• Sergio@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    Unpopular opinion: Kamala was a solid candidate.

    Biden was headed to a humiliating defeat. Another couple debates, and maybe he loses NY and CA and we have a Dukakis- or Mondale-level annhilation. Kamala stepped in and ran a solid campaign on very short notice. Trump didn’t even have time to come up with a good nickname for her! She kicked his ass in their only debate, and he was literally too scared to do it again.

    In the end, she lost by a couple hundred thousand votes in 3 states. She was wrong about Gaza and the economy, but PA, MI, and WI are credibly winnable in future elections. Kamala was not a garbage candidate.

    • Tinidril@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 days ago

      Unpopular opinion: Kamala was a solid candidate.

      If that is an unpopular opinion then the statement is definitionally false.

      • Katana314@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 days ago

        This statement implies popularity = good, universally.

        In the 1800s, slavery was popular. Hence, should a candidate have run on preserving slavery?

        • Tinidril@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 hours ago

          No it doesn’t. A candidate needs a lot of qualities to be “good”. One of those qualities is the ability to be popular on election day. An unpopular candidate isn’t a good candidate. A popular candidate might be.