I would say she was put into a position to take the White House by the American female voter's willingness to overlook simple requirements like competence and character in choosing same-gender candidates over better qualified alternatives.
If Willie Brown's actions were so repugnant to them, the female voters in California could have rejected Harris as an unqualified token at any point in her previous career. Instead, she was praised as a breaker of glass ceilings and an opener of doors previously closed to women - and more quietly a reliable redistributor of free government money, since she has the requisite (D) after her name.
But it was her relationship that put her in a position to get those votes.
If Willie Brown's actions were so repugnant to them, the female voters in California could have rejected Harris as an unqualified token at any point in her previous career.
This is California. What goes on in California would make the Sodomites blush.
Instead, she was praised as a breaker of glass ceilings and an opener of doors previously closed to women - and more quietly a reliable redistributor of free government money, since she has the requisite (D) after her name.
Would she have been in a position to get those votes if not for help from Willie?
And why are men trying to defend this. Assuming this is all true, one man's lust brought us to this point. Instead of defending this or trying to ignore it, why not call it out? I think we'll dodge the bullet this time, for for how much longer if men can't think beyond their next roll in the hay?