So, last night’s debate. Funny how women seem to be defined based on their accomplishments, but guys are defined on their potential.
Weird. Pete has a fraction of the accomplishments of someone like Warren or Harris, but media hot takes give him an edge why? Because of what potential he brings? What about Warren’s potential or that of Harris.
Pete is a mayor of a small market city. Heck, it’d barely rate as a neighborhood in a place like Los Angeles or Brooklyn NY (which itself is a fraction of NYC). And yet Kamala is US Senator from California and a distinguished prosecutor and Warren is also a US Senator who has signature legislation to her credit.
I don’t get it.
But I do get that everyone should be dunking on Tulsi even more than they have.