Update
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

WaPo Editorial Calls On Kamala Harris To Step Down ‘For The Country’s Sake’

"The Washington Post’s Kathleen Parker called on Vice President Kamala Harris to step aside “for the country’s sake” in an editorial published on Friday.

Parker agued that although she had hoped to see Harris thrive and shine in her position as second-in-command, she — and may Americans along with her — had been disappointed by the vice president’s actual job performance.

“The Kamala conundrum comes down to this,” Parker wrote. “She was picked because she was Black and female, a combo tantamount to job security. Now that she has become a burden to the Democratic ticket, Biden can’t fire her. He can’t risk alienating his base. Full stop.”

Parker went on to note that the “Kamala conundrum” was particularly worrisome given the number of Americans who were also worried about the age and cognitive state of President Joe Biden.

“The seriousness of this situation can’t be overstated. Biden’s diminishing faculties, notwithstanding his relatively successful State of the Union address, and his increasing physical frailty are concerning,” Parker wrote, adding, “Every honest person knows he’s not in top form. A recent New York Times poll found that 73 percent of registered voters believe Biden is too old to be the nation’s top executive. This includes 61 percent of those who voted for him in 2020.”

Parker concluded by pointing to Harris’ low marks when it came to job approval polls — which have consistently scored her among the lowest tallies ever for a sitting vice president — and argued that if something were to happen to Biden, those numbers were not likely to skyrocket simply because Harris moved into the Democratic ticket’s top spot.

Her assessment was that, for the sake of the country — or, more aptly, for the sake of the Democratic Party’s chances of success in 2024 — Harris should step aside. Parker gave no indication of who she might like to see take Harris’ place in the event that se did so, however."
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
beckyromero · 36-40, F
Parker is a conservative columnist. You may not believe it, but the Post does actually have a few.

In 2008, she wrote a piece saying Sarah Palin should withdrawl as the GOP Vice Presidential nominee.

Nothing but click-bait. And you were baited. Hook, line and sinker.

And another thing - an opinion piece by a columnist is not an "editorial" by the newspaper. Geez Louise!
DavidT8899 · 22-25, M
@beckyromero I don't care what type of columnist this Parker says he is -if that situation didn't reflect the desperate and very legitimate fears of the Democratic party,it would have never been printed by a paper like the Post .And for a paper like that to actually print the truth is an indication of how serious the situation is getting.Not click-bait,just facts and common sense.
beckyromero · 36-40, F
@DavidT8899
I don't care what type of columnist this Parker says he is -if that situation didn't reflect the desperate and very legitimate fears of the Democratic party,it would have never been printed by a paper like the Post .And for a paper like that to actually print the truth is an indication of how serious the situation is getting.Not click-bait,just facts and common sense.

First of all, KATHLEEN Parker is a woman.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/kathleen-parker/

Secondly, her views don't reflect that of the Post. It was an opinion piece, not the newspaper's editorial.

And third, some newspapers, like the Post actually DO allow space for opinion makers that may seem contrary to their readership's point of view.

She may not be a fan on Trump, but she is a conservative.

When Palin first emerged as John McCain's running mate, I confess I was delighted. She was the antithesis and nemesis of the hirsute, Birkenstock-wearing sisterhood - a refreshing feminist of a different order who personified the modern successful working mother.

https://www.npr.org/sections/talk/2008/09/the_opinion_page_palin_must_go_1.html

See also:
https://www.lubbockonline.com/story/opinion/columns/2015/02/02/parker-sarah-palin-found-her-own-party-had-lost-faith-her/14995033007/

And:
https://www.chicoer.com/2014/11/12/kathleen-parker-obamas-spiteful-legacy-2/

https://www.staugustine.com/story/opinion/2013/11/10/kathleen-parker-what-obama-forgot-apologize/16077470007/

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/kathleen-parker-now-haile_b_142336

https://www.beaumontenterprise.com/opinions/columns/article/KATHLEEN-PARKER-With-Reagan-in-84-it-was-730225.php
DavidT8899 · 22-25, M
@beckyromero Just I don't care if this Parker person calls themselves a conservative, wether they are a he or she is irrelevant.If they didn't toe the "Trump is the source of all evil and nothing is ever Bidens fault"line,they wouldn't be allowed to operate -period.And you can post all the news links that you want,it doesn't change the fact:the reason she was allowed the write that article in that paper is because Bidens senility and Harris total incompetence has become so self -evident that not even a propaganda outlet like the Post can cover it up or explain it away anymore.
beckyromero · 36-40, F
@DavidT8899

Well, you're just plain wrong about that. Conservatives opposed to Biden and/or Harris get opportunities in left-leaning newspapers all the time.

Just because Trump doesn't like to read them, doesn't mean you need to follow in his footsteps.
DavidT8899 · 22-25, M
@beckyromero I rather think that I'm right.And while I don't doubt that Donald Trump doesn't read those propaganda rags,I can assure you that has no influence on my decision to ignore them. Contrary to the belief of "Never Trumpers"a person can generally support his decisions as President without being a member of a "cult"who slavishly worships him as some kind of deity.Know this:The Post,along with the New York Times,are NOT honest journalism;nothing critical about the party would ever be allowed unless the owners secretly approved of it.
beckyromero · 36-40, F
@DavidT8899

You're disqualified for being a juror since you refuse to look at the evidence.

Typical Trumpet.
DavidT8899 · 22-25, M
@beckyromero I will remove myself from this conversation since you've abandoned all common sense(this isn't a trial and Im not a juror).Typical "Never Trumper."(,FYI:Trump was not my first choice for nominee,so how that makes me a "Trumpet",Im not sure )