

The “Harris” campaign was a continuation of Biden’s ongoing campaign under a new candidate. They never had a chance to set their own messaging nor policy priorities.
I don’t see why the campaign being a continuation meant they couldn’t set their own messaging or policy priorities. As far as I know, donations etc. can’t be taken back if a campaign changes policies. Could you explain what you mean here?




Sorry, but that’s not an acceptable answer. If you can’t pivot your campaign even though your polling research shows you that individual, divisive topics are causing you to lose, something is broken enough that you definitely shouldn’t have ever been a valid candidate. How can you expect to win against a populist if it takes years to listen to your voters?!
I knew that Harris will lose the second she stepped on stage, was asked how things will change with her, and she answered that nothing will fundamentally change if she’s elected. All while the other candidate keeps telling people that he understands they are hurting, and that he’ll improve everything. I don’t care who was responsible for that strategy - everyone involved should be banned from having influence on another campaign.