Kamala Harris Likely To Run For President In 2020
The Press is conditioning viewers and readers for the 2020 election by continuously tossing about the same select names, and associating those politicians with speculation of a 2020 run. The names thusfar associated with the possibility have been a blend of old-guard establishmentarian bureaucrats (such as Joe Biden and Tim Kaine), and newer "Rising Stars"(tm) attempting to appeal to progressive voters. One such candidate, who's image has, as of late, graced the pages of every headline making speculations of a 2020 run for President, is Kamala Harris.
One such article, from Politico, features a sizable image of Harris under a headline making mention of "2020 Democrats". After taking the necessary 30 seconds to scroll past the ever-expanding oracle, the article itself is nothing more than a full-throated endorsement of implementing identity politics, "overtly", as a strategy against Donald Trump in 2020. Likewise, the discourse on social media has followed suite, with Mrs. "such-and-such-plus-donut" pining over the candidates and issues that have been fed to them to be concerned about, and the establishmentarian figureheads they have been told to support as future leaders. To call out corruption or voice dissent is immediately "sexist", although Mr. "Hillary-Clinton-profile-pic" did not concern himself with supporting Nina Turner, Tulsi Gabbard, Sema Hernandez, and probably cannot stand Kshama Sawant. That being said, it is important that we see what is being played before our eyes. While she attempts to portray herself as a progressive leading up to the Democratic Primaries, here are a few things you should know...
Although Harris has a few good marks on her record, she generally draws on an innate ability to say the correct words at the correct time, and her record and words have often been at odds. In January of 2017, Harris voted to confirm now Sec. of Defense James (a.k.a. "MadDog") Mattis, and issued a statement that she felt he would be a "moderating force" within the Trump administration. In case you were wondering if this is at all reflective of her foreign policy, worry not. After the Trump Administration purported the myth that Assaad used Serin Gas on his own people, and proceeded to bomb Syria, Harris did not hesitate in issuing a statement criticizing Trump and his administration for... not attacking Syria viciously enough.
Kamala Harris has likewise defended the death penalty, defended CA's draconian "three strikes" policy, and, while vocally she has been a constant critic of the war on drugs, has taken absolutely no substantive action on reform, as either AG or sitting Senator. She has refused to support the state-wide implementation of body-cams for police officers, supports the criminalization of sex workers, and while she has vocally gone after large banking institutions, even going so far as to punish the banks by making them give themselves billions of dollars in the name of "relief", Families amidst a foreclosure crisis in CA that she is generally praised for standing by did not qualify for said relief if the loans were owned by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, the nations largest mortgage holders.
According to The Center For Responsive Politics, Harris' largest donor is Time Warner (who owns CNN), who has graciously furnished her campaign with $130,000. She has received $90,000 from 21st Century Fox, and $45,000 from Comcast (who owns MSNBC). Walt Disney (ABC, ABC News) donated $40,000. I wonder what Harris' "public and private position" might be with regard to large media mergers, and the Media Industrial Complex? She has likewise received $90,000 from Alphabet Inc (who owns Google), and $50,000 from Apple. I wonder what her "public and private position" might be on the data infractions and privacy intrusions of tech giants who have admitted to spying on consumers and selling their data?
Kamala Harris has the verbage of a progressive, and the actions of an acquiescent tool of the corporate establishment. Democrats therefore see her as the perfect opportunity to put the good appearance of "fresh blood" in front of another obedient servant of the status quo.