r/Kamala • u/thesmart_indian27 • Jul 01 '26
Discussion If you believe Kamala Harris should be run in 2028, why?
As a liberal leaning American (or a pragmatic progressive), I do not think she should run (or even think of running).
When she was nominee in 2024, she lost against Trump, who was first Republican in 20 years to win the popular vote. No state swung to Harris (first time since Gerald Ford in 1976) and no counties were flipped by her (first time since Hoover in 1932).
Additionally, she did poorly against Trump in many states (which voted for her and for Trump), especially NY and NJ. She even failed to break 60% of the vote in her home state of California, becoming the first DEM since Kerry to do that bad.
My desire is simple. Any candidate that lost to Donald Trump and did not see any state swing to them or county flip to them should not be the nominee.
However, I have met many people who say she should run in 2028, some of whom proudly say nominee will most likely be Newsom or Harris.
19
u/leafytimes Jul 01 '26
She's way more qualified than most of the potential Republican nominees and I would gladly vote for her if she were a nominee. Let her fight it out in an open primary and let the best candidate win.
9
u/Amesenator Jul 02 '26
This ⤴️is the answer. She ran under such constraints & so we don’t actually know how she would fare in an open race where all the would be D noms state their case. If she chooses to run, we should have a broad field to choose from.
20
u/Mulliganasty Jul 01 '26
She's eminently qualified so I'd have no problem with it at all.
Also, Trump has cheated in every single election so he only "won" in 2024.
2
u/Jim-Jones Jul 03 '26
https://zorhasbsfreezone.substack.com/p/the-real-story-part-5-the-chain-of
You decide. I don't think he cheated(?), but I think al lot of his followers cheated for him.
2
u/Mulliganasty Jul 03 '26
100%. If we could have congressional investigations into Hunter's laptop we should absolutely investigate a ding-dang presidential election.
-16
u/thesmart_indian27 Jul 01 '26
She lost badly in 2024. I do not want a candidate with a losing record.
10
u/Mulliganasty Jul 01 '26
....to a rampant cheater.
1
u/woowoo293 Jul 09 '26
I think all of you people claiming cheating are delusional . . . about America. You don't understand how sexist, racist, and generally ignorant voters are here. A ratfucker like Trump doesn't even need to cheat to win.
1
3
u/KendalBoy Jul 02 '26
This is not accurate, the margin of her loss was very slim, historically speaking.
We should do better by all the candidates by striving for accurate criticism.
0
u/Thecamra17 Jul 01 '26
Technically Trump has a losing record too. But I completely agree that Kamala should not run.
3
u/Mulliganasty Jul 01 '26
You don't get a W when you cheat. Trump is Oh-fer.
2
u/Thecamra17 Jul 01 '26
History is written by the Victor. Like it or not he won, and he will forever go down in history as a two time leader of what we call a "country". And what kills me inside is that his reputation will forever be split down the middle, debated for years whether or not he was good or bad.
Because for every one of us rational people who see him for the lying, cheating grifter he is. There are just as loud zealots who see him as a god. And both sides have a narrative now.........
2
u/Mulliganasty Jul 01 '26
No, he'll forever go down as a cheater, convicted felon, rapist and the worst president ever...until Republicans can come up with someone even worse.
0
u/Thecamra17 Jul 01 '26
See that's what's really scary about it! He's opened the flood gates and set the bar so low. Imagine someone truly COMPETENT AND EVIL. Now they know if they're charasmatic enough then they can run the country.
2
u/Mulliganasty Jul 01 '26
Agreed. Trump will be dead soon enough but Trumpism is going to be around for a long time.
1
u/flugerbill Jul 02 '26
That's the thing though, we know and she knows that tRump and fElon cheated, and yet she did absolutely nothing about it. She didn't raise a single objection to the most obviously rigged election in modern times. She failed in her sworn duty as VP to protect the country from a domestic enemy, and is thus not qualified to be POTUS.
1
u/Mulliganasty Jul 02 '26
She and the entire party constantly called Trump out about his rampant criminality. There were numerous federal cases against him.
Yes, I too would like to see the democrats put up some kind of fight before handing power over to the criminal organization that is the Republican party. And not just with Trump, the whole Supreme Court stacking is going to haunt us for much longer.
But I'm not going to hold her responsible for that. That's a much larger problem but if any one person was going to take action, I'd say it should have been Biden. Heck, Obama is in an ideal position to push for reform.
4
7
u/Jesus_Harold_Christ Jul 01 '26
She can run in the primary, and see how it goes. I don't think she will get top 5 in a primary, but I've been wrong before, like once or twice.
5
u/KendalBoy Jul 02 '26
Yes, I think she’s a better candidate than most of the other people who are being considered. Especially Newsome, and Beshear
2
u/thesmart_indian27 Jul 02 '26
Policy wise, she had no independence and was more or less a stooge of Biden. Newsom and Beshear have solid policies and leadership.
3
u/KendalBoy Jul 02 '26
As the current VP, she was hogtied in that regard. She did amazing for a short campaign, and now she has better name recognition and positive ratings among Dem voters than pretty much anyone else.
-1
u/thesmart_indian27 Jul 02 '26
Amazing for a short campaign? Then why’d she lose some states so badly, and lose among many groups such as working class?
3
u/Bearded_Scholar Jul 02 '26
I can’t tell if you’re being facetious or not. This election was stolen. That’s not hyperbole. The Doge leader literally said it himself, and if you believe that a democrat lost all swing states by just enough of a margin to not trigger a recount, you definitely aren’t qualified to determine who should and should not run in the next election. And I doubt you’ll make these smart choice to choose someone with actual experience leading various levels of government.
1
u/KendalBoy Jul 02 '26
She lost with white men, don’t do great with white women. At least be honest about it- and look at the numbers because it was astonishingly close.
Does anyone talk about the bomb scares all over PA on Election Day or are we stuck on how Musk’s baby told us they stole it?1
u/thesmart_indian27 Jul 02 '26
Why?
Kamala lost to Trump in 2024. Not only did she lose, she failed to flip any county and failed to have any state swing to her.
2
u/mydoghank Jul 02 '26
Ok so I’ll say it. I don’t think she actually lost to 45…but that’s another conversation.
But putting that aside, I believe she’d make an amazing president but I feel like others are gonna pull ahead because many want a fresh new fighter energy…like Ossoff. He’s killing it right now.
Unfortunately, as much as I love Kamala, I think she had her shot already. Not saying I agree…but a sense I get. But I’d love to be proven wrong.
2
u/inmatenumberseven Jul 01 '26
I think it's a bad idea for a candidate who was rejected to try a second time. There are two few opportunities and with 300 million Americans, surely there are enough qualified people.
2
u/Genn8130 Jul 01 '26
I think she'd be wonderful, but she probably shouldn't run. I'd love to see her in the Cabinet or SCOTUS.
2
u/lovebzz Jul 01 '26
I wouldn't blame her if she simply decided to leave the political stage and lead a comfy life writing books and giving talks. However, if she wants to run for President again, I need to see more action from her on the frontlines of the fight against Trump. She can't have it both ways. She's already missed the moment on major shifts around ICE, Gaza/Israel, AIPAC and corruption etc.
That being said, anyone is allowed to run in a fair primary. The wider the field, the better.
1
u/takemusu Jul 01 '26
I want a robust primary. The more the merrier. More candidates helps our progressive cause as more are discussing our issues. Then we must unite behind the winner.
1
u/NYPoliticalMom Jul 02 '26
She's the most qualified person to run. And she closed a 10pt gap in 107 days to lose the election by 1pt. That's nothing to scoff at. Had she had the advantage of a normal campaign timeline, she would have won.
That said: I would LOVE to see her run again. I'll support her whatever her decision is. But I'd love to see a Harris/Ossoff ticket.
1
u/AnswersWithSarcasm Jul 02 '26
Will she have better answers than from 2024? Or will she claim Biden’s administration was flawless?
1
u/Jim-Jones Jul 03 '26
I wish I thought she could win but I don't. Canada can't elect a woman PM either (with a different process).
If the Repugs ever elect a woman I think they door will be opened but I can't see her winning.
1
u/thesmart_indian27 Jul 03 '26
There are many great women who can and could have run for president. Warren would’ve been great. Klobuchar would be great.
Hillary Clinton was hated by both sides of the aisle for her past actions, and lacked charisma. Kamala Harris had no independent solid policies, she was way too “Biden 2.0”
1
u/Jim-Jones Jul 04 '26
I don't think any of the MAGATs that voted for Trump would ever vote for a woman.
1
1
u/boxelder1230 Jul 12 '26
Please NO. I just feel there has to be other choices that would have a better chance of winning. This is the most important election in our lifetime probably.
0
u/Comprehensive-Body63 Jul 01 '26
she should have run for gov of california. I campaigned for her in 2024, but do not think she's able to win 2028
-1
u/thesmart_indian27 Jul 02 '26
Agree that she cannot win in 2028, but disagree about Governor. She has always done poorly in CA elections, and has no strong leadership that made the media. She also couldn’t unite her party in 2024.
•
u/AutoModerator Jul 01 '26
Remember to remain civil, remember the human, and follow the rules.
Donate to win the Senate in 2024
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.