This is the seventh in a series of effortposts examining Democratic primary candidates. This series seeks to analyze and discuss candidates, primarily seeking to discuss them in an order consistent with timely relevance. So far, we have covered:

#1:

#2:

#3:

#4:

#5:

#6:

All effortposts continue to be updated with edits at the bottom discussing more recent developments, and followup effortposts may be created as necessary.

Introduction

This one is going to be brief. I cannot, in good conscience, recommend Amy Klobuchar or waste my time putting the effort into researching elements of her history and platform. Thankfully, that information will likely be largely irrelevant.

For background:

Excerpts:

A number of former staffers — both male and female — describe a workplace environment governed by fear and dread, one in which Klobuchar treated her Capitol Hill staffers with cruelty and humiliation, while fixating on seemingly minor issues. A minor mistake in an internal document, for example, could lead to a “multi-day affair,” one former staffer said. Like other Klobuchar alumni, she described haranguing late-night phone calls and critical emails written in all caps, sometimes sent in quick succession.

This is petty, but far from the worst issue.

Three former staffers said Klobuchar has tasked them or their co-workers with performing personal errands, such as making her personal appointments, washing dishes at her home or picking up her dry cleaning. Senate staff are generally prohibited by from performing personal duties for members.

Again, not the worst issue, but I'd find this problematic on its own, even without the main points of issue.

But behind the doors of her Washington, DC, office, the Minnesota Democrat ran a workplace controlled by fear, anger, and shame, according to interviews with eight former staffers, one that many employees found intolerably cruel. She demeaned and berated her staff almost daily, subjecting them to bouts of explosive rage and regular humiliation within the office, according to interviews and dozens of emails reviewed by BuzzFeed News.

That anger regularly left employees in tears, four former staffers said. She yelled, threw papers, and sometimes even hurled objects; one aide was accidentally hit with a flying binder, according to someone who saw it happen, though the staffer said the senator did not intend to hit anyone with the binder when she threw it.

As Klobuchar prepares to potentially announce a presidential campaign Sunday, four of those former staffers said they were sharing emails and anecdotes with BuzzFeed News because they believe that insight into her office reflects on the senator’s ability to run the country. BuzzFeed News spoke with some of the staffers extensively over a period of several months.

I agree with her staff's assessment.

The point at which I called off the original effortpost.

Speaking out could lead to retribution from Klobuchar, should she be able to identify them. She has been known to grow irate at staffers who find work elsewhere, calling their new employers to have the offers rescinded. The practice, which three former staffers for Klobuchar described and one other Capitol Hill veteran confirmed, was seen as vindictive, mystifying and counterproductive. It was also a sign of how far Klobuchar would go to punish those who she thought betrayed her.

Absolutely no. I will not waste my time indulging the platform and background of this candidate. This is a disgusting abuse of power that should have resulted in an

The case against Klobuchar has several staffers speaking on condition of anonymity, likely fearing retribution. If there was no threat of retribution, I could imagine that number would increase. These are multiple allegations of abuse of power and workplace violence, allegations that should be taken seriously. As far as her Senate seat, I'm down for a thorough investigation before removal from office. When selecting a candidate for President however, I believe that unless this investigation is carried out in full prior to voting and returns a convincing case that it didn't happen, this is disqualifying.

Therefore:

I refuse to write a favorable effortpost or even a normal candidate effortpost for Amy Klobuchar unless these concerns are perfectly addressed by investigation. Please scroll back up to the beginning of this post for links to other candidates that are far more deserving of your time than this failure.

Edit:

In regards to why I covered Gabbard and not Klobuchar, a few differences.

1: Gabbard's issues were not well known. I wouldn't exactly say I wrote impartially about her, it was more educational on why she's a bad candidate.

2: Gabbard wasn't widely discussed as a potential candidate for the sub. Some people here were willing to look past Klobuchar's abuses for her policy. Here, my main goal was to make abundantly clear that I believe that to be a destructive approach and a path we shouldn't take when there's reasonable candidates running.

That being said, if she shows significant recovery from this scandal before the debates, I will make a poll as to whether or not you guys want a breakdown of her history and policies, and that post would avoid positive and negative phrasing like I normally use as well as collaboration with one of her supporters to ensure to you guys that the post is neutral.