interest investigating. Because why bother? She’s an accomplished Black woman. May as well just call her a neoliberal and a cop and be done with it.

        • argv_minus_one@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          She has a track record of imprisoning poor people for being poor. In California, no less, where it’s basically impossible to not be poor.

          • Veraticus@lib.lgbt
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            This is a pretty typical wild mischaracterization of what actually happened — assuming you’re referring to her truancy programs. (Do you even know what you’re referring to, or are you simply repeating smears about Black women that you’ve heard?) As is usual for women, especially Black women, hyperbole and toxicity are the political norms. It is disappointing to see it, but unsurprising.

            • Serenus@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Having just looked up a bit of detail on the truancy law (and living outside the US, so I’m coming at this not having heard much of anything about it), that sounds horrific. The rationale Harris gave, that it was designed to connect parents to resources, doesn’t mesh with the fact that threatening people with jail time isn’t how you help them.

              I also ran into the fact that she argued in favour of the death penalty. Again, not exactly something that’s going to make her appealing to anyone even remotely progressive.

        • sin_free_for_00_days@lemmy.one
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Nice assumptions you felt the need to make about what I know or don’t know. No need debating with boot licking assholes.

          • Veraticus@lib.lgbt
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            You’ve demonstrated knowledge of literally nothing during this conversation. I’m the only one that’s referenced actual policies here. All you’ve done is hurl insults at me and Black women politicians. It’s not a good look, but keep doing it, it’s really making my point for me.

    • yarr@lemmy.fmhy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t like her because of situations like her truancy laws. If you think she’s not liked just because of her race and/or gender, then you’ll never understand why people don’t agree with her.

      • Veraticus@lib.lgbt
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I think she gets special criticism because of her race and gender. The level of hyperbole and toxicity around her is unique, though politicians like Hillary Clinton and Elizabeth Warren experience similar extremely emotional reactions. White male politicians with controversial policies don’t get called “neoliberal” or “cop” in the same way that Kamala does; certainly some her policies are not great, but she’s not really worse than equivalent politicians, and in fact she is way way better than a whole bunch of them.

        What do Hillary Clinton, Elizabeth Warren, and Kamala Harris have in common that seems to provoke such an extreme emotional negative reaction in their critics? Why is the reaction even worse towards Kamala?

        Hmm.

        • yarr@lemmy.fmhy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Hillary Clinton, Elizabeth Warren, and Kamala Harris have in common

          I would posit those three agree with each other far more than they disagree with each other. It would be odd to find someone that objects philosophically to only one in that set. From where I sit they have a lot of similarities:

          • Party Affiliation: All three women are Democrats.
          • Experience in Public Service: Clinton, Warren, and Harris have held significant roles in public service. Hillary Clinton served as Secretary of State under President Barack Obama, as well as a U.S. Senator for New York. Elizabeth Warren is a U.S. Senator for Massachusetts. Kamala Harris is the Vice President under President Joe Biden, and prior to that, she was a U.S. Senator for California and the Attorney General of California.
          • Women’s Rights Advocacy: Each of these women has been an advocate for women’s rights. Clinton has a long history of advocating for women’s rights both domestically and internationally. Warren has focused on issues such as equal pay for equal work. Harris has a record of fighting for women’s health rights and equal opportunities in the workplace.
          • Law Background: All three women have backgrounds in law. Clinton is a Yale Law graduate who worked as an attorney before her political career. Warren was a law professor for more than 30 years, and Harris was a prosecutor and served as the Attorney General of California.
          • Presidential Candidates: All three have run for president. Clinton was the Democratic nominee in 2016, Warren was a primary candidate in the 2020 election, and Harris was also a primary candidate in the 2020 election before eventually becoming the vice-presidential candidate.
          • Progressive Policies: They all have advocated for progressive policies such as healthcare reform, climate change mitigation, and wealth inequality reduction. Clinton championed healthcare reform as early as the 1990s, Warren has been a vocal critic of Wall Street and a proponent of wealth redistribution, and Harris has put forth plans addressing healthcare access and climate change.
          • Veraticus@lib.lgbt
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Definitely agreed with all of that! But there are a lot of white men with similar records who do not engender the kind of vituperative hate that these women do. And I don’t think it’s due to the similarity of their policy positions.

            • yarr@lemmy.fmhy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              a lot of white men with similar records

              There are some democrats that are male progressives that have a law background that ran for president that are not hated by people? Who?

              • Veraticus@lib.lgbt
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Obviously every politician gets hatred. But the kind and volume towards women (or Black, or gay) politicians is much higher than their white male counterparts.

                For example, I definitely do not think that a thread like this would wind up with so much screeching about “cops” or “neoliberals” if it were about Al Gore. And probably would not have existed to begin with, because while he was, of course, radically progressive at the time (especially about climate change and technology) he was basically just a white progressive lawyer that ran for President.