Well, we knew it already, but now it’s officially official.
Willie Brown, once the likely most powerful Democrat operator in California, had a relationship with Kamala and, by his own admission, favoured her career on several occasions whilst she was his mistress.
I do not know what passes for “feminism” these days, but I think what Kamala did goes under different names, none of them flattering.
I wonder how many Democrat women will “identify” with this oh so progressive horizontal prodigy, whose continuing flip-flopping, sexual and otherwise, shows the only thing she is willing to progress is her own advancement.
The reality is that the Democrats dig a very deep hole for themselves when they created the expectation of a sexist, racist choice for the Veep (if you can’t be chosen because of the colour of your skin, this is racism; if you can’t be chosen because of your sex, this is sexism). At that point they were already in deep trouble, because no candidate of quality was available within the narrow confines of their racist, sexist parameters.
Once the deep hole was there, they tried to get out of it by picking one of the very bad choices they had, and it is already clear it did not go well. The left is barking, the right is rejoicing, the MSM are embarrassing themselves trying to make of this cheap, conniving slut a statesman.
By serving only herself for so many years, Kamala has alienated everybody else. Leftists Blacks are angry because she sent people to jail for marijuana offences, in her “tough guy” phase, and moderates are angry because she has espoused all the madness of modern times, from tranny issues to green new deal. Catholics who still care and pay attention know that she is an extreme proposer of the killing of the unborn, even for the standards of Democrats.
This is why she went nowhere in the Primaries, even after remaining the only person “of colour”. By spectacularly tanking even as the only minority candidate left, she clearly showed that not even the minorities she belongs to like her. More likely, they think of her exactly the same I do.
I do not pretend to be an expert in that irrational, impenetrable jungle called the female mind; but one thing I know: normal women hate sluts. It must be so, because – even in these times – the slutty woman is both a menace to the married woman, and a threat to a woman’s marriage perspectives if she is believed one. In the same way that every man knows that being considered a sissy will greatly harm his reputation with women, a woman must feel – and women feel, a lot – that being reputed a slut will greatly harm her ability to form a bond with a quality man, reducing her to fish in the soy boy pond for her long-term relationship project. I think, by the way, that this is the reason why sluttishness is considered “feminist” by, erm, sluts: because it undermines the family, both the existing one and the one that is hoped for.
The result of this is that Kamala’s obvious horizontal careerism will – though many of them may choose not to be vocal about their aversion to that kind of woman – greatly harm her with very, very many female voters.
So there you are. The talent pool was restricted so much, that no talent was left. What was left was a careerist slut whom nobody likes, not even the people of her own minority, and whom many women will soon learn to hate with a passion.
Great choice, Dems.
This identity politics is working like a charm.