Harris Claims She Worked at McDonald's in College. Here's What We Know
U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris has repeatedly claimed that she worked at McDonald's while getting her undergraduate degree in the 1980s. This claim has been reported by multiple reputable news outlets, but aside from Harris' own testimony, there is no independent evidence such as a photo, employment record, or confirmation from a friend or family member to verify the story. Harris has invoked the alleged McDonald's work experience throughout her political career, including in a 2024 presidential campaign ad and during a 2024 appearance on "The Drew Barrymore Show." Other prominent Democrats, such as former President Bill Clinton, have also repeated the anecdote. However, some internet users have challenged the claim, with unverified reports that "McDonald's Corporate sources" have no record of Harris working at their locations. Snopes reached out to Harris' campaign and McDonald's headquarters seeking evidence to corroborate the claim, but as of the report's publication, no such proof has been uncovered. Without tangible evidence to independently confirm or debunk the story, Snopes has rated the claim "Research In Progress" as they continue to investigate.
Can they actually prove anyone worked at McDonalds that long ago? Aside from saving a pay stub for 40 years I don't see how one could prove or disprove such a thing, I doubt the company keeps records of every employee that far back.
She could have worked for a franchisee, too. If that was the case, a SMB owner is definitely not going to have those records after all this time
Assuming that franchise is still even open. How long does the US gov hold onto tax returns? The IRS says there's usually no need to keep them after 6 years. The best evidence they could find would probably be a coworker that corroborates the story or a photograph of Harris behind the counter working. The photo seems unlikely, and how many coworkers from 30 years ago do you remember?
The Social Security Administration has a record of every employer that's ever paid you and how much they paid you each year.
They have to for paying out social security.
So I actually tried this recently. Everything is done by paper and mail - even though I visited the office in person, they just mail it onwards.
Also, despite having an expected turnaround of six months officially, it turns out that wait times of multiple years are not uncommon once the request is submitted. So even if Harris submitted a request right now the election would be long over before she would have a copy of the records to prove it either way.
You're talking about applying.
I'm talking about getting your work history.
Can be done in pretty much the time it takes to sign into the website.
... for my work history.
Specifically, using SSA-7050-F4, https://www.ssa.gov/forms/ssa-7050.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9TwOUSn34I
Yes, me too!
Err, so from https://www.ssa.gov/forms/ssa-7050.html
I.e. you can create the account and view the info online pretty quick but it won't have the proof that you worked at McD back in the 80s or 90s.
I can't think of any way how I could proof the first job I had during school in the late 90's. I was working in a restaurant kitchen, peeling potatoes and stuff. You don't take photos there or keep name tags or other keepsakes. It was a shitty job, you want to forget about it, as soon as you left the premises.
Kamala Harris' job is even longer ago. 40 years is a long time to keep paystubs or something. There were no camera phones back then, no digital footprint you could recreate. That she can't produce any proof, doesn't proof anything.
Also, and possibly more importantly…
…WHo FuKinG CArES?!?
60 comments in this thread. And snopes looking it up. So seems some people do.
Shit!
She coulda had @UniversalMonk@lemmy.world’s vote if only she [had|hadn’t] worked at McDonald’s
😞😭
Ah, the arrogance of the establishment!
See this brothers and sisters?! They think that by mocking and belittling those who dare to challenge their broken system, they can shame us into submission.
But they forget that ridicule only fuels the fire of our resolve.
Keep sneering, if you must, but know that every insult you hurl only strengthens our determination to stand against your candidate and the corrupt system they uphold.
How many people do ya think will change their minds and start voting for your candidate if you keep mocking and making fun of them? Hmmmm?
Gosh. I’m such an asshole…
I wouldn’t call you that, as I respect everyone’s right to their opinions.
But it’s hard to take someone seriously when they resort to mocking and belittling others to make their point.
There’s a better way to have these discussions, one that doesn’t rely on tearing others down.
I’m sorry my crass comment made you feel belittled.
What can I do to make it up to you?
No need for apologies or making it up to me. I’m more interested in a genuine conversation where we respect each other’s views, even if we don’t agree. Sarcasm doesn’t really add much to that.
Sure.
So besides employment history at McDonald’s, what positions are most important to you in a presidential candidate?
As I previously noted, her McDonalds history has no bearing on whether I vote her or not. So not sure why you keep circling back. I merely noted that with the reply count in this thread, and the fact that Snopes is looking into is shows that some people are indeed interested in it.
But was there something that I said that made you think I am interested in it? Because I am not.
But I will answer your question in good faith, even if you were not asking in good faith. The most important positions for me in a presidential candidate are:
Workers' Rights: I want a candidate who truly fights for workers, ensuring fair wages, strong labor unions, and protections against corporate exploitation. Neither Harris nor Trump have shown real commitment to these values. Harris has a history of corporate-friendly policies, and Trump’s track record includes reducing labor protections.
Anti-Corporate Influence: A candidate who's serious about reducing the influence of money in politics and breaking up the corporate stranglehold on our government. Both Harris and Trump are deeply tied to corporate interests. I question their ability to prioritize the needs of the people over profits.
Peace and Anti-Militarism: I need a candidate committed to ending endless wars and the military-industrial complex. Harris and Trump both support military interventions and have shown little interest in scaling back America’s aggressive foreign policy.
Climate Justice: A leader who understands that addressing climate change requires big systemic change, not just incremental policies. Trump’s outright denial of climate science and Harris’s support for market-based solutions that favor big business over real environmental progress are both unacceptable to me.
Social Justice: I look for a candidate who truly fights for racial, economic, and gender justice. Harris’s record as a prosecutor raises concerns about her commitment to reform, and Trump’s divisive rhetoric and policies are clearly against the principles of equality and justice.
:)
This is a little weird. Even in this day old thread it seems someone is watching us…😳
I definitely agree with you on one or more of those positions.
I watched Matewan for the first time today in recognition of Labor Day here in the US.
Have you seen it?
I'm not sure I understand what you mean by that, can you clarify a bit?
I have not. Never heard of it until you mentioned it and I looked it up on Wikipedia just now. How did I not know about this movie?! I will watch it tonight. Thank you for that! Looks super interesting and right up my alley.
Social security records.
90s is nothing, a normal person could get it in a month, one of her aids could probably get it in an hour.
Does it matter tho?
Eh, it would be fucked up if she just flat out lied, but it's hard to imagine she would lie about that.
If she proves it tho, they'll make a new stupid claim and if she doesn't prove it they'll use this as evidence that she would prove it if it wasn't true.
How to know when OP is unhinged and divisive:
People are agreeing with givesomefucks, who often gets down voted for unpopular views.
Seems pretty ridiculous to judge the validity of an argument based on whether people agree with a particular commenter or not.
Ideas should be evaluated on their own merit, not dismissed because of who supports or opposes them.
This kind of thinking only stifles discussion and perpetuates division, which is exactly what we should be avoiding if we're serious about finding solutions. Let’s focus on the content of the conversation, not the personalities involved.