VP Harris Next Run California Governor or POTUS 2028

[ProfD]

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/11/25/kamala-harris-advisers-options-open-00191393

 

VP Kamala Harris is telling supporters not to count her out. She might have aspirations for higher office.

 

VP Harris may consider running for governor or California in 2026 or POTUS in 2028.  IMO, the former would be better than the latter.

 

Governor of California would be a better look for VP Harris especially if current Gov. Gavin Newsom is being groomed to run for POTUS in 2028.

 

Unless the United States becomes a banana republic, POTUS OJ will not be able to run again 4 years from now.  Nevermind that he will be 82 years old as well.

 

It's too early to tell whether or not America will be ready for a female POTUS in 2028.  .

 

Governor Harris is definitely a strong possibility in California.

[Chevdove]

6 hours ago, ProfD said:

 

 

Governor Harris is definitely a strong possibility in California.

 

Yes, probably. Wow! She's already talking about running again!?

Well, she did a good job, even though she did not win. 

 

[Pioneer1]

I actually think she DOES have a good chance of becoming Governor of California.
Infact, she should have done that BEFORE or INSTEAD of becoming Vice President

She probably could have walked straight from Governor's office into the Whitehouse skipping over the VP position.

 

[ProfD]

1 hour ago, Pioneer1 said:

I actually think she DOES have a good chance of becoming Governor of California.
Infact, she should have done that BEFORE or INSTEAD of becoming Vice President

She probably could have walked straight from Governor's office into the Whitehouse skipping over the VP position.

 

The liberal state of California would definitely give her a shot at Governor.

 

The red parts of patriarchal America aren't ready for a female POTUS yet.

[Pioneer1]

Lol...so you still think she lost because she's a woman, huh??

 

[ProfD]

37 minutes ago, Pioneer1 said:

Lol...so you still think she lost because she's a woman, huh??

That's a huge part of it. She didn't have any charm  or charisma either.

[richardmurray]

The problem with Kamala Harris is the simple problem of most elected officials in modernity. They are masters of the advertisement game. 

Look a certain way, say certain things, and that includes a schrumpf. 

You want to win elections with least money or campaigning simply be an effective elected official. I don't mean : the i made laws nonsense, the I am qualified nonsense, the I am a good person nonsense, the cater to a voting block nonsense. All said things are not effective elected official actions; they are campaigning tools. 

An elected official of high positive quality doesn't need to advertise a law they made, if the law truly betters people.

An elected official of high positive quality doesn't need to state or remind anyone of their background before elected office, what one should be judged on is their time in elected office. 

An elected official of high positive quality doesn't need to have character references or tout their character , laws are not made of character but purposes.

An elected official of high positive quality doesn't need to cater to a voting group, imagination plus truth is needed to make laws that aid all.

 

Kamala Harris was attorney general of california. During her time as attorney general did she do enough to cater all phenottypical/financial/linguistic/geographic groups or race sin california? She lost the presidency because she has never impressed policy wise as an elected official from her time as attorney general to now. 

 

[ProfD]

15 hours ago, richardmurray said:

Kamala Harris was attorney general of california. During her time as attorney general did she do enough to cater all phenottypical/financial/linguistic/geographic groups or race sin california? She lost the presidency because she has never impressed policy wise as an elected official from her time as attorney general to now.

Former POTUS Barack Obama won election as a junior senator from Illinois.  He didn't do anything remarkable policy-wise to help anyone.  His charisma and oratory ushered him into the White House twice. 

[richardmurray]

@ProfD exactly, I wish you had quoted the following as well

17 hours ago, richardmurray said:

They are masters of the advertisement game. 

Look a certain way, say certain things, and that includes a schrumpf. 

yes, Obama is a good advertisement man. But my point is that you can beat any advertisement campaigner with policy quality , if you have policy quality 

[Pioneer1]

20 hours ago, ProfD said:

That's a huge part of it. She didn't have any charm  or charisma either.

I think that's the MAJOR reason she lost the election.
Being a woman was a minor part.

It was a factor, but not a significant one in my opinion.

I often wonder is this how some White people feel when I hear them telling Black people
"It's not about race. That's not the problem."
or
"It's not because you're Black but because...."

They're swearing up and down that your race had nothing to do with it but it was your performance or some other issue, when you almost KNOW racism played a part.

Perhaps it played a PART...but not the MAJOR part...lol.

The same with Kamala losing the election.

I'm sure sexism played a PART in that many....perhaps hundreds of thousands if not millions...didn't want to see a woman president.
But many millions MORE actually did.
Sexism wasn't the biggest or major reason.

Like you said, it was her lack of charisma and ability to stir up enthusiasm among the voting population like Trump was able to.