Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
August 14, 2020

Why Has Joe Biden Chosen Kamala Harris?

Can anyone explain to me why Joe Biden selected Kamala Harris as running mate?

I find nothing that makes her an attractive candidate:

  • We just had a summer during which Democrats applauded to Black Live Matters and cheered anti-police riots. Harris has the well deserved (vid) reputation of being a hard line prosecutor and is unlikely to be sympathetic to the issue. Stocks of private prison companies went up when Harris was confirmed as vice president candidate.
  • Harris comes from California. She will not attract critical swing state voters.
  • Her campaign during the primaries was chaotic. She polled at some 2%, about the worst number of all candidates.
  • She has little governing and zero foreign policy experience. As Joe Biden has obviously (vid) mental problems a more experienced potential replacement would have been more assuring.
  • Kamala means "horrible, terrible" in Finnish.

In my view the choice of Harris as VP candidate increases the already high chance that Biden will lose the presidential election.

So what was the real reason for this choice?


The Wall Street Journal headline hints to a potential answer but my hunch is that there is more to it.

Posted by b on August 14, 2020 at 17:10 UTC | Permalink

next page »

She was chosen because she's a pro-capitalist (anti-communist) black woman.

It's a myth the "moderates" or "center-" are not ideological. They are very ideological. The only difference is that it is part of their ideology to use an anti-ideological rhetoric.

Posted by: vk | Aug 14 2020 17:16 utc | 1

Easy. To scoop the black vote.

Posted by: Arch Bungle | Aug 14 2020 17:19 utc | 2

To serve Trump the second presidency in a silver plate...

Posted by: H.Schmatz | Aug 14 2020 17:23 utc | 3

She's not popular among California voters, but their electoral college votes are already locked for the Democrats. She represents the Machine in California, Big Oil, Big Wine, Big Tech, Big Money.

Posted by: Linda Wood | Aug 14 2020 17:27 utc | 4

I kind of thought he had boxed himself in, by promising to choose a black woman. The only two Democrats with a current national profile were Harris and Susan Rice, both with major liabilities, to say the least. What an inspiring, uplifting process a US election is!

Posted by: expat | Aug 14 2020 17:32 utc | 5

Just to refresh your memories: Bernie Sanders only lost the primaries last year because the African-American faction of the party gave Biden the Deep South on a silver plate (with behind-the-scenes negotiations). Kamala's nomination for the ticket may have been part of the deal.

But then, you may be asking: why the black vote?

The USA has a theory - which is ingrained in their collective consciousness - that it is a classless society. This has its origins in its colonization system. So, to explain every inequality in the country, they use the genetic argument: that either the individual has an inferior intellect and/or athleticism; or that the individual is of an inferior/superior race. Since every slave in the USA was black, the race narrative ossified among these lines over the centuries (the old division between whites and white trash falling into disuse).

So, in order to eliminate the threat of socialism/communism, modern (post-1917) Americans prefer to absorb the blow of a postmodern conflict (blacks vs whites; heterosexuals vs LGBT; men vs women) in order to keep a divide et impera scenario than to risk the very extinction of the American Empire through a communist revolution. In this sense, the DNC is willing to risk losing with a Veep from California with less than 2% of the vote than to go socialist.

Posted by: vk | Aug 14 2020 17:33 utc | 6

You are asking the wrong question.
Why do you assume it was Biden's choice?

The agency sits with the "donocrats" party leadership, which means the donors.
Biden is just the hood ornament.

Pelosi control the party because the donor money is largely channeled through them.
Hence, we should assume Harris was the Donors' Choice.

So the question becomes, what does Harris offer to the donors that the others did not?

VP is not a post that will immediately be able to deliver payback. Harris is a contingency (to Biden being unable, or unmanageable) but primarily a sponsored bid for 2024. The party leadership themselves, and the Obama and Clinton factions, were waiting for the primaries to reveal the Next Big Hope for a qualified Judas Goat. Obama (black) succeeded, Clinton (female) failed, but the donocrats have convinced themselves that Trump was a fluke, and tried to convince everybody else it was actually Putin. PeteB, Harris etc. auditioned for the 2024 slot with long-shot runs for 2020. The voters did not buy it, but then, the voters do not count as long as donor money appears to buy the elections anyway. Harris is the self-made "Black Hillary" bet (female, black). Her liabilities and strengths with voters are similar in structure, minus Bill Clinton aside, and decades of reputation/record.

If any of the goatlets had succeeded in the 2020 Monty Hall primaries, Biden would have been dropped overnight. But failure to overcome establishment (Biden, Clyburn) does not disqualify from the long-term. It just means additional grooming is needed. Pelosi and her paymasters are betting on Harris. Biden is there Last Best Hope for 2020, because the alternative might have been Sanders.

Posted by: b. | Aug 14 2020 17:41 utc | 7

There is a theory that Democratic mandarins behind the scenes from the Clintons, Obama’s and deep Dem establishment power brokers like ex-Senator Chris Dodd who headed up the VP Selection Committee wanted someone who checked a lot of boxes (woman, black) as well as moderate and most importantly pliable.

The consensus behind the scenes is that Biden is pretty much a cipher and while his Chief of Staff and others around him (like a Sec of State) can be expected to wield enormous power, given the likelihood that Biden likely to depart one way of the other from the office, the VP position is critical to Executive Power and needs to be someone who can be molded.

Susan Rice was another likely candidate but she is a strong personality with her own views; Harris is more controllable. Harris also has that fake laugh and faux jovial personality that Dems love in their candidates since apparently no one who flashes smiles every 10 seconds can do anything bad. Harris in thus very marketable to Dems.

The media can also be expected to build up Harris

Posted by: Ludwig | Aug 14 2020 17:47 utc | 8

That Wall Street Journal headline is certainly accurate as far as it goes.

Harris is rightist, in vein of Hillary Clinton, and unlike Hillary, Harris has a rightwing, frankly racist, record as a prosecutor in first San Francisco, and then as Attorney General of California.

Back to the Wall Street thing, she refused to use California law to prosecute Steve Mnunchin's bank. He's now Trump's Treasury Secretary.

Months ago, the World Socialist Website (WSWS dot org) predicted Biden would likely pick Harris.

Posted by: Jay | Aug 14 2020 17:49 utc | 9

Oh, for God's sake, VP candidates are almost never chosen to bring support. If they have independent support, they are threats. And if they are opponents with support they are even more of a threat. In this case, Harris is a corporate liberal hack, which Biden is. Choosing her for that is Biden affirming the value of his own politics, the sincerest form of flattery, imitation. But, as the OP notes, Harris did even worse than Biden, which also makes him feel superior. Bush senior, blue blood with a heavy resume, Quayle, blue blood but lightweight. Clinton, smooth southern corporate liberal, Gore southern corporate liberal but stiff as a board. Bush lite, right wing good old boy not sweating it, Cheney right wing nerd sweating bullets. Obama, charismatic corporate liberal, Biden anticharismatic corporate liberal. Trump, colorful fraud and hypocrite and ideologically nuts, Pence colorless fraud and hypocrite and ideologically nuts. Going back further, Nixon, complex ideologically driven right wing fraud and crook, Agnew, simple minded ideologically driven right wing fraud and incompetent crook. LBJ, politically savvy liberal, Humphrey, politically obtuse liberal.

This rule doesn't work well for Reagan/Bush, but Reagan was always something of an actor playing president and Bush was always a player in a way most VPs aren't. And it doesn't work well for Kennedy/Johnson either. Maybe Kennedy got laid so much he didn't feel threatened by anybody, not even a VP? In any case, no rule for human affairs is perfect.

Posted by: steven t johnson | Aug 14 2020 17:49 utc | 10

I agree with all of the above, but understanding that the role of the Democratic Party as the defender of the ruling class from the left pretty much describes our duopoly.

Narratives such as imperial feminism and people of color breaking the glass ceiling are instrumental in mollifying liberals, and enraging the right. You get a two-fer, as you misdirect the could be left, and divide the provide a wedge of identity politics. Reporter Rania Khalek has website called Soapbox that is entertaining as well as informative. Here is one of her bits on Imperial Feminism.

Posted by: Michael | Aug 14 2020 17:50 utc | 11

A psychopathic whore,especially for bankers.
A match made in hell.

Posted by: winston2 | Aug 14 2020 17:53 utc | 12

"Can anyone explain to me why Joe Biden selected Kamala Harris as running mate?"

Because the Dims are certain they will win this time, so it doesn't really matter who Biden's running mate is. Since the disaster in 2016, the Dims and their backers in the misnamed "intelligence community" know that the voters have become unpredictable and cannot be trusted, so they will take no chances this time. It is highly unlikely that Trump's support will be sufficient to override the preparations that will be made for November like AMLO's supporters did in Mexico in 2018.

Posted by: William Gruff | Aug 14 2020 17:55 utc | 13

@Arch Bungle (2):

Not true of younger voters of colour--or younger voters at all. She has a really bad record for putting people in prison in California for minor drug charges.

Posted by: Jay | Aug 14 2020 17:55 utc | 14

@ Posted by: William Gruff | Aug 14 2020 17:55 utc | 13

Could be a desperate, improvised move to stop Bernie Sanders.


@ Posted by: steven t johnson | Aug 14 2020 17:49 utc | 10

Yes, Veeps are historically unimportant in American history - except as an indicative of succession (i.e. the veep of today will be the POTUS of tomorrow).

But your examples are relevant exceptions. Johnson murdered Kennedy and then became elected. It is not expected that Biden survives his mandate if he wins; in that case, the African-American faction of the DNC may have essentially sold Bernie out in exchange for a realistic shot at the first black woman POTUS (even if through the back door).

Posted by: vk | Aug 14 2020 18:02 utc | 15

vk @16

Agreed. If it was about winning honestly they would run with Sanders. The Dimocrats don't have to win honestly though, unless the empire's oligarchs want it that way for their own entertainment.

Posted by: William Gruff | Aug 14 2020 18:11 utc | 16

Trump appears to be losing in the polls. Why did she get picked for VP? Precisely because of her lack of experience governing, the usual suspects will be able to control her easily. They assume Biden won’t really govern and maybe not even be in office very long.

Posted by: Oscar Romero | Aug 14 2020 18:15 utc | 17

Has she mentioned reparations yet?

Posted by: dh | Aug 14 2020 18:17 utc | 18

It's very simple b. The "Donor Class" that controls the D-Party chose Biden then chose Harris. Here's what a D-Party member independent of the Donor Class had to say about the DNC Platform in a nutshell--It's immoral:

"'I believe that moving away from a profit-based healthcare system is the moral issue of our time. And in the final analysis, because of that belief, I could not vote for a platform that lacks a clear statement supporting Medicare for All.'"

Now Medicare isn't perfect by any means as I well know as I'm in the process on enrolling since I turn 65 in November, but it's certainly better than the nothing millions of Americans have as their "common defence" the Constitution says the government ought to provide to We The People. But the Neoliberal Donor Class will have none of that. And the DNC, Biden, Harris, and too many others besides most R-Party people are in the employ of that Class, which is why the common folks's needs are NEVER Addressed.

So b, once again the common folk had no say in who would become the D-Party's candidates or what their Platform would consist of--just like 2000, 2004, 2008, 2012, 2016, and likely much earlier than 2000. The last presidential election that was actually "fought" was 1992 when Perot derailed the CIA's main candidate and seated its second choice--Clinton.

The big question IMO is: Will Biden differ any from Trump? The second big question IMO: How long will the clearly demented Biden remain in office before he abdicates and Harris become POTUS and names Hillary Clinton VEEP? Biden endorses the Outlaw US Empire's #1 policy goal, so that policy won't be altered, although domestically he'll be softer, meaning less overtly tyrannical. IMO, Harris isn't qualified to teach school let alone be an administrator in any capacity--sorta like Dan Quayle. The economic crisis caused by the Donor Class will continue or may have finally blown up prior to the election as it might.

Then there's the issue of Trump's behavior showing he wants to void the election. Maybe he'll use National Security as the reason and invoke the power Congress gave Bush after 911 as his authority--that's entirely plausible. IMO, the Donor Class will instruct Trump to delay the election on the grounds I supplied above as a test to see just how much they can get away with. Remember b, the Outlaw US Empire is run by a Duopoly, which itself is run by a "Politburo" of the Donor Class mostly consisting of the Rentiers, which also includes some very old money and industrialists.

Posted by: karlof1 | Aug 14 2020 18:17 utc | 19

Couldn't resist the Trumpery?

"Obama (black) succeeded, Clinton (female) failed, but the donocrats have convinced themselves that Trump was a fluke, and tried to convince everybody else it was actually Putin. PeteB, Harris etc. auditioned for the 2024 slot with long-shot runs for 2020. The voters did not buy it, but then, the voters do not count as long as donor money appears to buy the elections anyway. Harris is the self-made 'Black Hillary' bet (female, black). Her liabilities and strengths with voters are similar in structure, minus Bill Clinton aside, and decades of reputation/record.

If any of the goatlets had succeeded in the 2020 Monty Hall primaries, Biden would have been dropped overnight. But failure to overcome establishment (Biden, Clyburn) does not disqualify from the long-term."

The big lie that Trump won the popular vote doesn't mean that his smarts won the EC game, which claim is just kissing Trump's ass. The inistence the fluke was Putin's doing, is about criticizing Trump from the right, while not criticizing the EC (much less abolishing it.) The voters didn't buy Warren, Harris, Booker, etc., ever. But they did buy Sanders and Buttigieg (though pretending Buttigieg didn't win is a kind of making up for the continued BS about how Trump won, I suppose, and gratifying to the homophobes.) Most of all of course, they mostly didn't buy Biden, who contrary to fact and the comment, wasn't dropped like a hot potato. Biden's "victory" in a conservative state Democrats probably have no chance of winning, but whose right-wing Democrats still prefer a loser like Biden to a socialist or a homosexual (even if a fellow conservative.)

How anyone can get so much wrong, 180 degrees wrong even, in just six sentences? Trump worship, denied, but still deranging the thinking.

Posted by: steven t johnson | Aug 14 2020 18:21 utc | 20

California tech titans and their money.
Identitarian (BOTH African-American and Asian-American) plus female.

The fact that she is such a loser is a bonus:
Couldn't take down Kavanaugh or Barr in Senate.
Couldn't handle the Dem debates (Tulsi smacked her down good)

Then there's the future: Michelle Obama doesn't want an experienced Veep as a presidential competitor in 2024.

And apparently Friend of Biden family.

The fact that choosing her as Veep dropped betting odds 6% (from 42% to 48% Trump win), well, minor detail.

Posted by: c1ue | Aug 14 2020 18:21 utc | 21

At some point during debate season last year, I got the sense that Harris was actually meant to be the anointed one – that the power centers had signed off on her as reliable on the plutocracy, the empire, surveillance, etc., and they liked the identitarian package of First Woman and second First Black President.

Then her campaign collapsed before a vote was cast, but these are not people known for modifying their views to fit reality, so there she was on the ash heap looking as good as ever through their troll splinters, and here we are.

Posted by: David G | Aug 14 2020 18:22 utc | 22

The ignorance on display here about the importance of the vice presidential choice throughout US History is staggering. WTF do you think the term Balancing the Ticket means?!?

Posted by: karlof1 | Aug 14 2020 18:24 utc | 23

"b" moots question: "So what was the real reason for this choice?"
I'd say it's fear of pitch-forks afoot in an arena of delusional richphucks...

Yeah, the senile prevert and the house N (i donawanna be crude, but she is, just as O-bummer was/is) will probably lose. If they count fair...

The idea seems to to be to dispute the outcome, not to attempt to "win". "They" fear the election, fear the crowd. This fear is, I think, well grounded in truth, as History suggests. Ahem...


Meantime the Franklin essay is worth re-reading.How the Fascists Won World War II (counterpunch) Thanks to Dr K.

Posted by: Walter | Aug 14 2020 18:27 utc | 24

The issue of Kamala Harris's "competence" is absurd. How competent was George W. Bush, hm? Didn't matter, he did what he was told, end of story. She's diversity eye candy, and will gladly do whatever her wealthy patrons want her do, while saying whatever sounds good at the time.

Posted by: TG | Aug 14 2020 18:30 utc | 25

Kamala wasn't at the coverup meeting on inauguration day - everyone else was and Susan Rice wrote the cover up note.

Posted by: Michael Droy | Aug 14 2020 18:31 utc | 26

Posted by: Arch Bungle | Aug 14 2020 17:19 utc | 2

Blacks vote overwhelmingly (90% plus) Democrat in national elections. Unless the candidate or running mate is a Grand Wizard of the KKK the black vote is secure. Even then I'm not so sure. Remember Robert Bryd?

Posted by: One Too Many | Aug 14 2020 18:34 utc | 27

The candidates have to be 100% loyal the orthodoxies of national policy, that goes without saying.

Democratic party strategy is to arrange the closest thing possible to recreating the successful formula of 2008. For this all to work, the election has to be a referendum on Trump, just as 2008 was a referendum on Bush. If the covid disaster continues, I think it will work.

The progressive-left doesn't matter at all in this calculus. This is about keeping the centrist CNN-watching Democrat base motivated and willing to vote in large numbers in a handful of key states. For these Democratic voters, having a woman and person-of-color, plus a healthy dose of advertising, is theoretically sufficient to counterbalance Biden's long Senate record of collaborating with Republicans and going against modern Democratic positions on nearly every point of social policy. IMO foreign policy doesn't count for anything nowadays in US national elections, unless it can be sold as a 'pocketbook issue', as Trump did successfully in 2016.

As for why Harris in particular over the other "finalists"? Don't know. Maybe she had the best name recognition, was a Senator, and most non-threatening to a combination of voters and big$ sponsors. Susan Rice, who was probably the other plausible option because she was in the Obama administration, was also perhaps vulnerable to accusations of being involved in the Obama administration starting investigations into the incoming Trump administration. Or maybe Harris had better behind-the-scenes corporate sponsors than Rice or the others.

Posted by: ptb | Aug 14 2020 18:36 utc | 28

1) It was more or less compulsory to choose a Black woman.
2) The democratic party establishment wanted someone who would
reliably do what they wanted.

Posted by: Nick Patterson | Aug 14 2020 18:37 utc | 29

Makes sense, they couldn't get Hillary in through the front door so the'll bring her in through the back. If Trump is unable to start a war (which is unlikely with the seizure of Iran's oil tankers) then Biden is in. With Biden winning the next action will be to get him declared incompetent and have Harris take over. With Harris "in charge" she will need a vice president, and guess who.

Posted by: Tobi | Aug 14 2020 18:46 utc | 30

Democrats are a very weak party with incredibly thin ranks of contenders. Biden is proof. Who in their right mind would stand a decrepit empty suit with no results to show for 40 years in the Senate? Most people don’t even think he’ll be around to run for a second term.

Given their thin bench, Harris was the least worst choice. Her strengths would have been seen as: centrist, articulate, black women who is an experienced campaigner and reasonably telegenic. The black attribute cannot be underemphasized, because many attribute Hillary’s loss to black voters sitting it out, notably in Milwaukee, which was chosen as site of the Dem convention Precisely as a way to boost the black vote in Wisconsin.

Another leading choice, Susan Rice, had little to offer besides foreign policy experience as a warmonger going—IOW a black, female, mini-Biden.

Warren, per Biden, would have been too old and too progressive and not attractive to black voters.

Widmer is a virtual unknown, elected governor only in 2018. She might have delivered Michigan, but not black voters.

The list of choices shows just how weak the Democratic bench is. Nobody but Warren has a reasonable track record and suitable experience.

Beyond the short list, Castro has a track record at the federal level and as a mayor. As a Hispanic, he might have been able to deliver Texas, but that would have required a massive voter registration drive among Hispanics in south Texas, a group the Democrats have willfully ignored and neglected since Lyndon Johnson. Democrats chose instead to concede Texas without a fight.

Of the rest of the primary contenders, Klobuchar was too close to the police. Buttigieg was an empty suit with no real base but gays. Sanders was anathema for constantly reminding Democrats of their shameful betrayal of FDR’s New Deal, the legacy that still keeps many blind loyalists in the party.

Instead of developing their farm system the Democratic leadership is just a bunch of corrupt, senescent septuagenarians determined to hold onto their partisan power until the grave. Developing an attractive, competent group of future contenders is just too threatening. Fortunately, the Squad has taken them on and is extirpating the leadership one by one, though not fast enough.

Posted by: JohnH | Aug 14 2020 18:48 utc | 31

Biden just needed to beat bernie, if he can beat trump that will be a bonus for d3ms. If not

Posted by: Bob | Aug 14 2020 18:54 utc | 32

"She was chosen because she's a pro-capitalist (anti-communist) black woman." ( vk | 17:16 utc | 1)

Yea, and being black she is as un-black as possible. But anyway, even a broom would win against Tronald, provided his name is not Hillary - provided that the election procedure takes place as usual...

Posted by: pnyx | Aug 14 2020 18:54 utc | 33

Pro corporate class is always a prerequisite of any candidate, so it has to be for a secondary reason. They picked Harris because they want to pick up some of the disenfranchised Bernie Sanders vote with a person of color. Campaign was afraid they would have aliened too many of them to the point they would boycott or protest vote with the greens.

Posted by: One Too Many | Aug 14 2020 18:54 utc | 34

The Donor Class is dominated by a certain tribe. This tribe is on the one hand pushing the "browning" of America at full speed but on the other hand is starting to worry that all these new brown Americans might not be as enthusiastic in their support of Neoliberal economics and in support of the Zionist project as white Americans have been for the past 60 years. So this tribe needs a person of color who they have confidence will support their tribal interests. This way if anyone attempts to resist Harris, this resistance will be labelled racist. Harris' husband is a prominent member of this tribe. The Donor Class' biggest fear is that The Squad will take over at some point. The Squad vs. The Tribe is going to be the fault line of American politics in the coming years.

Posted by: Working Class Nero | Aug 14 2020 19:10 utc | 35

So I learned that Kamela Harris undergraduate work was in political science and economics.

The sigh from Wall Street is because Harris is a private finance supporter. Her father was an economist and so the (private finance = good) koolaid drinking runs deep.

I notice that none have mentioned that her mother is from India originally and having India ties in the White House while at war with China would be seen as a plus, no?

Posted by: psychohistorian | Aug 14 2020 19:11 utc | 36

I agree with b that the selection of Horrible Harris most definitely gives me a gut feeling that Trump is going to win this one. Of course I could also say why I think the Democrats chose Harris - they're too focused on selecting someone that Trump couldn't fault with the commie/anti-police sticker.
Generally, we have resign ourselves to the fact that whether it's Biden or Trump, this USA is going to get a lot worse before it has any chance to get better. So that makes me make other projections: what is better, a path where Trump is re-elected, social unrest and general federal incompetence continues, international alliances unravel at an even faster pace, disasters and a possible repeat virus strikes with impunity? Or a corporatist Biden, which throws some morsels to the peasants yet continues the growing inequality, misdirects social unrest, likely starts another war and is unable to finish even one, mushrooms the military budget and deficit, yet slows down the isolation of American illusion from its allies? In all this, I hope for that which causes least human loss of life in the rest of the world, and (unfortunately) the most human loss. As well as the most abject poverty, human loss and conflict inside the USA, for a continuing and undeniable humiliation like the Soviets had to endure post-1991, or the Germans post-WW2, is what that nation needs.
And the fastest way to that, is, unfortunately, now most likely - the Trump way.

Posted by: Josh | Aug 14 2020 19:14 utc | 37

"Why Has Joe Biden Chosen Kamala Harris?"

Good question, b I dunno either. First off before I starts ranting...

I have no love for Trump and the Democratic party. I decided not to cast my mail-in ballots except local and tax issues. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein in 2016. I predict Trump win - a replayed of 2016 election. As much as I despise Trump, his evils deed plus his religious stunt across the WH in front of St. John’s Church American will vote for him. Regardless his racist attacks, most Chinese Americans will votes for him. Note how Trump and Pompeo switch from Chinese to Communist in their daily bashing. He still needs black and Asian minority’s votes to win. When politicians invoke god - I can’t believe it.

Even my ABC (American born Chinese) nieces and nephews and brother (Ozzie) still dun believes Trump is a racist.. Wait till McCarthysim reached their doorsteps will they realize how stoopid they were. I truly expect another replayed - WW2 Japanese interment camps all over California and sized private properties too.

Posted by: JC | Aug 14 2020 19:20 utc | 38


Look at the brighter side, a Trump win will mean the empire will go down faster. Short term pain, long term gain.

Having lived and travelled abroad extensively in most 5 eyes countries for most of my life, I agree with you although there are many good people who can see things straight, they are not in majority and will amount to nothing against the tide of public stupidity and misguided patriotism. When SHTF it'll be internment camps galore, it will not matter whether you have contributed to the society or even served, it'll be the colour of our skin.

I for one do not wish to Anne Frank my way through this mess nor I wish to place such burden on my friends, even if I trust them with my life.

It'll not be fixed until after the coming depression that they see they've been lied to all along and the question that remains will be whether this world will be a glowing carpark when the psychopaths are done.

Posted by: A.L. | Aug 14 2020 19:37 utc | 39

Mr. Magoo is a cardboard cutout.

This election is simply the Orange Messiah vs. Black Hillary

That cackle grates like fingernails on a chalkboard.

Trump just has to pound that Harris busing clip, believe all women sound byte, and Tulsi stomping on Black Hillary”s ovaries during the debate.

If you had to pander for a woman, Fauxcohontas was the only choice. Black Hellary is loathed by the Bernie Bros

November will show that there are a whole lot more Blue Lives Matter than Black Lives Matter voters

Wow, the Democrats are dumb

Posted by: Anunnaki | Aug 14 2020 19:48 utc | 40

Josh @38--

You raise an interesting point--which will propel the Outlaw US Empire downhill into oblivion faster: Trump or Biden? Hard to say. Both aspire to achieve the #1 policy goal--Full Spectrum Dominance. Both are creatures of the Donor Class, but IMO Biden will be in a better position to bail them out when the current Ponzi Scheme implodes, similar to Obama being the choice over McCain in 2008 for similar reasons--Trump bailing them out would generate much more resistance from deplorables than Biden, and the D-Party might retake the Senate making such a bailout easier, as with Obama.

Again, the COVID's the Wild Card, but so too is Trump's promise to "terminate" Social Security and Medicare, the latter will be a core campaign point that'll cost Trump lots of votes.

In the coming decade, given the current financial fiasco, it probably won't matter who becomes POTUS in 2021, as what the People need will be ignored as usual regardless. Given the current level of angst, that might finally light a fire under the people and motivate them to change the situation themselves. Some aspects of the future are rather clear while others remain befogged.

Posted by: karlof1 | Aug 14 2020 19:54 utc | 41

One of the functions of the pick I didn't see mentioned above is going forward to raise Harris's profile as a political alternative in gender and colour to figures like AOC and other members of "the squad" within the Democratic Party. Historically, VP's (whether they win or they loose) become the immediate establishment go to's the next time around. Poll's if you can believe them are already showing Harris as one of the top 2024 picks despite her disastrous 2020 campaign, just on the basis of her selection by Biden alone. So, at one level her selection is an attempt to revive her (corporate) political career. It is no coincidence that AOC, what ever you think of her is only getting one minute of prerecorded air time at the 2020 convention. It is no coincidence that in 2016 at the last minute Nina Turner wasn't allowed to speak to second Sander's nomination. The fact that Tulsi Gabbard was allowed to appear at all in 2016 (to nominate Bernie) is now no doubt being viewed within the DNC as a huge tactical mistake. Tulsi of course blew up Harris's campaign by pointedly asking her in the debates amongst other things about her (Harris's) keeping prisoners in jail to use as slave labour in fighting fires while Attorney General of California. The establishment democratic machine win or loose wants their men, women and those who are also persons of colour to be corporate toadies and yes lackeys to AIPAC and Israel. The monied interests that own the Party are already thinking many election cycles ahead.

Posted by: Russell Stephens | Aug 14 2020 19:59 utc | 42

why did biden choose harris? i don't think it really matters.. it had to be someone and apparently a women of colour was who it had to be... optics where the appearance and the reality are typically two very different things in politics... i am not sure how many buy into the optical illusion of all inclusiveness in a country that is exclusively run by and for the kleptocrats.... i like @ 38 josh commentary and related mostly to that... it really doesn't matter who wins.. some believe just the opposite, but this is how i see it.. it doesn't matter.. it is either a slow or a quicker ride to irrelevance as i see it for the american empire..

on a related note, i am curious to know how others think all matters related to covid will or won't impact the outcome.... thoughts anyone??

Posted by: james | Aug 14 2020 20:01 utc | 43


It is in front of you and you've missed it:
It is the pro-Israel big donors , mainly from California.
In addition , as soon as she was chosen , all the Zionists from the. left - from pundits to think tankers to the media were talking about her Jewish husband.
Harris is very pro-Israel (as Biden) and against BDS. We will just have to watch the SQUAD treatment of her as VP should BIden win .

Posted by: Yul | Aug 14 2020 20:01 utc | 44

"why Joe Biden selected Kamala Harris as running mate?"

The most probable answer (IMHO) is that he didn't - keeping a close eye on what Kilary is up to now and in the future would be a good move.

Posted by: Cascadian | Aug 14 2020 20:02 utc | 45

psychohistorian 37 "I notice that none have mentioned that her mother is from India originally and having India ties in the White House while at war with China would be seen as a plus, no?"

I have been looking at a few headlines on her being Indian. Hates China, but she's a Tamil so not sure how popular she is amongst the Indian political class.

Posted by: Peter AU1 | Aug 14 2020 20:02 utc | 46

In the unlikely event Biden wins the election he has no ability to take the oath of office. If the Chief Justice gives it to him one word at a time he could not repeat them. His mental capacity is diminishing at a gallop, by January he may not know his own name. Harris would be the president-elect.

In meantime Harris has as much charisma as a corpse. She will not overshadow Biden. She can campaign with a life size cardboard cutout of Biden and still not overshadow The Candidate. Anyone with more independence or more spirit would at some point attempt to slip the reins. Harris knows how she arrived and will behave.

Posted by: oldhippie | Aug 14 2020 20:04 utc | 47

When Biden shortly losses his faculties she will be in the prime position to take over, along with Obama pulling her strings for the next 10 years.

Posted by: Mac | Aug 14 2020 20:08 utc | 48

@20. i was mulling such things last evening & began to wonder hadn't been decided that biden will select hitlery as sec of state...with that much power she will be able to side line kamala to the lowly position most vps enjoy: very little camera time, occasional photo ops & some low level hand shaking. hitlery will be the puppeteer. & when biden's alzheimer's is no longer able to be covered or ignored, it's possible kamala will suffer a sudden stroke but only when & if hitlery allows biden to have little more than mbs's father time speaking or in front of the camera. the press will hide biden's blunders & demise press very like they did roosevelt's polio.

Posted by: emersonreturn | Aug 14 2020 20:10 utc | 49

Harris knows how she arrived and will behave.

Posted by: oldhippie | Aug 14 2020 20:04 utc | 48

Bam! There!

Posted by: A.L. | Aug 14 2020 20:12 utc | 50

Once Biden committed to a black women, the only choices were Kamala Harris and Susan Rice. The others were all extreme anti-white racists and/or communists. Harris’ law and order record is a strong plus among whites and even some poor blacks. She hurts him less than any other black woman.

Posted by: bob syskes | Aug 14 2020 20:13 utc | 51

Posted by: A.L. | Aug 14 2020 19:37 utc | 40

Thanks brother! Yes, I share your feeling the bright side the sooner the empire goes down the faster better. That's my hope and wishes. Look like the riots in Portland and Seattle tone down any news latest news?

I really expect interment camps for me if Trump has his way, I have not doubt he hates the Chinese, Hispanic and other minority.

Posted by: JC | Aug 14 2020 20:14 utc | 52

@ Petr AU1 #47

Have a good laugh:
Writer Cauvery Madhavan captured the hysteria in a tweet: “If you’re wondering what that loud windy up sound is - it’s all of Chennai cranking the #SixDegreesOfSeparation machine!! Any moment now my mother is going to triumphantly reveal that her pharmacist’s father was @KamalaHarris’s grandma’s preferred tailor.”
Another Twitter user, Priya Ravichandran, jested, “I was asked to Google and find which relative lives in besant nagar. People are this close to renting party bus and do drive by near their house and celebrate kamala.”

Posted by: Yul | Aug 14 2020 20:15 utc | 53

I understand that USA elections are important for all the planet, I really do. I've been following them for, at least 15 years, while I've followed no election in my little dysfunctional country. But really, you must have realized by now that they are all a big circus. They probably chose their candidates by spinning the Wheel of Fortune. Or the circus elephant pulls them out of a hat. Trying to understand why anything happens it's a fools game. And each and every time you will get a very democratic 52%-48% or thereabouts. It's really painful to watch all you well meaning people getting mad and wasting all this energy on this shameful charade. What good can come out of any of this?

Posted by: Tod | Aug 14 2020 20:17 utc | 54

Kamala Harris must have been chosen by the Democrats to be Biden's running mate precisely because she has zero foreign policy experience, thus giving the Klintonator a potential backdoor to control US foreign policy as Secretary of State again or National Security Advisor.

Posted by: Jen | Aug 14 2020 20:24 utc | 55

To consolidate the Karen vote?

Posted by: nwwoods | Aug 14 2020 20:24 utc | 56

biden chose her because his handlers told him to, and they did that because the dnc has that an authoritarian corporate ho is the future of the democratic party. she could well be the next president, no telling how long biden will last. as far as winning, the democrats are doing a fine job of trying to hand the election to trump, who has been trying to hand the election to them. a comedy unless you live in the u.s., except perhaps for nervous mexicans and canadians.

Posted by: pretzelattack | Aug 14 2020 20:32 utc | 57

There is only one goal: beat Trump. Of the remaining viable candidates, after political pressure to name first a female, then a woman of color, the calculation (of which millions of dollars were spent to figue) is that Biden/Harris provides the best chance of victory in November or December whenever the results are known.

Posted by: gottlieb | Aug 14 2020 20:33 utc | 58

Posted by: Peter AU1 | Aug 14 2020 20:02 utc | 47

Did searches and found more that what I needed but decided not to post.... Both her parent were highly educated and divorced, her mother from Sri Lanka and father a black Jamaican.

"I have been looking at a few headlines on her being Indian. Hates China, but she's a Tamil so not sure how popular she is amongst the Indian political class."

Very intelligent assessment Peter - sort out the mystery. Indian hates Chinese, history fact. Pakistan love the Chinese and her mother a Sri Lanka, are China' buddy. Of course it may change if Pompeo decided switch and turn the on the Chinese. Had you ever wonder few Chinese living in India during Brit occupation and after independent?

Posted by: JC | Aug 14 2020 20:40 utc | 59

Psychohistorian @ 37, Peter AU 1 @ 47:

It's my understanding that most Tamils are Hindu so Harris may go down well with Narendra Modi's government and party. As President, she's likely to be easily led by the Modi govt and Israel (which has cultivated India as an ally) to oppose anything Pakistan might do to safeguard its interests or with China. A Harris Presidency could well be a major headache for the Middle East and Muslims in the Indian subcontinent.

Tamils have a farflung diaspora across Southeast Asia and other parts of the world - they were Britain's choice of indentured labour to work on plantations in Malaysia, Fiji and the Caribbean after the British Empire abolished slavery in the 19th century. They may now pose significant challenges to the governments in the countries where they live as they historically have been an underclass in those countries, now that a person of Tamil descent potentially might be POTUS at some time in the future.

Posted by: Jen | Aug 14 2020 20:42 utc | 60

" "Can anyone explain to me why Joe Biden selected Kamala Harris as running mate?" "

Her husband is a Jew. She will be as obedient to Israhell's dictates as Trump is. Don't you folks ever learn ?

Posted by: Fog of War | Aug 14 2020 20:46 utc | 61

I think that the Democrats are playing to loose.
The "Global Full Spectrum Dominance" is the overall object and for that to happen the US will need a "like or hate - but obey" type of Dictator. Trump already fits the bill. He is loud and direct and has all the subtlety of an icebreaker. The US is at semi-war with most of the planet via sanctions (equivalent to blockades or sieges), trying to pick fights with smaller recalcitrant Nations or with special secret extra-territorial military and mercenary actions. Also by trying to cut-out potential competitors from International Finance or influence (China, Russia). It is a long term fight that will be fought to the death (absolute submission) of one side or the other.

Biden just hasn't got it to "win" in a fight to set up a New Global Empire.
But Biden's other prospective running mates, Warren, Rice, were too independent and not brutal enough. If VP they might actually have tried to be the new Empress.

Kamala will do what she is told to, and in the very unexpected chance that Biden wins, will be banished to the same Bunker to carry on the shooting part of the war. Ably directed by several Boltonesque figures from the background.

Posted by: Stonebird | Aug 14 2020 20:46 utc | 62

Since every slave in the USA was black

Posted by: vk | Aug 14 2020 17:33 utc | 6

I stopped there so not sure what effect a helpful injection of 'facts' have on the rest of your opinion there.

Posted by: conspiracy-theory | Aug 14 2020 21:00 utc | 63

Here is one possibility: they chose a weak VP on purpose, after nominating a weak presidential candidate, because the person with real influence in the future administration was no longer eligible for either post.

Obama made the calls that swung the primaries for Biden, and maybe his plan going forward is to informally dominate a weak prez and veep from, say, a position of Secretary of State.

Posted by: merovech | Aug 14 2020 21:05 utc | 64

Jen 61

Thanks. I have been trying to find Hindu nationalists views on Tamils. Harris made some noises about Kashmir sometime back.

"Asked about the possible role the US could play following last year’s lockdown in Kashmir and the human rights situation there, she replied: “It is about reminding people that they are not alone, that we are all watching.”

After external affairs minister S Jaishankar declined to attend a meeting last year with the House Foreign Affairs Committee because of the presence of Indian-American Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal, who had moved a resolution in the House of Representatives on the situation in Kashmir, Harris extended strong support to the lawmaker who, like her, has roots in Tamil Nadu."

Posted by: Peter AU1 | Aug 14 2020 21:07 utc | 65

Ms. Harris is on the Senate Intelligence committee, and so will reliably represent the interests of our colleagues at the Company that actually runs the U.S. Mr. Pompeo has been doing a fine job as SecState as C did a reverse takeover of the State dept, but now it's for all the marbles. See: Bush the elder.

Posted by: Imagine | Aug 14 2020 21:09 utc | 66

Had to be an African American Woman

1. Susan Rice - I bet she lost by a very slim margin, maybe lack of chemistry.
2. Kamala Harris - safe, dull choice for #1 criteria, I hate it.
3. Karen Bass - If you say anything nice about Cuba, you are disqualified. Too bad, I like her.
4. Stacey Abrams - Very unimpressive, only accomplishment was to cry voter suppression and racism when she lost election.

Even the Democrat voters in the primaries hated Kamala Harris. Joe Biden just is not that smart. Harris is an establishment, Senator who will do or say anything to please the Democrat establishment.

Posted by: Christian J. Chuba | Aug 14 2020 21:14 utc | 67

@ Posted by: conspiracy-theory | Aug 14 2020 21:00 utc | 64

My god...

Ok, I'll use the academic term: "Atlantic Slave Trade".

The so-called slave labor during the times of the early colonization were actually more like serfdom (feudal workforce) than the traditional capitalist slavery. They were absurdly long contracts that gave all the rights to the landowner and almost none to the serf, but they had some contractual relations that didn't make them technically slaves.

Posted by: vk | Aug 14 2020 21:20 utc | 68

Harris I think was chosen purely to pull in votes. Black, Indian, Baptist. Connection to India through her mother and to Israel through a Jewish husband. Covers all bases.

Posted by: Peter AU1 | Aug 14 2020 21:22 utc | 69

Lots of great points here, however I take issue with the title of the article.

I don't believe Joe Biden has any agency in who his VP is, so I would have probably titled this:
'Why Has The DNC Chosen Kamala Harris'.

I pegged Kamala Harris early on as "The Chosen One", mainly due to her relationship with banks and the private prison/classist criminal justice system. Her recent handshake with Netanyahu says quite a lot; do VP picks always have such a photo op before they are actually elected? I actually think Buttigieg and Harris was the dream ticket for the donors, but Buttigieg was the fall guy for rigging the primary vote count and Harris was dismantled by Gabbard, so they couldn't lead with her.

Biden was their desperate backup plan against Bernie Sanders' undeniable popularity, which ultimately appears only to have been used to drum up the vote for Clinton in 2016 and similarly this year based on Sanders dropping out at the exact pivotal moment when his platform should have been the unifying savior of the nation under Covid 19. To me, Sanders dropping out is much more of a mystery than Harris being shoehorned in.

B, the last point about the Finnish translation made me spit out my drink when I laughed!

Posted by: Rutherford82 | Aug 14 2020 21:35 utc | 70

vk@16 "Johnson murdered Kennedy..."

Cui bono? is always a good question, but the other two legs of the tripod of guilt are means and opportunity. In this case, means and opportunity blend into the ability to use CIA personnel. The problem there is that the CIA is the president's Praetorian Guard, and Johnson had nothing to do with holdovers from Eisenhower's two terms, much less Kennedy's new people. Johnson's connections were supposedly with J. Edgar Hoover, who allegedly provided blackmail to make Johnson VP in the first place. The Kennedys even had better ant-communist credentials than Johnson who as I understand it was officially anti-McCarthy, which is more than you can say about the Kennedys. It even seems like Kennedy had better relations with the upper military than Johnson, whose friend was the defunct MacArthur.

Also, if Johnson did kill Kennedy, leaving Kennedy's people in place was leaving enemy eyes to watch and hands to pry. Robert Kennedy himself continued in as attorney general, a prime place for finding things out, for almost a year, then a Kennedy man, Katzenbach, took over. And after that was Ramsey Clark. It is possible I suppose a man who ended up associating with the Workers' World Party would keep any knowledge about Johnson to himself, or that he was never so liberal minded in office as to ask around. But I wouldn't bet on it.

The certainty Johnson dunnit is I think sadly misplaced. It seems far more likely to me everyone, the Kennedy family as well as Johnson, were intent on muddying the waters because, as dyed in the wool paranoid anti-communist nitwits, were convinced Castro dunnit. And they'd already had their fill of hardball with Castro in the Bay of Pigs and the October missile "crisis."

Posted by: steven t johnson | Aug 14 2020 21:35 utc | 71

karlof1 #24

WTF do you think the term Balancing the Ticket means?!?

Thank you karlof1 for that question....

perhaps it means appointing the VP from the most populous/powerful state,
perhaps it means appointing a person of the opposite colour.
perhaps it means gender equality,
perhaps it means one from the deep state as pres and one from the Clinton state as VP,

Most likely it means the jackboot of the military state standing on the scales.

Whatever it means the ticket will not be taking humanity on a peaceful cruise - more like a joyride.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | Aug 14 2020 21:44 utc | 72

@ Posted by: steven t johnson | Aug 14 2020 21:35 utc | 71

It is already pretty well established that it was Johnson who ordered the murder of Kennedy. Unless new, very groundbreaking evidence comes out, it is practically certain Johnson was the murderer.

I'm curious, though: which version of the story is taught in the American schools? Do they still teach the version that states the shooter was a rogue, mentally sick ex-spy with a history of pro-Sovietism?

Posted by: vk | Aug 14 2020 21:57 utc | 73

whatever the calculation, it wasn't because she appealed to black voters, who were far more likely to support biden, or sanders, or really almost anybody else. she put a lot of black kids in jail for smoking marijuana, which she has admitted to smoking herself, she wouldn't let an innocent man go free even after it became clear he was innocent of murder, and sge let a notoriously crooked banker (mnuchin) off.

Posted by: pretzelattack | Aug 14 2020 22:00 utc | 74

Kamala was Hillary’s candidate. I assume her selection is a concession to that branch of the DNC corporatists.

Posted by: Alaric | Aug 14 2020 22:03 utc | 75

@ Posted by: donkeytale | Aug 14 2020 18:02 utc | 15
You're comparing YoY (in case of China) and MoM (in case of US) values

Posted by: Anon | Aug 14 2020 22:05 utc | 76

The interesting thing about Harris is that she is hardly "black" in the African American sense- though she looks that way and that her record is truly appalling-mainly because of her ill treatment of African Americans. She not only suppressed evidence of innocence among those she had put in jail she also jailed kids and their mothers for missing school.
She was chosen not by her clone Hillary but by Obama who has turned himself into the Boss of the Democratic Party- and is building the Daley machine on a national scale. Bloomberg looks as if he is auditioning to be consigliere.
It is hard to believe that Harris is regarded as a vote winner except amongst millionaires and neo-liberal fans. And maybe keeping the vote down- it is unlikely to reach 50% - is part of the plan.
It is hard to believe that, in this year and in these circumstances, the Democrats can hold off demands for Medicare For All, which even Harris pretended, for a few weeks to support. They are clearly so contemptuous of the people that they are campaigning exclusively among the donors. They believe that if they can outspend Trump they can retail any policies that they please after Labor Day.
They are so confident because they have seen that nothing will reduce the enthusiasm of their victims-the Sanders supporters and the millions who would benefit from the reforms he promoted- for a Candidate internationally understood to be not only corrupt but flirting with idiocy.
Until the left starts campaigning against candidates like Biden and Harris, they will keep on getting nominations because nobody to the right will oppose them.
I'm supposing that everyone knows that both Trump and Kushner contributed to her Senate campaign, as did Mnuchin the Treasury Secretary who would be in jail today had Harris as Attorney General of California done her duty.
Kamala was educated at Westmount High School in Montreal where her mother worked as a Professor at McGill.

Posted by: bevin | Aug 14 2020 22:12 utc | 77

"It is already pretty well established that it was Johnson who ordered the murder of Kennedy..."
Don't discredit yourself. It is far from established that Johnson had anything to do with the assassination. He certainly benefited from it but, despite simpletons, that doesn't prove anything.

Posted by: bevin | Aug 14 2020 22:16 utc | 78

Having read through most of the thread before my eyes fogged over, the answer to b's question is...there is no one answer.

Beyond that, I have no clue and couldn't care less. Since it doesn't matter who is the front men (or women) in the government when the real policy makers are behind the scenes, it's just mental masturbation to speculate on who was chosen or why. Without internal hacking and surveillance of the real players deliberations and arguments (or someone's memoirs twenty or thirty years from now), no one is ever going to know.

I'm more interested in the seizure of the cargo of those four Iranian tankers. This is going to put Iran up big time. Expect tit-for-tar retaliation - just as the UNSC vote to extend the arms embargo is coming up. Russia and China will veto anything, anyway - but that also plays into Trump's China bashing and hence his election, as well as his Iran bashing. And it's amazing how many people I see on Twitter who hate Trump actually believe the Russian bounty story and are using that to accuse Trump yet again of being pro-Russia because he "didn't do anything about it" - which is probably why Pompous is braying that Russia will pay "a huge price."

The problem with the Iran tankers is that it edges perilously closer to a US Navy blockade of Iran - which I've long thought would be one of the main steps towards war as Iran will have to respond by closing the Straits. Trump has repeatedly emphasized that he wants *no* Iranian oil sold anywhere. The only way to do that is a blockade, which is an act of war. Now that Trump's re-election is in peril, he could be willing to listen to neocon and Israeli advice to do just that.

Posted by: Richard Steven Hack | Aug 14 2020 22:23 utc | 79

This all reminds of The Mold Of Yancy by Phillip K. Dick.

I am working, so I don't have time to elaborate, but it explores the idea of a country turning into one person, a nation of clones, due to the political environment. Per Dick's notes, a major figure is based on Eisenhower and Watergate, of course, bore the basic idea of the story out.

Posted by: Rutherford82 | Aug 14 2020 22:27 utc | 80

Kamala Harris is selected to please the wealthy donors and to block the exit ramp to reform; so pols can "Build Back Better" the American Gulag. And prisons for profit will expand as the odious Dems, as hypocrites, sport their Kente Cloth. Harris and her VP mantle is telling the progressives that they have been shafted and there is no piece of progressive programs at the core of the Bernie Sanders movement that the corporate Dems are bound to respect.

The incarcerated poor and the cannon fodder thrown at US Wars Without End will meet the unbridled, but deliberate movement toward distraction and deception, the wholesale shouts for destruction and the economic cannibalism of the Ruling Class.

Our host's observation is to the point: "the choice of Harris as VP candidate increases the already high chance that Biden will lose the presidential election." There has lately been a real demonstration among top progressives of just how low their expectations for Biden really are. Nina Turner, a former Senator, and key figure in Bernie's campaign, described the thought of voting for Joe Biden: "It’s like saying to somebody, ‘You have a bowl of shit in front of you, and all you’ve got to do is eat half of it instead of the whole thing.’ "It’s still shit”.

Posted by: Copeland | Aug 14 2020 22:30 utc | 81

uncle tungsten @72--

The term has always applied to electoral strategy dealing with the Electoral College up until the advent of Goldwater in 1964 when prejudices/biases became more important for the GOP and their strategy of appealing to such sordid voter attributes. Social Media within the Outlaw US Empire reflects that very well. There's an excellent reason why Escobar's second name for the Empire of Chaos is Stupidistan, and that moniker isn't just aimed at the government.

Posted by: karlof1 | Aug 14 2020 22:33 utc | 82

Historically the Democratic Party saves its best candidates to run when there is not an incumbent.
Add to that, the VP of the country rarely amounts to anything in politics after holding that position. GH Bush being a notable exception.
The pick really does seem tone deaf. It is reminiscent of 2016 for the Progressive wing of the party. They just got f*cked again. Let’s not even go into the Primsrirs being rigged for Biden against Sanders.
*look at Exit Poll numbers versus reported numbers. Far more than the 4% difference the UN requires for a sign of fraud.
It will take a lot of cognitive dissonance for a good portion of the party to cast a vote for Biden-Harris. Makes you think the party does not care at all what the Voters want.
The US needs more parties involved to create competition with the two parties that offer no representation to anyone but Billionaires.

Posted by: Slat1 | Aug 14 2020 22:37 utc | 83

@ Posted by: bevin | Aug 14 2020 22:16 utc | 78

You don't need trial-grade evidence to "prove" historically Johnson was behind Kennedy's murder.

By exclusion (with the evidence we have nowadays) it could've only been Johnson. Any other hypothesis is simply weaker.

Now, sure, Johnson didn't just have the idea. Bay of Pigs, his connections with the mafia etc. etc. all set up the stage for Johnson to give the final consent. Kennedy's assassination certainly wasn't an accident of History.

Posted by: vk | Aug 14 2020 22:56 utc | 85

"The interesting thing about Harris is that she is hardly "black" in the African American sense- though she looks that way and that her record is truly appalling-mainly because of her ill treatment of African Americans." Biden has made it clear he requires a co-governor in his VP He fancies his forte is foreign policy with its strategic vision of restoring American leadership to the world. Domestically, his presidency will immediately face the challenge to the peace and stability of our urban centers. Might not that be Harris' portfolio?

Posted by: paul r | Aug 14 2020 22:58 utc | 86

ok, Here's a possibility: Obama is the boss-- bevin, I think you're right. He is a particularly dangerous type of sociopath. He's smart, charismatic, and in control of his appetites and emotions. He also knows what we all know-- Kamala is a loyal follower of the higher up sociopaths. But she doesn't have the charisma of an Obama or the unpredictable Trump. So she will be a placeholder like Pence. When Michelle Obama or another more charismatic sociopath in Obama's stable emerges for 2024 Harris will be rewarded with a prestigious position but not POTUS. She has demonstrated that she is not capable but she is useful in the vp role for now.....

Posted by: migueljose | Aug 14 2020 23:01 utc | 87

Because the DNC leadership and donor's believe their own story. They created a narrative that the most important thing for Americans is to have a diverse, non-caucasian woman in power who wants nothing more than to attack Trump and now they are boxed in by their own narrative, which was never true in the first place. Americans, want education, health care, a nice job, a functioning economy. But they have been told for so long by the donor class that they dont want any of these things and what they really want a combination of the DNC Power Broker's Hillary Clinton and Obama and who fits that bill better than Kamala Harris?

Posted by: Turk 152 | Aug 14 2020 23:03 utc | 88

i guess the campaign just needed someone who hated black people more than biden does. well played, yuppies who watched west wing!

the sustained 90 day screeching of butthurt "liberals" have already started which - along with getting reamed by gabbard and blaming all criticism on "douchy white guys" - proves she's not as tough as she thinks she is. we've had some mild birtherism and the use of "angry" (which is apprently racist now?) but then she only has to debate the albino christian zealot pence and he's not exactly william f buckley on his feet. nor does he have the racial tourette syndrome that trump has displayed weekly.

also: when in doubt about motives, just remember therse people are pathologically tone deaf. they think the black vote is "owed" to them and neither biden nor harris have a damn clue about what the actual voters think or feel. they're "not trump" and that's apparently a sterling qualification so they're just throwing stuff against the wall to see what sticks.

Posted by: the pair | Aug 14 2020 23:09 utc | 89

vk@73 "It is already pretty well established that it was Johnson who ordered the murder of Kennedy. Unless new, very groundbreaking evidence comes out, it is practically certain Johnson was the murderer.

I'm curious, though: which version of the story is taught in the American schools? Do they still teach the version that states the shooter was a rogue, mentally sick ex-spy with a history of pro-Sovietism?"

No, it is not established and I know of zero evidence Johnson ordered a hit. As to what version is taught, in the schools? I was out of school before the history textbooks for kids caught up. I know many right-wing political idiots believe Johnson murdered Kennedy and I'm sure they've taught it to their kids. The assumption Kennedy was murdered by someone else is so standard a comic book TV series had yet another conspiracy to kill JFK debut on Netflix recently. So unless your source is The Umbrella Academy graphic novels, I have no idea who you think established this.

Rutherford82@70 imagines the DNC to be the Homintern central committee! This is almost cute. The Democratic Party is not a programmatic party committed to political principles, and it is not organized as a disciplined party to fight for power to enact said program. It's a franchise operation, and the DNC loosely markets the independent buccaneers operating in various campaigns. Nationally, the Democrats are the Outs, and the Republicans are the Ins. Also, insofar as there was ever an establishment candidate, it was always Joe Biden and the whipping from Sanders and Buttigieg, was never a part of the plan. If you believe that, you probably think criminals plan to get caught by the police as an eleventh dimensional chess gambit. Insofar as Buttigieg got any support from the donor class who weren't trying to impress their gay relatives and friends, it was almost certainly from Republicans who agreed with the Rutherford82s that a homosexual was a crying disgrace to the Democratic Party.

Posted by: steven t johnson | Aug 14 2020 23:13 utc | 90

Self-identifying 'centrist Republicans' who were interviewed at various sites raved about Harris' 'law-and-order' history and said she would get their votes.
If she can help to swing that vote, it would make a huge difference.

Posted by: chet380 | Aug 14 2020 23:14 utc | 91

The mechanisms of totalitarian power in the early 21st century are all in place. The hybrid (public/private) organizational structures like the Federal Reserve and, in particular, the Federal Open Market Committee of the New York Federal Reserve Bank now completely determine our economic destiny.

Another hybrid organizational structure of similar dominance is the public/private surveillance system established through the internet by our prominent intelligence agencies, particularly the CIA and NSA and such private monopolistic structures as Google, Facebook and Apple. I would argue that the 22 members of NSA who have the authority to authorize metadata searches on any of us are equal in influence to the members of the Federal Open Market committee of the New York Fed.

What the individuals within these 2 organizations have in common is that they are unelected and that their deliberations are largely private and secret.

Such structural realities make a discussion of Biden and Harris and their influence appear quite quaint.

Our two major parties, to paraphrase Orwell, now seek power within this mechanism only for their own sake. They are not interested in the good of others..Power is not a means it is an end. The object of power is power.

My question is which of these political parties, taken the sinews of real power mentioned above, is now the more dangerous?

Posted by: Worm Wood | Aug 14 2020 23:32 utc | 92

Remember, candidates for president (not Jill Stein or Ron Paul) tend to be on the extreme end of the sociopathic spectrum: they are not compassionate, not principled. They have learned how to appear to show those qualities and use the appearance of them to gain power. A perfect example is Kamala's bragging about telling her girlfriend that she was going to put her in jail if her kids were truant. Also, Bill Clinton going to Black churches and giving them his "tough love" speech on sending their bad children to prison. Biden bragging about writing the crime bill blah blah blah. They all share one important trait: they can be mean, and must demonstrate that trait to their benefactors.
However, while most of these socipathic candidates never become president they do worm their way into positions of power and prestige. Thousands find success in D.C. and beyond, amassing huge amounts of money, vacation homes, children in ivy leagues in spite of low ability. Even the losers do very well-- Tim Kaine is probably gettin lots of free stuff, vacations, college offers for his kids, free parties....
Bottom line, Kamala and her people will do fine, no matter which exit ramp she is told to take.

Posted by: migueljose | Aug 14 2020 23:35 utc | 93

The classic Demoncrats quid pro quo. Biden gets to win the presidency, but at 77, the oldest ever to seek the office, he cannot and will not complete his term. He already can't complete a sentence. Therefore, the anointed one, Pam Harris becomes the first woman president. She will advance Soros, et al, agenda to destroy America. Starting with the demand for reparations or burning of America through Antifa and BLM. All the time being pawns of Zionist.

Posted by: Eve of Destruction | Aug 14 2020 23:40 utc | 94

Fog of War @62: short, succinct, and dead on. Who loves ya baby?

Posted by: Donnie | Aug 14 2020 23:43 utc | 95

b. #7 you're on the money. the donors chose her and they chose her very early on. california dem establishment completely backed her and it was an embarrassment for the state that sanders was always more popular than her (there's a running battle in calif between the establishment and left dems, who hold the majority). the whole charade of 'who's he gonna pick' was just fodder for the masses, a game, because she was chosen back before she dropped out. her poll numbers were so bad and it was likely determined doing really poorly in the primary would put a stain on her before the upcoming VP slot.

she polled horribly in the black community, always. because of her (hideous) history as a prosecutor. no support (2%). that's also partly because she not african american by their standards(not a descendant of slaves). remember it was michelle (not obama) who flipped the african american community from clinton to obama.

anyway, back to biden. the party is run by pro israel mega donors and the clinton machine. biden was tapped precisely because he was the vehicle that could deliver the candidate they wanted (harris). everyone knows he has severe dementia. she will be the president, effectively. that's the plan and has always been the plan. she's everything corporate dems want. i always knew that's who they wanted and predicted the day she dropped her candidacy it was because she would be the VP.

Posted by: annie | Aug 14 2020 23:44 utc | 96

Why Kamala Harris?

Because nobody is loyal to her. If Biden's elected (a big if), she'll be dumped as VP shortly after the election and Hillary Clinton will be appointed in her place. No Democrat will object because shortly after that Biden will resign and Hillary Clinton will become the first female president of the United States.

Posted by: Ghost Ship | Aug 14 2020 23:56 utc | 97

Posted by: donkeytale | Aug 14 2020 23:42 utc | 95

Your own source show the stark difference between the nominal economic indicators of the US and China. No amount of lipstick is going to work on that pig.

Posted by: One Too Many | Aug 15 2020 0:07 utc | 98

Strange how everyone avoids the obvious: she was chosen because the Democrats don't want to win.

Hillary didn't want to win in 2016 either. (Nor did sheepdog Sanders.)

The Deep State needed a nationalist to confront Russia and China. Kissinger called for a MAGA response to Russia and China in an Aug. 2014 WSJ Op-Ed. Ten months later, Trump entered the race touting MAGA! and breezed through 18 other seasoned candidates.

The Empire is a bi-partisan affair. This election will hype anti-China propaganda just as 2016's Russiagate hyped anti-Russia propaganda.


Posted by: Jackrabbit | Aug 15 2020 0:16 utc | 99

@ Posted by: steven t johnson | Aug 14 2020 23:13 utc | 90

The demonstration is mainly by exclusion. I'll write here just the "long story short" version.

The Warren Commission concluded unequivocally that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone. That's the official version of the USG, and most likely the version taught at the American schools.

In his biography, Sam Giancana stated that Oswald's murder involved "right up to the top of the CIA [...] half dozen fanatical right-wing Texans, vice-president Lyndon Johnson, and the Bay of Pigs action officer under Eisenhower, Richard Nixon" (Giancana & Giancana, 1991, p.333.). He was murdered by Jack Ruby (a cassino owner), who received USD 50,000.00 from Giancana. For the hit job, Giancana claimed he received millions of USDs, "from the wealth right-wing Texas oilmen".

Up until this point, nothing's weird: Johnson could be pictured as an old friend looking for swift justice. But the story doesn't end there.

It seems Oswald was set up to seem like a Cuban agent by the CIA. The goal, it seems, would be to regain public opinion for a full-fledged American invasion of Cuba. It was certainly in the best interests of the American mafia to invade Cuba, but it didn't happen. Why?

Joseph Trento (2001) states that Lyndon B. Johnson purposefully hid the details from the Warren Commission because he was afraid a true connection with the USSR or at least Cuba itself would eventually be proven, thus triggering a nuclear war. He also didn't want Kennedy's connections with the mafia to come out to the public. That is different from gen. Alexander Haig (1992) who revealed Johnson simply wanted to protect Kennedy's dignity (i.e. hide his connection with the mafia).

EThe problem with Johnson's version is that it doesn't make any sense, for many reasons:

1) The Cuban Missile Crisis happened in 1962, and it was a major victory for Kennedy. After it was over, it was clear to the USG that the USSR still was to achieve MAD against the USA. The only reason Krushchev made such a bold attempt was because he was desperate: the USSR still didn't have intercontinental ballistic missiles capable of carrying nukes to US territory. Maybe Kennedy and the CIA and the Pentagon didn't know that at the time, but they certainly knew after that (and, thus, also Johnson);

2) How did the mafia got to team up with the CIA, given it benefited the most from Kennedy's assassination? The only reason here is the CIA was involved in Kennedy's assassination also (or, a creepier hypothesis, it had fused with the mafia or was not powerful enough to stop the mafia from assassinating their POTUS).

3) The succession was very smooth.

4) Johnson ended up not invading Cuba, and wasn't assassinated. If the mafia's interests really were the dominant interest, we should expect Johnson to at least fell pressured to go on with the Oswald story and push for a full invasion of Cuba. If he didn't, it could only be for the exact same reasons of Kennedy's push for "peace" with Cuba after the Bay of Pigs fiasco. Instead, Johnson almost immediately abandoned the Cuba affair.

Posted by: vk | Aug 15 2020 0:26 utc | 100

next page »

The comments to this entry are closed.