Dem VP choice

[Guy Chamberlin]

I think this year more than ever the most important quality for the VP is relative youth and vigor. 

 

Secondly, not plucking a Senator out of action unless she can deliver a swing state. 

 

I don't think the VP will bring a single policy change to the table. They are already using creative double-speak to make the Democratic platform everything for everybody, which they've done for as long as I can remember. It's aspirational and totally non-binding. 

 

The formula would suggest Stacy Abrams, but I would hardly be shocked by either Warren or Harris. 

[TGHusker]

Biden says he'd pick Michelle in a heart beat if she was interested.   He goes on to say he doesn't think she wants to be anywhere near the WH.    In the interview, he recommits that the VP will be a woman but not necessarily a women of color. He did say, his SC pick when that opportunity arises, will be a woman of color.  

 

 

https://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2020/04/20/joe-biden-says-he-would-pick-michelle-obama-to-be-his-vice-president/

[TGHusker]

15 hours ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

I think this year more than ever the most important quality for the VP is relative youth and vigor. 

 

Secondly, not plucking a Senator out of action unless she can deliver a swing state. 

 

I don't think the VP will bring a single policy change to the table. They are already using creative double-speak to make the Democratic platform everything for everybody, which they've done for as long as I can remember. It's aspirational and totally non-binding. 

 

The formula would suggest Stacy Abrams, but I would hardly be shocked by either Warren or Harris. 

However, the pick has to be seen as a person who could step in to be president.  My concern wt Stacy Abrams is that she hasn't won a state wide race (although that Governor's race was suspect) and she hasn't proven herself on the national stage outside of the State of the Union response.   Abrams, if selected, could put Ga into play (same # of EC votes as Michigan) and of course she solidifies the minority vote and would draw progressives to the voting place. One could argue that all of her other accomplishments would out weight the fact that she hasn't won a state wide vote or been elected to Congress.

I think it will be Warren or Harris or now possibly Michigan Governor Whitmer, who has gone toe to toe wt tRump. 

She secures the very important state of Mich which went to tRump last time.   Harris would help with the minority vote but Biden would have that locked up plus he already has Calif locked up.   Warren should be a motivating factor for progressives to show up to vote.  Amy K, who I like, isn't as diverse politically than Biden as Warren is.  She may be helpful in pulling in those upper midwest states of Wisc and Michigan into the Biden camp but Minn most likely will vote for Biden as it did for Hillary last time.   Abrams, if selected, could put Ga into play (same # of EC votes as Michigan) and of course she solidifies the minority vote.

 

[DevoHusker]

20 minutes ago, TGHusker said:

Biden says he'd pick Michelle in a heart beat if she was interested.   He goes on to say he doesn't think she wants to be anywhere near the WH.    In the interview, he recommits that the VP will be a woman but not necessarily a women of color. He did say, his SC pick when that opportunity arises, will be a woman of color.  

 

 

https://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2020/04/20/joe-biden-says-he-would-pick-michelle-obama-to-be-his-vice-president/

 

Too bad these things stray away from the outright best candidate, and months before the election, and waay in the future possible SC selection he can say it "will be" this or that, instead of the absolute best fit for the positions...

[Moiraine]

36 minutes ago, DevoHusker said:

 

Too bad these things stray away from the outright best candidate, and months before the election, and waay in the future possible SC selection he can say it "will be" this or that, instead of the absolute best fit for the positions...

 

 

Ya I don’t like it either. And I don’t see the point. He’s won the nomination. 

[Moiraine]

18 hours ago, Moiraine said:

Ya I don’t like it either. And I don’t see the point. He’s won the nomination. 

 

 

I’d actually go further than this now that I’ve thought about it more.

 

I think he’s doing a disservice to whoever he ends up picking by throwing out these promises about it being a woman or a minority. It makes it sound like he narrows down the pool based on those things first and it casts doubt on their qualifications.

 

What he should say is he’ll pick the best person. Maybe if he got down to a final 2 and they were equal and one was a minority or a woman, he would then pick the minority/woman. That I’d have no problem with since they are both lacking in positions of power. But the way he’s going about it makes it look like he’s doing a favor to his eventual pick instead of letting it look like they were picked because they earned it and deserve it. 

[BigRedBuster]

As for people who I think would do a good job, I like Kamala or Amy.  But, they might not be the people who have the wow factor to help him win the office.

[teachercd]

5 hours ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

I’d actually go further than this now that I’ve thought about it more.

 

I think he’s doing a disservice to whoever he ends up picking by throwing out these promises about it being a woman or a minority. It makes it sound like he narrows down the pool based on those things first and it casts doubt on their qualifications.

 

What he should say is he’ll pick the best person. Maybe if he got down to a final 2 and they were equal and one was a minority or a woman, he would then pick the minority/woman. That I’d have no problem with since they are both lacking in positions of power. But the way he’s going about it makes it look like he’s doing a favor to his eventual pick instead of letting it look like they were picked because they earned it and deserve it. 

Crazy idea huh?  Just picking the very best person for the job.  

 

By the way, I totally agree with you.

[Guy Chamberlin]

6 hours ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

I’d actually go further than this now that I’ve thought about it more.

 

I think he’s doing a disservice to whoever he ends up picking by throwing out these promises about it being a woman or a minority. It makes it sound like he narrows down the pool based on those things first and it casts doubt on their qualifications.

 

What he should say is he’ll pick the best person. Maybe if he got down to a final 2 and they were equal and one was a minority or a woman, he would then pick the minority/woman. That I’d have no problem with since they are both lacking in positions of power. But the way he’s going about it makes it look like he’s doing a favor to his eventual pick instead of letting it look like they were picked because they earned it and deserve it. 

 

This is a good point. There's a patronizing aspect to this I hadn't considered.

 

Biden's announcement was always a gimmick, specifically timed to the last televised debate with Bernie Sanders, issued as a live challenge, presumably making Joe look like the more dynamic progressive. 

 

Remember the last candidate to try something like this? It was Ted Cruz in 2016. The nomination wasn't officially sealed and he named Carly Fiorina as his running mate, hoping to seize the spotlight from Trump and force something at the convention.  

 

One of the things that amazes me about 2016 is that the GOP runner-up to Trump was the second oiliest and most disliked candidate in the country. Throw Ben Carson's surge into the mix and you gotta question the criteria of the modern Republican voter. 

[Danny Bateman]

1 hour ago, BigRedBuster said:

As for people who I think would do a good job, I like Kamala or Amy.  But, they might not be the people who have the wow factor to help him win the office.

 

They would both probably do well. Klobuchar especially if Biden is looking for a bipartisan consensus-seeker and dealmaker as he has talked about at times.

 

I'm growing increasing open to the idea of Warren, though. She brings no regional advantage but she would be a bridge between the two factions of the party, she's smart as a whip and would probably get creative in maximizing the influence of the office.

Plus there's this...

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

Give how the moderate, reach-across-the-aisle Obama/Biden administration was c$%k-blocked at every turn for 8 years, and how much Democrats have conceded over the last 40 years, why do we think a bipartisan consensus seeker is what this ticket needs right now? 

[Danny Bateman]

8 minutes ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

Give how the moderate, reach-across-the-aisle Obama/Biden administration was c$%k-blocked at every turn for 8 years, and how much Democrats have conceded over the last 40 years, why do we think a bipartisan consensus seeker is what this ticket needs right now? 

 

Did I say that's what it needed, or did I say that may be what Biden wants?

[TGHusker]

2 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

As for people who I think would do a good job, I like Kamala or Amy.  But, they might not be the people who have the wow factor to help him win the office.

I agree - those are my top 2.  But, even though Warren is more progressive than I would typically vote, I think she has the smarts, the vision, and the empathy to be a good leader (contrast to tRump who has none of those 3 virtues) if called on. I've always been impressed wt how she had deeply thought out policy positions prior to running.  She may be the one who can bring the 2 camps together in the Dem party, if the progressives can forgive her for some of her mis-steps towards Bernie during the debate season.

[FrantzHardySwag]

16 minutes ago, TGHusker said:

I agree - those are my top 2.  But, even though Warren is more progressive than I would typically vote, I think she has the smarts, the vision, and the empathy to be a good leader (contrast to tRump who has none of those 3 virtues) if called on. I've always been impressed wt how she had deeply thought out policy positions prior to running.  She may be the one who can bring the 2 camps together in the Dem party, if the progressives can forgive her for some of her mis-steps towards Bernie during the debate season.

Agree on Warren. If progressives think Warren is too right for their taste, then those people won't accept anything other than a Bernie nom. A Warren VP offer would be about as far as I see Biden willing to stick his hand out to the far left of the party. 

[Guy Chamberlin]

2 hours ago, Danny Bateman said:

 

Did I say that's what it needed, or did I say that may be what Biden wants?

 

Didn't mean to aim it at you. It's the thinking that made Biden the compromise candidate. There does appear to be some agreement that the VP could/should bring something more to the table. 

 

Again, I doubt issues will matter much for the VP choice as they're all under the Dem tent. It's really about adding excitement to the race. But it can't be window dressing this time. I think everyone is highly attuned to this VP becoming the next President in 2024 or sooner.