John Donegan claims that Kamala Harris is not qualified to be president of the U.S., and she is also a bad choice (“The Democratic Convention,” Aug. 1). He implies that that her nomination was forced on the members of the Democratic Party (“join or else”), and also that she was a “DEI” hire by Joe Biden.
Currently, polls show Harris to be at least even with Donald Trump. So how can an unqualified, DEI hire be a such a strong contender against a powerful ex-president after only being a candidate for two weeks?
Could it be that many fear what the reign of an emboldened Donald Trump would look like and are looking for someone, anyone else? Could it be that Trump/Vance keeps telling us how bad life is while the stock market is near a record high, unemployment is near record lows, and inflation is abating? Could it be that many know that the oft-repeated “immigrant crime wave” is a lie? Could it be that Trump still hasn’t admitted that he lost a fair election in 2020—as determined by the courts? Could it be that Trump was convicted of multiple felonies by a jury? Could it be that both Trump and Vance constantly call their opponents childish names or insult women and minorities? Could it be that Trump and Vance say they stand for “freedom” while restricting what women can do with their own bodies, what books people can read, and what religion people can or cannot follow?
And even if Harris was, in fact a “DEI” hire by Joe Biden, does that alone make her unqualified? Is there truly only one person in the whole nation who is actually qualified to be president or vice president? If there is more than one, couldn’t one of those candidates be Black or even half-Black? Apparently, John doesn’t think so. Didn’t Trump pick Vance at least in part because he thought Vance would somehow increase the chances of Trump’s reelection?
John also seems to be hung up about how the Democrats chose their candidate before the convention. Was Trump’s nomination before the RNC convention started ever in question?
And why does John care? He is obviously an “R.” Doesn’t each party set their own rules about how they nominate candidates? Maybe he should file a complaint with the DNC. I’m certain they will take his concerns into account just as much as the RNC did mine when I wrote to them complaining about Trump’s coronation before their convention ever started.
And John talks about the riots during the 1968 Democratic Convention like he almost expects the same during this year’s get-together. Obviously, John doesn’t understand how united Democrats are this year. They know the stakes of this election. They know that they don’t want to be led by a narcissistic old man that knows little more than how to hurl insults and thinly veiled threats against anyone who would try to contradict or stop him.
The Harris/Walz team talks about the future, not the past. They talk about policies, not revenge. They make us proud to be Americans again, while Trump tells us that we are a second-rate country that is completely broken and only he can fix it. Harris helps us look to the future with hope, not wallow in how someone has “wronged” us and it’s now our turn to get even. She reminds us that politics and government are not a “zero sum” game, and that we can live better without blaming, attacking, or marginalizing others verbally, physically, or economically.
So, that is why a person that you call an “unqualified” and a “DEI” hire stands a good chance of beating your chosen candidate! Δ
Charles Linquist wrote to New Times from Arroyo Grande. Write an opinion piece of your own and email it to letters@newtimesslo.com.
This article appears in Aug 15-25, 2024.
Yep, let’s break out the red flags with a sickle and hammer.
I “don’t understand how united the Democrats are this year”? Well, I understand how much most hate Trump, and you are correct that the catalyst for Kamala Harris’ support is Trump. But, the Democrats are hardly united in support of Harris, just in opposition to Trump. After all, less than 5% of Democrats supported her 2020 presidential bid, and it is unlikely that the party would have chosen her if given a choice. Obviously the Democratic party big shots didn’t think so, or they would have held an open convention and allowed other candidates to seek the nomination, thus giving her selection at least a veneer of democratic credibility.
Does a DEI selection necessarily mean that the candidate chosen is not the most qualified? Of course not. But, when you are committed to selecting a candidate out of only 7% of the population, and ignoring the remaining 93%, the chance that you are going to get the best candidate is greatly reduced. That is simple math. The DEI characterization of Harris came right out of Biden’s mouth, and helped you win the election in 2020. You now own it. It can not be wished away out of embarrassment.
But, you are correct that Harris’ polling numbers reflect a distaste for Trump. Indeed, I imagine that 1/3 of the electorate would rather vote for Jeffrey Dahmer, at least if he could be revived and qualified for the ballot.
“Party big shots” aka poobahs.
Kaaamola Harris as president is going to make me lose my lunch