To the editor: If Vice President Kamala Harris was running for president of California, she’d win in a landslide. Unfortunately, she is running for president of the United States. (“California’s Kamala Harris was the necessary choice but not the best candidate,” column, July 22)
Maybe I’m cynical, but I do not believe the majority of voters in critical swing states will embrace a liberal woman of color from the San Francisco Bay Area. Do I wish I was wrong? Of course. I despise prejudice, but that does not stop it from existing.
If 2024 was a normal election in a healthy environment, I’d think OK, give Harris a shot, she deserves it. But if Trump wins, it will be catastrophic for our country.
Beating Trump is so easy, and I do not understand why Democratic leadership does not embrace a simple solution. The solution, though, will require progressives to make a sacrifice and settle for getting three-quarters of the pie.
There are several prominent, popular figures who embrace the Democratic Party platform 80% of the time but are right of center on some issues; Sen. Joe Manchin (I-W.Va.), Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro and Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear are among them. These guys have won in red states and appeal to independent voters.
Harris has the chance to be a hero for the free world by maintaining her vice president position now and running for president in the near future.
Lanny Levine, Marina del Rey
..
To the editor: I’d suggest that George Skelton’s column was sour grapes, but he doesn’t have a dog in the hunt.
If Harris is not the best choice, Skelton should name another. I’m curious why he didn’t. After reading Skelton’s column, I feel that Harris indeed seems like the best choice given her qualifications.
Patricia Levinson, Culver City
