• yonderbarn@lazysoci.al
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    Without a primary and any opponents, how did you determine she was the best candidate? If you’re referring to her being the VP, it was widely reported the Biden cabinet was upset with her handling of the interview on the border crisis. After that they gave her the cold shoulder and barely handed her any meaningful projects. She was not prepared because she refused to listen to her aides and then afterwards blamed them for not properly prepping her.

    She was as much of a disappointment as Biden was. Would have been a better move to break clean from both of them.

    • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      By the time that Biden stepped down, there was no time for a primary. (And let’s be honest, that farce ran before wasn’t a true primary.)

      She was the only person that could, at the time, get everyone into lockstep with her. She was also competent, experienced and skilled.

      Aside from Israel/Palestine, her political positions weren’t particularly offensive either. (She should have thrown Biden under that bus, but I get why she didn’t. Hell. Biden should have dove under for her.)

      I would have much preferred another; though they would never have manage as well as Harris did… particularly as Biden gave grudging support for her.

      In the context of that moment in time, she was the only person with a chance at beating Trump, and that’s what made her “best”.