While liberals have held their tongues as Kamala Harris tacked to the center, they're preparing for a major battle over the future of the party, with personnel emerging as a flashpoint.
  • leadore@lemmy.world
    0·
    15 days ago

    “recent calls from some allies …”

    Who? What allies? Could this be any more vague. The article gives no hints as to who these mysterious unnamed “allies” are and no evidence of anyone, donor or not, calling for her removal. Nor has Harris or anyone from her campaign so much as hinted of any plans or feelings of wanting to oust Khan. Other than Mark Cuban, all the tech bro/oligarch types are Trump allies, not Harris donors.

    Sounds like just another piece trying to stoke rumors and stir up division.

      • leadore@lemmy.world
        0·
        14 days ago

        Thanks for the additional info. I’d call this “anticipatory worry/outrage” as a parallel to how the oligarchs ceding to Trump is called “anticipatory obedience”.

        Just because Cuban supports her and may expect obedience in return, I seriously doubt Harris would do it, especially as she is running as a previous DA/AG who went after lenders and others to protect the consumer, and has campaigned on going after ‘price gougers’ and others who harm the middle class. For her to turn around and get rid of Khan would fly in the face of all that and wreck her credibility right off the bat. I can’t see why she would consider doing that.

        • Schmoo@slrpnk.net
          1·
          14 days ago

          Having seen her progressive voting record I wouldn’t have expected her to campaign as a “moderate” and go back on every progressive stance she ever held either. In short, I don’t trust her to be consistent.

          • leadore@lemmy.world
            0·
            14 days ago

            There’s no way she’d have even a chance of winning if she hadn’t campaigned that way.

            • Schmoo@slrpnk.net
              1·
              14 days ago

              I disagree, I think if she had campaigned as the most progressive Democrat in history that would have sparked a massive wave of new support, but it would have put her campaign up against a lot of wealthy and powerful people. She chose the easy path by cozying up to capital interests, and this strategy gets us nowhere. At best it staves off the worst of the growing fascist movement for a time, but at the same time moves the needle further to the right. I think it’s shortsighted.