Oh for the love of everything on this planet. Not everything is about race and your sex.

Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA), who hasn’t even hit double digits in primary polling, lashed out at the media because they supposedly only pay attention to the old white males.

From Politico:

“There has been a lot of conversation by pundits about ‘electability’ and ‘who can speak to the Midwest?’ But when they say that, they usually put the Midwest in a simplistic box and a narrow narrative, and too often their definition of the Midwest leaves people out,” Harris said in an opening salvo during the trip. “It leaves out people in this room who helped build cities like Detroit. It leaves out working women who are on their feet all day—many of them working without equal pay.”

It gets better because she contradicted herself:

Embedded in her criticism is a call for solidarity across all races. “Our party is not white or black, Hispanic or Asian, immigrant or indigenous,” she said in Detroit. “As a party, we cannot let ourselves be drawn into thinking in those boxes or falling into those assumptions. We cannot get dragged into simplistic narratives.”

She does not want others to concentrate on race or sex, but she cannot stop bringing it up. By the way, I have not heard anyone saying only former Vice President Joe Biden or Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) can beat President Donald Trump because they have white skin.

Even Politico called out Harris’s contradiction. Reporters ask her what Democrats need to do to beat Trump, her policies, etc. Harris can never not bring up identity politics. Not the reporters:

Harris herself had mostly refrained from engaging when asked how Democrats should approach the national map and win back Trump voters. On occasion, she’s even ceded to “the pundits” she takes issue with. In Iowa earlier this year, Harris told reporters that people want to talk about “real issues—and they don’t want to talk about it through the lens of political talk and partisanship and from an ideological perspective.” “I think it’s really important that we give the American public more credit,” Harris said. “And understand that they, at the bottom line, are going to make decisions based on who speaks to their issues, and the things that keep them up at night.” Yet, she’s increasingly been using speeches to sketch out what’s lacking in the larger 2020 debate.

Trump’s victory made me doubt the electability argument. I agree with Harris that Americans are smarter than politicians and the media give us credit for. We want someone to speak about what matters to us: jobs and more money in our pockets.

Then why doesn’t Harris do this? Trump won because he concentrated on the issues that matter unlike Hillary, who chose social justice as her platform.

Media in 2008, 2012, and 2016

But if we must talk about race, I have some facts for Harris.

Someone tell Harris that the media adored President Barack Obama over 2016 failed Democrat presidential candidate Hillary Clinton in 2008. Obama went up against old white male John McCain that year and he won the Midwest along with Florida, Virginia, Pennsylvania, and North Carolina.

Obama ran against white male Mitt Romney in 2012. Again, he won the Midwest except for Indiana. He won Florida, Virginia, and Pennsylvania. North Carolina chose Romney. The media fawned over Obama in 2012 instead of Romney.

Hillary went up against old white male Donald Trump in 2016. Despite the love from the media, the American people chose Trump.

Is Harris just mad that no one likes her? I mean, polls before any announcements showed that people preferred Biden and Sanders.

Gee, Why Does Harris Poll So Low?

In a Hill survey, Harris sits at 6%. The latest Morning Consult poll has Harris at 7%.

So why don’t people like Harris?

Harris is a hypocrite. While she boasted in her book about her record as attorney general in San Francisco, she left out key details like when her office “defended egregious prosecutor misconduct in several cases.” Her office also “opposed releasing non-violent California inmates” because the “prisons would lose an important labor pool.” Harris feigned shock when she read that in the newspaper and claimed she had no idea her office did that.

Look at her “crusade against Backpage, an online classified ad service popular with sex workers.” From Reason:

Harris spearheaded the arrest of current and former Backpage executives on charges of pimping and conspiracy, under the (ultimately unsuccessful) theory that providing an open online platform for user-generated content made them responsible for any illegal activity committed by users who connected through the site. Federal law explicitly says otherwise—something Harris certainly knew, as she had petitioned Congress a few years earlier to change the law so that she and other prosecutors could target Backpage (and its deep assets) through state criminal justice systems. What’s more, myriad federal courts have affirmed that prosecutions like the one Harris attempted are illegal.

Harris supported the war on drugs. She tried “to threaten the parents of truants with jail time.”

Have you watched Harris during Senate hearing committees? She comes off as snobby and condescending with a holier than thou attitude.

Hillary and others claimed misogyny for her loss. They still do not accept the fact that Hillary lost because she sucks. Maybe someone should give Harris a reality check. She certainly needs it.



