Will Obama help Kamala Harris?

|
(12)

President Obama is coming to California to help raise money for Sen. Barbara Boxer, who already has more than $8 million on hand. The president has to do this; Boxer's seat is critical to the Democrats hopes for hanging on to a majority in the Senate,and Obama will pull out all the stops in this fall's campaign to help Dems in tough races.

And while Boxer's not going to get an easy pass, she's still the front-runner -- whatever the polls may show, she's always been a great campaigner and has overcome tough odds plenty of times before. And unless Tom Campbell pulls it out in the GOP primary, she's going to face either Carly Fiorina or Chuck DeVore, and both of them are too far to the right for California.

But there's another key race this fall where Obama could also be a huge help. I think San Francisco D.A. Kamala Harris is going to win the Democratic primary for attorney general, but in the general election, she's going to get hit hard by the GOP dirt machine. It's going to be death penalty and cop killers all day long. Harris is tough, and knows what's coming, but I can guarantee that race will be nasty, mean, dirty, ugly and as negative as you can imagine.

And Harris is going to need to raise a lot of money to fight back.

Now let's remember: Harris was one of the first California elected officials to support Obama for president. She was the co-chair of his state campaign. And this fall, he could return the favor by making a visible endorsement -- and by coming to town for a major Harris fundraiser. The president of the United States can raise $5 million in one night for a candidate -- and that kind of boost, along with the positive press it would generate, might make the difference.

Of course, Obama, who (sadly) won't come out against the death penalty, will have to take some hard questions and a few hits himself, in a tough national election year for Democrats, if he gets to close to Harris. And she' s enough of a pragmatist that she'll understand if he ducks this one.

But he really shouldn't.

Comments

She has my vote and support, but I'll never get over my personal dislike from some of the "rallying" speeches she gave to volunteers during the primary. They amounted to little more that "Bust your ass harder." Winning SF over Clinton was important. It stiffened Pelosi's spine as chair of the convention to not be seen as advocating against her constituents.

He really owes this to Harris.

Posted by generic on Apr. 12, 2010 @ 1:11 pm

The Chairman of Change (Bush3) has continued all of the neocon Bush agenda minus some minor window-dressing stuff in just his first year with the Dems having the House and Senate and White House. The neocon Bush/Cheney agenda continues. And you're concerned about the Dems keeping the Senate, as if that would make any goddamned difference whatsoever! You see the state of things don't you? What difference would it make? Most of them are Republicans with a D behind their name. Cheney is still running the show and who helped him for 8 years? Your precious Dems with their yes votes, their complicity, their silence and by taking impeachment "off the table." When will you get out of the D and R rut? EVER? How much longer will you allow yourself to be played by these useless politicians. Half of the congress = millionaires. Why do you rally behind and try to defend millionaires who don't give a fuk about you or me? They will play you as long as you allow yourself to be played. Both of these teams work for their corporate owners and neither give a damn about We The People. How much more do you need to see to understand that? It's just that the Dems pretend to on occasion and some people are gullible enough to fall for it. Just like they fell for Mr Hope and Change we can believe in and his BS.

You write that Obama won't come out against the death penalty. Why would you expect him to? He started droning/killing innocent people in Pakistan shortly after he took office and has droned Pakistan several times since. Like Bush, he likes killing people, so why would he come out against the death penalty? DUH. Then there's his escalation of Afghanistan. The occupation of Iraq continues along with the stealing of their oil. And then some damn fools give this war criminal and Bush-accomplice a nobel peace prize. Who bought them off?

It is long past due that people abandon both of these useless corporate, pro-war, PNAC parties and vote for independent progressives. Until then, the status quo will continue. Do I expect this to happen? No, people like Tim Redmond will stay in the D rut that he's in and remain a Dem kool-aid drinker indefinitely.

And Google Barbara Boxer, USA Patriot Act and see what you find. The USA Patriot Act shreds the US Constitution. Look to see what she voted for.

Posted by Sam on Apr. 12, 2010 @ 1:30 pm

Obama's help is the kiss of death these days. Even in California we're turning against his judgements. Boxer may be great at raising money but she will lose this one. She refused to listen to us and refused to hold town hall meetings, and turned off her phones. She brokered the deal for Nelsons vote...that went well, right. Insulted the military and a black rep. She has only one interest...herself...arrogant is too good a word when it comes to babs.Almost forgot...she and Waxman think cap and trade is what California and the country needs. They sponsered the bill. Just what we need more government and taxes, right?

Posted by GuestMomlee on Apr. 12, 2010 @ 2:00 pm

Doing a few searches it seems around 60% of people support the death penalty, when it comes to such things as cop killing it seems to be a pretty hard 60%, highlighting that concerning Harris only makes sense from the right. It's not really dirt, its her record of uselessness as a DA.

The position here is that she needs to fight back against her record? It puzzles me that Harris needs to fight the attacks on her record, this wouldn't be another case where the effete left knows better than the average Joe it purports to speak for?

If she could make her case based purely on the economics of the death penalty she might get some votes but all one needs to do is look at her record and that would fail too.

Posted by glen matlock on Apr. 12, 2010 @ 3:12 pm

Yet another politician with no record of success who somehow feels they're entitled to fail upward. It's clear AG is just a way-station on what she feels should be a path straight to the top.

She'll stay in that position for less than 4 years then she'll run for either senator (when DIFi retires) or governor. Then after that she'll aim for VP and then run for president herself. It's all so transparent.

Posted by Lucretia the Trollop on Apr. 12, 2010 @ 8:13 pm

Just to add to Sam's comment: I'm so excited to support the party whose president is trying to drill offshore for oil where Bush didn't even do it, and promote nukes way beyond anything Bush ever did! And BTW, progressives should stop complaining about right wing presidents who they perceive to be stupid (Bush II & Reagan). It's much better to have someone in power who is stupid if he wants to do bad things, than someone smart like Obama who will be able to accomplish them.

And Sam, you're right, unfortunately. What we see is Greens defecting to the Democratic Party (Mirkarimi) instead of progressive Democrats joining the Green Party. The most progressive publication of any size in the Bay Area (Guardian) still lacks the guts and/or wisdom to endorse true progressives instead of Democrats in elections. I suppose people like us will fight for what is right no matter what, but I have no realistic expectation that anything significant and good will ever happen.

Posted by Jeff Hoffman on Apr. 12, 2010 @ 8:22 pm

The title says it all. What has she done for California as a senator? What has she done for America as a Senator? She makes more money than the combined 10% unemployed in California. She has a better health care plan than the 9%+ unemployed in America. She thinks that the public should bow their heads to her wherever she walks into. It's all about Babs...she forgets that she was elected by THE PEOPLE, FOR THE PEOPLE AND OF THE PEOPLE...therefore she is the servant OF THE PEOPLE. However, in her self absorbed and narcissistic psyche, it's the opposite. She refused to listen to her constituents on policies as she worked the backroom deals to get the bills through anyway. While other reps were holding town hall meetings, she did the opposite and hid in her fortress on The Hill. Her time is up. As an independent, I will be voting for Fiorina, who actually worked her way to the top and had proven herself as an able leader and effective manager. Bye Bye Babs!

Posted by Guest on Apr. 13, 2010 @ 7:29 am

In my previous comment, I spoke about Bush3 having droned Pakistan repeatedly since his coronation.

This is from BBC News:
Tuesday, 13 April 2010 17:49 UK

"At least 73 civilians were killed when an army jet bombed a remote village in Pakistan's tribal region of Khyber, a local official has told the BBC.
He said the incident took place on Saturday but news was slow in being reported because of the inaccessibility of the region. The jet was involved in operations against Taliban militants in the nearby Orakzai tribal region.Officials have reportedly already paid compensation to families of victims. The military insists most of those killed were militants, but local sources say many civilians have also been killed. Many people have died in air strikes in the area over the past 18 months. Villagers say another strike - by a US drone missile - killed 13 people on Monday."

So where's the outrage? If this were Bush doing this, the Dem believers and kool-aid consumers would be SCREAMING about this. But since it's their "messiah" and "savior" Obama (The Chairman of Change and The Pope of Hope) doing this with a D behind his name, I don't hear anyone saying anything about it. When the politician has a D behind their name, that D apparently serves as license to do the same things that war criminals Bush and Cheney did without any criticism. It's perfectly all right and acceptable. But if it were Bush doing it, the D hypocrites would be screaming about it. They are silent when their Obama does the same things as Bush. Others make excuses and apologies for the same actions because they feel they must defend their "Dem Team," as if it's some sports team we're talking about. Rah, rah team. "My team right or wrong" is the mentality. Pathetic. Screw the team. What about the US Constitution? And this does not even address what would happen if someone droned the Divided States of North American (this nation) and killed 70+ people while they were trying to drone/kill hate terrorist groups here. This nation would react just like it did following 9/11. This government would bomb and terrorize any nation it could and justify it and the sheep would fall for it and fly their flags high and spew plastic "patriotism" and nauseating nationalism all over their vehicles, homes, airwaves and websites.

-----------------HYPOCRISY--------------------

The hypocrisy of the D believers is blatant and astounding. They are so blinded by D party-line indoctrination. Just like the Republican believers, they put party-line indoctrination ABOVE the US Constitution, when the US Constitution should have priority, not mindless cheer-leading for some useless corporate party that's the same as the other useless corporate party.

Posted by Sam on Apr. 13, 2010 @ 4:49 pm

So Obama should come to California to campaign for Kamala Harris for AG even though he did not campaign here against Proposition 8 and failed to do anything meaningful to counteract the Yes on 8 ads that had targeted black voters with Obama's statements against same-sex marriage? If Obama does campaign in California to pay back Harris for her support in 2008 after he had essentially done nothing to stop a measure taking marriage rights away from same-sex couples in California, then the lgbt community should take that exactly as it is - an insult to us. Giving money to the Democrats is only just enabling them and not creating any change.

Posted by Colin V. Gallagher on Apr. 14, 2010 @ 11:45 am

Giving money to the Democrats is only just enabling them and not creating any change.

---------------------------

Absolutely. They already have all the money they need. Why do "we" have to give them any more? Boxer already has more than eight million dollars. I wish I had anything close to eight million dollars. Why would anyone who is not a millionaire send money to a millionaire? Does that many any sense to anybody? All that these useless politician want from We The People is:

1. your vote
2. your $$$$$$$$. And some people are still naive and gullible enough to send it to them.

Other than that, they don't give a damn about you. Oh they will occasionally spew BS to the contrary, but that's all it is.

Remember "Hope" and "Change we can believe in?" Empty marketing slogans. That's all they were. Simple slogans for simple minds.

Posted by Sam on Apr. 14, 2010 @ 4:41 pm

So, now we like Kamala, eh, Tim? I .... TOLD ... you so.

Posted by Peter Byrne on Apr. 15, 2010 @ 6:16 pm

So, now we like Kamala, eh, Tim? I .... TOLD ... you so.

Posted by Peter Byrne on Apr. 15, 2010 @ 6:17 pm