Media Coverage of 'Border Czar' Kamala Harris Is Cringe
Vibes are not the same thing as votes.

For the last month, the mainstream media have set their sights on President Joe Biden, generating a massive and unusual amount of negative coverage in order to end his doomed candidacy. Now Biden is out, Vice President Kamala Harris is in, and things have returned to normal. Consider this hagiographic recap of Harris' consequential weekend by CNN's Edward-Isaac Dovere.
"Through all her calls at the Naval Observatory, Harris wore a hooded Howard University sweatshirt, workout sweats and sneakers," reported Dovere on X. "They got pizza and salad for dinner. She went with her favorite topping: anchovies."
Nature, in other words, is healing.
Harris is now the beneficiary of a veritable torrent of fluffy, positive press. The Washington Post praised her Spotify playlists and her sense of style—"subtle changes to her wardrobe selections relay a new gloss of power and polish"—while defending her against conservative accusations that she was picked for the veep spot because of her race and gender. Media institutions such as The Guardian, CBS, and NBC also rushed to proclaim Harris as a beloved icon of young people; Politico hailed her as "Kamala Harris: Gen Z Meme Queen." This verdict is largely connected to pop star Charli XCX's endorsement (possibly?) of Harris—the singer wrote on X that "kamala IS brat," which is the name of her hit summer album.
It is not hard to imagine the comparatively energetic, active, and youthful Harris as a more appealing figure than the aged incumbent who occupied the top of ticket until this past weekend. Even so, a recent Quinnipiac University poll showed Harris losing the youth vote to former President Donald Trump. Another analysis, by CNN's Harry Enten, pointed out that Harris has not matched Biden's 2020 numbers in terms of youth approval. These results may be outliers and there's certainly time for her to improve; she has only been the presumptive candidate for a few days, and as the official Democratic nominee for president, she would be expected to ultimately carry the under-35 crowd. Still, it's a cautionary tale: Vibes are not the same thing as votes.
Haste Makes Harris
The truth is that Harris is remarkably untested on the national stage. When she ran for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination, she received little traction and was among the first major candidates to drop out: Julian Castro, Cory Booker, Amy Klobuchar, Elizabeth Warren, Pete Buttigieg, and Bernie Sanders all outlasted her. Though she ultimately withdrew from that race before primary voting took place, a September 2019 poll from Emerson College showed that she would lose the primary in her home state of California. The poll had her in fifth place, behind Biden, Sanders, Warren…and Andrew Yang.
What's behind Harris' lack of popular appeal? For one thing, it's hard to know what she actually stands for. As California's top prosecutor, she was hardly a progressive; according to Harris, she sought statewide office in order to "institute a plan on truancy"; said plan involved locking up parents of kids who skipped school. Then, during her ill-fated presidential campaign, she decreed herself unburdened by what has been—to borrow a popular Kamala-ism—and embraced the George Floyd movement's demand for more progressive policing. At best, one can say that the American people do not understand what exactly she stands for, and she will now have the opportunity to make that clear.
As the vice presidential candidate, Harris was ultimately part of the winning ticket in 2020. But for the vast majority of Biden's presidency, Harris has polled worse than her boss. It was not until recent months, when public approval of Biden truly collapsed, that she started to seem like the safer bet.
In the weeks since Biden's disastrous debate performance laid bare the reality of his advanced age and cognitive decline, Democratic leaders, elite donors, and the mainstream media have dramatically shoved the president aside and christened Harris as the new standard-bearer. They have done this with the nominal support of the rank-and-file, as polls have shown that most Democrats did want Biden to bow out. But unlike Biden, Harris does not have a long track record of winning national elections.
Czar Kamala
One of Harris' greatest assets, however, will be favorable media coverage; indeed, mainstream reporters are already trying to protect her on one of her most vulnerable issues. On Wednesday, Axios accused Republicans of unfairly faulting Harris for the dysfunction at the U.S. southern border, writing: "The Trump campaign and Republicans have tagged Harris repeatedly with the 'border czar' title—which she never actually had."
This notion that Harris was never named "border czar" is contradicted by earlier reporting…by Axios. An April 14, 2021, article by Axios reporter Shawna Chen explained that "Harris, appointed by Biden as border czar, said she would be looking at the 'root causes' that drive migration."
Caught red-handed, Axios demurred and issued the following correction in a piece published yesterday: "This article has been updated and clarified to note that Axios was among the news outlets that incorrectly labeled Harris a 'border czar' in 2021." The updated article says that "border czar" was an "unofficial" moniker, as if the difference matters. The truth is that Harris was assigned to lead part of the administration's handling of this specific issue. That's inconvenient for the campaign, since immigration and border security is Trump's most winning issue. But it's the truth.
College, Not Colored
Fox News host Brian Kilmeade was widely accused of making a racist remark after a clip of him discussing Harris' agenda went viral on X. Users claimed he had used the phrase colored sorority. Democratic National Committee Chair Jaime Harrison attacked Kilmeade for perpetrating racism and misogyny. Former Republican National Committee chair turned uber-critic of Trump Michael Steele was similarly outraged.
Kilmeade's Fox News colleague Lawrence Jones, a black man, was seated on the couch with Kilmeade when he made the remark—and according to Jones, he said "college sorority," not "colored sorority."
I listened to the clip for myself, and it seems abundantly clear that Jones' interpretation is correct; Kilmeade said "college sorority." Mediaite agrees as well. All those who rushed to accuse Kilmeade of racism should set the record straight, at the very least.
This Week on Free Media
Amber Duke is back on the show to discuss the media suddenly highlighting Trump's advanced age, Nancy Pelosi's "coup" against Biden, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's spot-on criticisms of the Secret Service, and The View's thoughts on Harris.
Worth Watching
I have to admit, I laughed. Watch all the way to the end for the big reveal: a meeting between Matt Walsh and…Robin DiAngelo.
Over a year ago I embarked on a personal journey into anti-racism and DEI. Now I can finally share it with all of you. My new film "AM I RACIST?" is only in theaters on September 13th. pic.twitter.com/gnhpJ253oE
— Matt Walsh (@MattWalshBlog) July 24, 2024
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
"Kilmeade's Fox News colleague Lawrence Jones, a black man, was seated on the couch with Kilmeade when he made the remark—and according to Jones, he said "college sorority," not "colored sorority.""
What would be the PC term to use to provide a distinction between a default sorority and the kind of sorority that only accepts a person with a certain skin color?
Racist sorority?
I've seen the video. College is clear. Not even close to colored.
It's the Dinger hunt all over again.
I listened to it. I don't think Kilmeade would be dumb enough to give the left a reason to cancel him and say "colored." However, I played it a bunch of times and when I tried to hear if he said "college," I heard him say "college." When I tried to hear if he said "colored," I heard "colored." You hear what you already presuppose he says.
One of the x posts that responded had a different video of Biden saying either, "I talked with your wife," or "I fuck your wife." The same thing happens to me with this one. If I am straining to hear the first one, I hear it. If I'm listening to hear if he said "fuck your wife," I hear that. I couldn't find that post when I went back to the Michael Steele post, but here's someone else's clip of it:
https://twitter.com/ricwe123/status/1810798839475097895
If a person is predisposed to see and hear "racism" everywhere, that person will listen to Kilmeade and hear "colored."
Sorority of color, duh.
You can not hate these journalists enough.
This type of gaslighting isn’t cringe, it’s something even worse. It speaks to a really nasty streak of authoritarianism, showing a willingness to try to make what was previously true no longer the truth. Because you’ll have people who actually WILL just recite the party line, that it was never an “official” job, as if that semantic distinction matters.
^ This
Media taking 1984 as a how-to guide..."We've always been at war with Eastasia".
Yeah, their argument is basically, "he never gave her the title of Border Czar or asked her to fix the problem. He just asked her to study it and help to someday identify the root causes."
When there are still plenty of news articles online from 2021 which said it was a lot more than that, a high profile assignment and her chance to shine, albeit with some risk if she failed. But now that she barely even tried to address the problem, it's conservatives calling her "Biden's Border Czar" are the ones who are lying.
Biden did not "ask her to study it and help to someday identify the root causes", he put her in charge of the border.
Bagadad Bob just realized in was an amateur. Our media is giving a master class in gaslighting
Look how much they pushed drink bleach, hoax, bloodbath, very fine people, and everything else. Trump was right to label them the "enemy of the people" and fake news.
"You can not hate these journalists enough."
You may think you do, but you don't.
But, my hate setting for journalists is already at MAX_INT!
I'm gonna need a knob that goes to eleven...
defending her against conservative accusations that she was picked for the veep spot because of her race and gender.
Is Biden now a conservative? He made it very clear merit was not a consideration in his Veep, strictly genitals and skin tone.
See this tweet.
https://x.com/realchrisrufo/status/1816178088033804779
If you praise Biden for picking a VP based on her race and gender to the exclusion of everything else, you are a good person. If you criticize Biden for limiting his VP pick to black women, then you are an evil, inhuman person.
In his letter resigning from the presidential campaign, Biden had appointing a "black woman" to the Supreme Court as one of his major accomplishments.
He also has a "black man" as his Sec. Def.
Skin color is the most important thing.
Black men are over represented as enlisted personnel, under as officers. 17%-6%
Women are 19 % of AD enlisted but 21% of officers.
Keep harping on them niggers though. DEI is definitely about them and not women and their overwhelming political dominance.
FYI Asians are 3-5% and whites are 60-76%.
Based on everything we know about athletics and intelligence…. really?
I'm guessing SPB2 is still doing his sock of ML.
Never was
Spb2 is the biggest faggot loser on this board.
Nothing I said in that post is false.
Sarc is a loser.
Jeff is a leftist.
Keep white knighting for ml original flavor. You guys are pathetic.
Well, it's some useless shitpacked cunt who showed up already muted, so... yeah.
You're seemingly completely oblivious to the fact that Biden recently called his Sec Def "the black man" during his BET interview. Which was the incident I was mocking. Personally, I couldn't care less what color the Sec Def is if he/she/they/it/[insert pronoun here] is doing a good job. Actually, that applies to every job. I certainly "See color", but here's the thing...I don't care.
You're the one throwing around the N-word in 100% full-on projection mode.
NYT:
After Biden Flub, Pentagon Spokeswoman Says Austin Has ‘Absolute Confidence’ in President
Mr. Biden appeared to forget the name of his Secretary of Defense, Lloyd J. Austin III, and instead refers to him as the “Black man” in an interview with BET.
I think we all knew what you were referencing. SPB2, in this case socking as ML, is just an idiot and a racist.
Fake ML throws around the N-word, trying to project his racism onto me somehow.
Of course, I was simply mocking Biden's inability to identify his own cabinet members by something other than the color of his skin, as if skin color is the most important thing (in what's left of Biden's mind, anyway).
Maybe he's just oblivious to this incident as reported by NYT re: Biden's BET interview
After Biden Flub, Pentagon Spokeswoman Says Austin Has ‘Absolute Confidence’ in President
Mr. Biden appeared to forget the name of his Secretary of Defense, Lloyd J. Austin III, and instead refers to him as the “Black man” in an interview with BET.
"Biden had appointing a “black woman” to the Supreme Court as one of his major accomplishments." How does he know she was a woman? He's not a biologist.
It's not her fault that Biden restricted his list of VP candidates to black women, it's Biden's fault. If Harris had gone on to achieve universal acclaim for her accomplishments, energy and diplomacy as VP, Biden's unnecessarily restrictive selection criteria wouldn't matter. But when she flopped miserably, it's a fair question to ask if maybe some stronger candidates weren't unnecessarily excluded.
And now fawning journalists are amazed at her energy exuded in her craven pursuit of political power? She finally has a task that motivates her.
My high school daughter's reaction to the BRAT branding was ... WTF? "Only middle schoolers listen to that."
My high school daughter literally cringes every times she sees Kamala, which is constantly. They seem to think carpet-bombing people who aren't old enough vote is the key to victory?
Grooming them for the next cycle.
the whole brat thing is a psyop by the DNC. I wouldn't be shocked if they paid for that tweet. It's so pathetic that they're trying to make her seem like the choice of gen z. It is the definition of cringe
>>the mainstream media have set their sights on President Joe Biden, generating a massive and unusual amount of negative coverage in order to end his doomed candidacy.
seems the MM is more a tool to end the candidacy. someone else made the decision.
Harris is now the beneficiary of a veritable torrent of fluffy, positive press.
Remember what I told you guys? Remember what I said? Ok, I don't expect all that many people slavishly follow my comments, but... still. I said exactly this. While everyone was all "Kamala is unpopular!" I carefully reminded the boards that you cannot forget that our sky-splittingly biased press hasn't gone away. She is going to be ruthlessly and shamelessly promoted by a press that actively works for the DNC. And they'll be promoting her to the exact same group of voters who they successfully hid Joe Biden's cognitive decline from for 4 years.
The followers of the media outlets that just gaslighted the world on Biden's mental health have no problem with the lies. They have become so infected with the support the part that lies are just a tool.
They will lie to you to no end while claiming to be keepers of the truth. They know they are lying, they don't care.
They know THAT WE KNOW that they are lying AND DONT CARE.
They own access to both the Memory Hole AND the Narrative.
I'm actually concerned that all the media fanfare and simping for Kamala, plus being viewed by the "youth" vote as better for Palestine (because that is somehow an important issue for young voters), and whatever tricks the Dems come up with (and you know there will be many, in addition to election "fortifications" and some kind of October surprise) can swing the election in Horrible Harris' direction.
I'm sure the early polls that have come out after Joe dropped out that show Kamala doing well is a combination of the relief by Dems of being rid of droolin' Joe and an intentional skewing of the sampling and results to boost Kamala to give her some momentum. But, still, I see this election as being a tough one for Trump, when you factor in all the aspects I mentioned above.
The people laughing about a Kamala campaign and thinking Trump has it in the bag are naively underestimating what the machine and "deep state" will do to prevent Trump from regaining the presidency.
Trump v Biden as it stood was too wide of a gap. There was no way to fortify against it. A Harris blitz in the media will be "proof" of how it will be possible for Harris to have gotten 187M votes while Trump got 6 (votes, not million votes).
The people laughing about a Kamala campaign and thinking Trump has it in the bag are naively underestimating what the machine and “deep state” will do to prevent Trump from regaining the presidency.
This is true, but they're also up against the fact that Kamala can't just not ever speak, and so she's a major liability by nature. No amount of glossy pictures of her smiling and looking excited and "no, really, she's hip and the kids love her" assertions are going to change the fact that she's going to eventually have to speak, and when she does that foot will go right down her throat.
When the new pandemic is rolled out shortly, she can campaign from her basement, similar to how Brandon was able to do so and still "win" the election.
I'm joking ... at least I hope this couldn't happen again.
when she does that
foot8 inches will go right down her throatFTFY
Like I said the other day, selecting Kamala as the nominee (because the DNC nomination has been a selection, not an election process since 2016) makes the 2 am ballot dump a lot easier to justify. With Biden cratering, a similar spike in 2024 that happened in swing states in 2020 would be such a blatantly obvious fixed "election" that red state politicians would simply refuse to go along with it, and consider anything coming from the feds to be invalid at that point.
Now, the press can start this propaganda campaign for Harris as the female Obama and clear the way for that ballot dump to take place.
Most reasonably intelligent people would maybe stop trusting the media after it lied to them for months (if not years). But then, we're talking about Biden voters here.
""Caught red-handed, Axios demurred and issued the following correction in a piece published yesterday: "This article has been updated and clarified to note that Axios was among the news outlets that incorrectly labeled Harris a 'border czar' in 2021." The updated article says that "border czar" was an "unofficial" moniker, as if the difference matters.""
It would be Winston Smith's job to find and edit the articles on the Internet.
Wikipedia:
Czar, sometimes spelled tsar, is an informal title used for certain high-level officials in the United States and United Kingdom, typically granted broad power to address a particular issue.
In the United States, czars are generally executive branch officials appointed by the head of the executive branch (such as the president for the federal government, or the governor of a state). Some czars may require confirmation with Senate approval or not. Some appointees outside the executive branch are called czars as well. Specific instances of the term are often a media creation.
A free country has no need for czars, and ought not to tolerate them.
^
All those who rushed to accuse Kilmeade of racism should set the record straight, at the very least.
Yea go ahead and hold your breath on that one.
Have they even set the record straight for the kid at the Chiefs game yet?
I don't recall if Trump was president or just running at the time. But there was a story here about a Muslim woman who claimed she was assaulted by a Trump supporter on the Subway. That was big news. Later she came out and said she made it up because she was coming home late and didn't want her father to be mad. Not big news.
For people wondering how Lindsay Graham is a Senator in my state of SC --- That useless milkdud of a moron Harrison was his last electoral opponent for the seat.
He wins because he faces the dumbest carbon-based life forms in existence.
And the free publicity from the news media, and the free franking privileges from the taxpayers. There's a reason incumbent Congressmen have a reelection rate higher than the old Soviet Politburo.
Hey, with the amazing job Congress does, 98% retention rates seem PERFECTLY OK.
Hell, maybe it should be a full 100%. Those folks got their crap together.
There's hot takes running around the tubes that Biden endorsed Kamala as revenge on Obama for forcing his ouster.
I don't care whether it's true or not. It's funny as heck.
I was hoping Biden would come out Wednesday still defiant, still campaigning. I don't care what the dog faced pony soldiers said, I'm still in the race!
That would have been awesome in itself. But the shock it would have sent through the Deep State would have been far far better. What! Obama pulled strings!
Not even the media could gloss over that.
MSNBC says "hold my mimosa...."
Yeah, the unsigned email saying he dropped out was suspicious enough, then the Russian style "cold" on top of it.
Or Joe wasn't supposed to say it, and forgot.
I'm still shocked that the Dems would pick a female POC when America is known to be such a racist and misogynistic country? Do they want to lose?
That's how you know you're doing DEI right.
Axios not alone. BBC called her the "immigration czar". Biden's words at the time of appointment made it clear that she was in charge.
BBC 2021:
US President Joe Biden has put Vice-President Kamala Harris in charge of controlling migration at the southern border following a big influx of new arrivals.
Mr Biden said he was giving her a “tough job” but that she was “the most qualified person to do it”.
Announcing Ms Harris’s appointment as his immigration czar, Mr Biden told reporters and officials at the White House: “She’s the most qualified person to do it, to lead our efforts with Mexico and the Northern Triangle [Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador], and the countries that are going to need help in stemming the movement of so many folks – stemming the migration to our southern border”.
Mr Biden said Ms Harris’s past work as California’s attorney general made her well suited to leading the effort, adding: “When she speaks, she speaks for me.”
September 20, 2021
On Monday, MSNBC host Stephanie Ruhle was asking the real question we all want to know: where is Vice President Kamala Harris and why isn't she handling the ongoing crisis at the southern border?
Ruhle was reacting to the Biden Administration stopping 15,000 Haitian immigrants who were camping at the border when she noted that Harris is supposed to be in charge of the border, but that she isn't doing anything.
“How about the message from our vice president? Where is she?” Ruhle asked. “She was supposed to be in charge of all of these migration issues, going to those Northern Triangle countries — that’s obviously not Haiti — that was one of her first international trips with the message ‘Do not come here illegally.’ People aren’t listening. What is she saying now?”
Associated Press, March 24, 2021:
https://apnews.com/general-news-3400f56255e000547d1ca3ce1aa6b8e9
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Joe Biden has tapped Vice President Kamala Harris to lead the White House effort to tackle the migration challenge at the U.S. southern border and work with Central American nations to address root causes of the problem.
“When she speaks, she speaks for me,” Biden said, noting her past work as California’s attorney general makes her specially equipped to lead the administration’s response.
But the high-profile assignment for Harris, who ran for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2020 and is expected to run for the White House again in the future, could be politically fraught.
“Needless to say, the work will not be easy,” Harris said. “But it is important work.”
When you're hyperfocused on the notion that everyone is supposedly racist and is supposedly just looking to offend you or put you down, then yeah, you hear "colored sorority."
They want to be victims so badly...
https://blacklivesmatter.com/black-lives-matter-statement-on-kamala-harris-securing-enough-delegates-to-become-democratic-nominee/
OR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
JULY 23, 2024
Black Lives Matter calls on the DNC to host a virtual snap primary.
Washington D.C. – Black Lives Matter demands that the Democratic National Committee (DNC) immediately host an informal, virtual snap primary across the country prior to the DNC convention in August. We call for the Rules Committee to create a process that allows for public participation in the nomination process, not just a nomination by party delegates. The current political landscape is unprecedented, with President Biden stepping aside in a manner never seen before. This moment calls for decisive action to protect the integrity of our democracy and the voices of Black voters.
While Joe Biden wasn’t our preferred candidate, we cannot ignore the troubling actions of the Democratic Party:
The DNC refused to host debates during the primary, even though a vast majority of Democratic voters wanted them. This would have likely allowed America to see the decline of Joe Biden in 2023.
The DNC changed the primary schedule and created rules that made it almost impossible for non-Biden candidates to appear on the ballot, effectively clearing the field of any challengers to the incumbent president.
Following the primary where millions of Black voters weighed in, after one poor debate performance, the DNC Party elites and billionaire donors bullied Joe Biden out of the race.
Now, Democratic Party elites and billionaire donors are attempting to manipulate Black voters by anointing Kamala Harris and an unknown vice president as the new Democratic ticket without a primary vote by the public. This blatant disregard for democratic principles is unacceptable. While the potential outcome of a Harris presidency may be historic, the process to achieve it must align with true democratic values. We have no idea where Kamala Harris stands on the issues, now that she has assumed Joe Biden’s place, and we have no idea of the record of her potential vice president because we don’t even know who it is yet.
…..we have no idea of the record of her potential vice president because we don’t even know who it is yet.
It’s Nunya.
Nunya Bidness.
I had to look out the window and check the color of the sky this morning when I read that, to make sure I hadn't woken up on a different planet.
Harris would be the type who wants to order anchovies and ruin a perfectly good pizza.
Anchovies make everything better. One thing I agree with Harris on.
Anchovies are a "sometimes" topping.
>Julian Castro, Cory Booker, Amy Klobuchar, Elizabeth Warren, Pete Buttigieg, and Bernie Sanders all outlasted her.
We’ll mention Sanders, who placed 2nd in the primaries, but ignore Gabbard who came in third, in favor of a bunch of no-hopers.
Gabbard, who actually delivered the kill-shot.
Well “everyone knows” the Democrats didn’t really want Gabbard. She dared to question the woke orthodoxy. She was even portrayed as Cruella de Ville on SNL.
If the DNC had allowed the remaining primaries to proceed in full after so-called Super Tuesday when Biden was gifted the nomination on the basis of the “black vote” in South Carolina and a few other state primaries that would never vote for the Democrat in the general election anyway, Sanders would have been first, Biden likely second and Tulsi 3rd or 4th.
Also, Soave, *no one* is appointed 'czar'. Its an unofficial title, created by the media decades ago, to describe someone who has been given a portfolio of responsibilities.
>"In the weeks since Biden's disastrous debate performance laid bare the reality
You keep pushing this - the reality was clear two years ago, you denied it. It was clear a year ago, you denied it.
It wasn't until the MSM got the knives out that you unsheathed yours.
>Harris does not have a long track record of winning national elections.
I mean, I guess *zero record* is not a long one. No one voted for her in a national election, ever - no, you don't vote for VP.
Under the radar, it sounds like the elites of the democrats want to virtually anoint her before the convention so not to have an open convention
I read the same thing that Obama thinks she is incompetent, that it is Biden's revenge, and cranky Jill is out for blood.
No comments on here about Govtrack calling her the most liberal Senator and delaying it?
She has no discernible accomplishments as VP, and one major failure on her record (border czar, or some similar basket of responsibilities without that specific title.)
She has no notable accomplishments as a Senator, unless you count voting in lockstep with the Democrat Party more often than any other Senator.
I guess she has some accomplishments as a DA in Oakland and Attorney General in California, but those might not necessarily be the ones she wants to highlight to her supporters. At least back then she was moderately tough on crime.
I saw that around here somewhere today or yesterday.
The notion that Govtrack is now memory-holing the whole thing is new to me though.
New York Post:
GovTrack, an organization that tracks voting records in Congress, yanked its 2019 rating that pegged then-Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) as the most liberal member of the upper chamber – after several media outlets including The Post cited the statistic in stories on the presumed Democratic presidential nominee.
The website pulled down its 2019 ranking on Monday evening after it got renewed attention in the wake of President Biden’s seismic decision to drop out of the 2024 race on Sunday, its founder confirmed to The Post.
GovTrack had previously determined in its single-year “report card” for 2019 that she was the most ideological to the left member of the upper chamber based on her legislative behavior.
At the time, she was ranked even further to the left of Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) – the latter of whom is typically considered the most left-leaning senator, including in the most recent metric available from GovTrack.
https://www.foxnews.com/media/flashback-see-how-kamala-harris-answered-when-she-confronted-2020-the-most-liberal-senator
Also at https://twitter.com/RNCResearch/status/1816188767809704417
Townhall:
According to the analysis GovTrack simply deleted from their website, apparently just after Harris became the nominee, she was the most left-wing Senator before she joined Biden’s ticket, even outflanking Bernie Sanders. She was also the least bipartisan Senator — 100th out of 100. And she rarely showed up for work [she missed 61.9% of votes, 3rd worst]. The ‘nonpartisan’ folks at GovTrack (ahem) apparently decided this information should no longer be accessible, so the page is gone. Whatever you think of Harris or this election, shouldn’t this sort of thing be extremely disturbing to people?
Harris is still giggling as the question proceeds, then something in her eyes changes, as she realizes 'Pence said it!' isn't going to work, even as her mouth remains agape in a residual smile from the laughter. I'm sure she would have preferred back then that the GovTrack information had never have existed, and now GovTrack has helpfully un-existed that information. Thank goodness for online archives. Will Harris also try to make many of her comments vanish, on subjects like decriminalizing illegal immigration, giving illegal immigrants taxpayer-funded healthcare plans, supporting the $6.6 trillion-per-year Green New Deal, defunding police, banning fracking, and eliminating private health insurance? Can she erase the Isaac Espinoza case from her record?
The "root cause" of the border crisis is Trump's sanctions on Venezuela and the Obama administration's meddling in Nicaragua and El Salvador and Guatemala. That Biden hasn't lifted the Trump sanctions tells you all you need to know about Kamala's adeptness at identifying "root causes" let alone doing anything about them. Lift the draconian, illegal, amoral sanctions and watch the "caravans" reduced to pre-Trump border encounter numbers, especially from Venezuela.
Why would we not sanction Venezuela? They’re a hostile Marxist state.
You have an active fantasy life.
Switch places. Suppose it was president Trump who dropped out of the race and his VP JD Vance became the presumptive nominee. Axios headline -
"Despite being appointed the border Czar JD Vance failed to address the migrant crisis"
The problem isn't merely that the media is incompetent. The problem is that they're BIASED. They are lapdogs for the democrat party. Whether the highlight the truth or obscure the truth depends entirely on their agenda. They will engage in the most convoluted semantics and technical distinctions to render a true statement as false, vice versa.
Among the center right, there are two groups that do not see this plain truth. The TDS crew and Reason brand libertarians. Or to put it another way, you either can't admit to leftwing deception because that makes Trump look good or like a victim, or you're so invested in "both sides are bad and big government transcends party lines" that you cannot convince yourself to see that one side can be even theoretically worse than the other.
A nation without immigrants, gay marriage and gun ownership can go on. It will not survive if the media and leadership lies to maintain power. It will not survive without a border, a functioning police, and a common culture.
The Celebration Parallax
A parallax is the apparent difference in position of the same object seen from different vantage points. For instance, an analogue speedometer that reads sixty miles per hour to the driver, but fifty to the passenger—even though the needle itself is only in one place.
The Celebration Parallax may be stated as: “the same fact pattern is either true and glorious or false and scurrilous depending on who states it.” In contemporary speech, on any “controversial” topic—or, to say better, regime priority—the decisive factor is the intent of the speaker. If she can be presumed to be celebrating the phenomenon under discussion, she may shout her approval from the rooftops. If not, he better shut up before someone comes along to shut him up.
Note also that the key distinction here is celebration versus non-celebration, not support versus opposition. One need not actually, clearly oppose the subject under discussion in order to be blameworthy. Declining or neglecting to celebrate it forcefully enough is enough. As in Stalin’s Russia, lack of enthusiastic clapping is regarded as opposition. The legitimacy of one’s right to state the same identical fact, in the same identical language, depends on who one is and what one thinks of it. Since the left presumes that all persons of color approve of the phenomena covered by the Celebration Parallax, the Parallax is really a test to distinguish allies from Deplorables.
To the best of my recollection, the origin of the Celebration Parallax arose from the need to defend “affirmative action,” a very unpopular policy since its inception. The party line therefore goes like this: People of color must be granted explicit preferences to overcome America’s “legacy of racism” so that we may “diversify” America’s power centers and end white male dominance, a move that—in addition to being necessary to address the country’s inherent racism—improves those institutions by infusing them with different and hitherto neglected points of view. Also, kids of color need “role models” who “look like themselves.”
But there is no such thing as “reverse discrimination,” which is itself a racist term, and there are no “quotas” (another racist term) whatsoever, but only “timetables,” “goals,” and measures to evaluate applicants and candidates “holistically.”
On no subject is the Parallax more prevalent than immigration. Depending on who’s doing the talking, the demographic transformation of the United States is either a glorious trend that portends a permanent Democratic majority and a more “vibrant” future, or else a “conspiracy theory” that is not happening in any way at all, no-how.
The Left insists that concerns from certain quarters that immigration policy in America (and Europe) amounts to a “great replacement” is a “dangerous,” “evil,” “racist,” “false” “conspiracy theory.” But a leftist New York Times columnist can write an article entitled “We Can Replace Them” and … nothing. Same fundamental point, except she’s all for it and her targets aren’t. A U.S. Senator can exult that demographic change will doom Republicans. Joe Biden himself can refer to an “unrelenting stream of immigration.” Except they’re celebrating it and calling for it. Anyone on the Right who uses the exact same words will not merely be denounced; the very fact pattern that is affirmed when Biden says it will be denied when the Rightist repeats it.
https://americanmind.org/salvo/thats-not-happening-and-its-good-that-it-is/
Skin color is the most important thing.
https://twitter.com/ByronYork/status/1816438336409444473
A glimpse of how the Harris campaign sees the voters. VP choice is focusing on several white male candidates. Source 'familiar with the campaign's thinking' says: 'Let’s just face it. There’s a lot of sexist, racist white dudes out there in America who don’t like Trump, but just need a little extra validation.'
At what point does the coverage of this story at Vox, Axios, Atlantic, and MSNBC get re-assigned to "Winston Smith"?
"...The Trump campaign and Republicans have tagged Harris repeatedly with the 'border czar' title—which she never actually had..."
In a day or two, this will morph into "a Trump lie!", when it is nothing other than common usage, like many "Trump lies!".
Kamala Harris is not the Border Czar, just like the USA has not been in a war since WWII.
Just like Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan and many other "non-wars" were formally declared as "Wars", they are thus not "Wars", Kamala Harris may have been the point person designated by Biden to deal with and solve the border crisis, she definitely was not the "Border Czar" because the term "Border Czar" is not an actual position.
Kamala Harris was simple the inept point person designated by Biden to deal with and solve the border crisis who failed miserably.
Biden however is the only president who has presided during a time without being at war. What a wonderful achievement that Biden has, where he has decreased the stockpiles of military equipment and created trillions of dollars to give away to various locations around the globe even though there is no war.
Biden must also be attempting to rid the red sea of mosquitos with missiles because we can't be a war with the Houthis because it has not been declared. Additional proof is that Russia isn't at war with Ukraine because it's just a "Police Action". Ukraine might be a war with Russia, but not the other way around.
Image that, every president since WWII has presided over the country during times where we were not at war. That's pretty impressive and noble. I wonder what the definition if "IS" is?
It is nice to “unburdened by what has been”, image the possibilities if there are no consequences for evil deeds and failures.