Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit
Kamala was, shockingly and as a surprise to all, an incredibly capable candidate in 2024. She didn't underperform yesterday relative to other Democrats.

This year, it wasn't about the candidate. It seems clear there wasn't any Democratic candidate who could have won.

In the interest of HN guidelines, I won't respond with sarcasm.

This is a bad opinion. Kamala was a terrible candidate by all metrics. Definitely, the worst Democratic candidate I have seen in my living memory.

It should've been a dead giveaway that now a single Indian or Black person has a good thing to say about her. Her only victory was in California (single party & famously misaligned with national voting trends) and her only televised primary performance was a disaster. Democrats didn't run open primaries because they knew she'd lose.

She didn't have concrete policy proposals, talks like an under-performing consultant and had zero charisma.

Not by all metrics. She did very well in the debate against Trump. She drew huge crowds with her rallies.
loading story #42070377
Nah, Harris wasn't an ideal choice, just like Hillary Clinton wasn't. Ideally for next elections democrats would need someone likable with plenty of charisma and moderate stance on social issues. Being male would be a plus too, unfortunately.

I think Tim Walz would have done better than Harris.

I think so, too. He has a much more direct, down to earth way of talking to people.
Charisma wins elections and she was not terribly charismatic https://paulgraham.com/charisma.html
Apparently being a clown and a liar wins elections ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
loading story #42071024
loading story #42070923
she didn't outperform 2020 biden in any county in the united states.