Harris is miles better at articulating coherent arguments than her opponent, which is why the debate between Harris and Trump was entirely one sided. Having now seen Harris speak in full a couple of additional times, it’s clear she definitely has a lot of it rehearsed and is trying to recollect talking points. Not super unusual. Some issues she clearly knows better than others. Seems to me her worst moments are when she tries to say something “profound”, and it really isn’t. She’s much better on topics where she can come across more naturally. Still, when the other side is “they’re eating the dogs. they’re eating the cats”… I’m not sure we wanna go down that path as far comparing what gets said when teleprompters are off…
Those are two different situations. Republican leadership could not stop Trump because of the primary system which put it in the hands of voters. Although a lot of Bernie Sanders supporters believe that the Democratic powers hindered him in his run against Hillary Clinton. In this case, Harris was not the candidate because of voters. She was selected by Democratic Party leadership, and the deligates got in line behind that. I never said she slept her way to the top. You are projecting that onto my post. What I pointed out was that she had been Willie Brown’s girlfriend, which is a known fact, and that he promoted her candidacy. When the most powerful man in California Democratic politics promotes your candidacy, there’s a very high chance that you will be successful, regardless of whether you are the best candidate. When I read a number of the posts on TH, it reminds me of Don Quixote and his lady Dulcinea del Toboso. Dulcinea was a mere common peasant girl, but in Quixote’s mind he had built her up to be royalty, because chivalry required it. Any superlative he could think of, he attributed it to the Lady Dulcinea. That’s what I think is going on here. It seems to me that you all have taken a very common candidate and built her up in your minds into something she is not.