Milquetoast uninspiring leader should still beat someone who outright hates everything about our country, divides rather than leads, and plans to sell our institutions for scrap value while putting the proceeds in his own pocket.

Although I think the people blaming it on racism are hopeful. The real answer is that it struck a chord with people who do not want women in leadership positions.

I remember reading an article when Harris was nominated, about how it was set up to be a "historic moment". Indeed, it was.

▲

fakedang 2 days ago | parent [-]

It was historic in the sense that there were no primaries, and that she was chosen by an embittered Biden to precisely result in this outcome.

▲

mindslight 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

I hadn't heard that motive specifically, care to send any links that substantiate it?

(to be clear, the article was of course using "historic" in the sense of the DEI groupthink - since there's no way Trump could win then won't it be super historic to have a Black woman president)

(and disclaimer: criticism of DEI virtue signalling is in no way an endorsement of Maggot vice signalling)

	▲	fakedang 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		https://edition.cnn.com/2024/08/15/politics/joe-biden-legacy... This was not a move by Biden to position Kamala for a loss, but he certainly did not want Pelosi and the Democratic establishment to gloat on a win. Which is why he immediately endorsed Kamala for the presidency, right after announcing he was stepping down from the race. > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O9fSK2AR594 Pelosi suggested there should have been an open primary after Biden dropped out. But Biden's endorsement ensured that they could not backtrack from Harris.

▲

red-iron-pine 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

chosen by an embittered Biden? what kind of crazy hot take is this?

she was the VP of the US and 2nd in line for the presidency and had been hand picked for her role previously.

she was a incredibly obvious choice and would have had a very strong likelihood of getting the nod had there been actual primaries.

	▲	fakedang 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		> she was the VP of the US and 2nd in line for the presidency and had been hand picked for her role previously. https://edition.cnn.com/2024/08/15/politics/joe-biden-legacy... Selection as VP doesn't mean by default that the running candidate/party endorses the candidate. Most often, VPs are chosen because they are harmless enough to become opposition to them, as a concession to a former opponent, or in most cases to bridge the demographic gap and reach out to a particularly marginalized segment of voters who are not adequately represented in governance. > she was a incredibly obvious choice and would have had a very strong likelihood of getting the nod had there been actual primaries. Lol, hell no. She already lost the primaries multiple times. She was extremely unpopular. In the 2020 elections, running with Biden helped boost her profile slightly, but back then Biden was a much more stronger candidate and his choice of running mate wouldn't have mattered - Trump was extremely unpopular then.