Trump and his allies had a plan for how to hit Harris. Then he opened his mouth.

girlfreddy@lemmy.ca to News@lemmy.world – 320 points –
politico.com

“They don’t have a narrative that they’re comfortable with about how to take down Harris,” said Chuck Coughlin, an Arizona-based political strategist. “He’s grasping around. I think he’s desperately grasping around with his instincts. I don’t think his team has any way to put their handle on this, and so he’s instinctually grasping around for what to say.”

The Trump machine had in recent days begun a multi-million-dollar TV advertising blitz hammering Harris for her record on the border, an issue the former president’s campaign sees as a winner — and portraying her as ideologically out of the mainstream. One ad from a pro-Trump group labeled the vice president a “dangerous San Francisco liberal.”

Harris had even begun defending herself from the attacks, hitting back Tuesday night in Atlanta about her border record, and simultaneously releasing a nearly minute-long video framing her as pro-border security.

But Trump’s comments Wednesday on Harris’ racial background drew some of the biggest gasps from the audience, and provided Democrats with ammunition. During the appearance, Trump said Harris “happen[ed] to turn Black … She was Indian all the way and all of a sudden she made a turn and she became a Black woman.”

57

You are viewing a single comment

All they gotta do is remind everybody how many non violent drug offenders she sent to the living hell that is the CDCR. I despise Harris for that because I have been incarcerated for non violent drug offenses and I despise anybody who could possibly live with themselves after doing that to anybody. I'm not voting for Trump either mind you.

While I respect that this is an emotional issue for you, I want to remind you that an AG has a duty to enforce the law as it is. Harris did not choose to make non-violent drug offences a crime. There are laws, and sometimes those laws are bad, but an AG is not a king who can simply strike down any laws they disagree with.

The AG can choose not to enforce the law or give lax sentences and plea deals.

You gotta do something sometimes to keep up appearances, but you definitely don't have to go full throttle either.

And that's exactly what she did. She frequently pushed for diversion instead of incarceration, declined to seek the death penalty even in the case of a cop killer, and created a program to give young offenders job training instead of jail time (including clearing their criminal records so they could seek jobs without being marked as felons).

Her record isn't perfect. No one's is. You're never going to get to vote for an angel. But as former prosecutors go, she basically did all the things you're asking for.

I actually know nothing about her, I was just replying to your reply basically saying she had to enforce the law to the person saying she went too far.

If she did what I said as much as she could then that's great

Guy who knows nothing about Kamala Harris accuses her of going "full-throttle" against non-violent offenders...

Propaganda is a hell of a thing. Makes people say stupid shit they don't know anything about.

The first person did. Then the 2nd guy replied she had to.

Edit: The 2nd person could have said she actually did do what she could and what I said in their initial reply, but didn't. They just said she had to which isn't (and supposedly wasnt) true

Edit: and my reply to be clear was what I DID know about. The AG does not need to enforce the law on every person. They have discretion and can influence to some extent other DA's and the police.

Just so you know, the AG doesn't have the liberty to just not enforce the law. She really didn't have a choice here, the law wasn't justified, but her job was to uphold the law. If someone committed a nonviolent drug offense, and the DA in that jurisdiction wanted to prosecute, she didn't have the power to stop it just because she disagrees with the law. That would be impeachable.

What decisions her job did allow her to make were more progressive than any of her predecessors or peers. For an AG, she was actually a damn good example. She wasn't perfect, and she was part of a deeply flawed system, but she wasn't a villain. She was fighting a war on drugs or demanding military-like powers for police forces like some AGs do...

She has been outspoken about drug decriminalization and legalization, and prison reform, and lighter sentencing, and rehabilitation, and harm reduction, and police reform, and pretty much everything that needs to happen to meaningfully improve the world the way you want it to improve.

As a senator, her voting record was closer to Bernie Sanders' record than any other Senator. She endorses strong social safety nets, and universal healthcare.

But go ahead and sit out the vote because someone online told you "ACAB includes Kamala Harris because she called herself a cop while AG". If Trump wins you don't need need to worry about voting again anyway, he'll have it all fixed.

You are absolutely correct but unfortunately this is the best we can do. She's inarguably better than Trump and Biden

Correct about what? Show me even one receipt of her endorsing harsh penalties for nonviolent offenders.

Bullcrap. Can't do the time, don't do the crime. I knew the risks and I don't blame anyone else for the time I did when I got busted. I agree the laws are wrong but it is delusional to blame anyone other than yourself when you knew what the risks and penalties were.

Don't downvote this guy just because he has an opinion contrary to the rest of the thread, okay?

Maybe try not committing crimes? 🤷🏽‍♂️

Fuck you. If I want to non violently enjoy the fruits of life. I will.

Don’t get mad that crimes have consequences. You knew the risks. I don’t agree that non violent drug crimes should have jail time but that is the law. If you don’t want the time, don’t do the crime as the saying goes.

To be fair though, you knew the consequences of doing drugs. Blaming someone for you getting in trouble for something you knew was illegal is pretty weak.

Now, is the law shit, yes. Does it need changed yes.

1 more...
2 more...