Biden's VP?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nobody’s perfect.
Is Pence?

To evangelicals he is. To the rest of the GOP he is inoffensive white bread and fits the "do no harm" ethic. To Trump, he's happy he'd never be overshadowed. So he was a solid pick according to basic VP criteria.

Not sure we have the equivalent of someone who would excite a key part of the base while "doing no harm" to the remaining constituencies.

But to anyone who might like Republicans for the economic policy but isn't basically interested in the Christian version of Sharia law, Pence is a disaster. He let people die of HIV because he hates gay people. Is that who you want at the helm?

I think Harris is great. Demmings is great. Duckworth is great. They're all great. Trump is a gd disaster.

Harris is far too polarizing and unfortunately she does not help in any swing states or battles. A coastal liberal (west instead of east, but otherwise politically the same) does not help in the midwest or southern battleground states. While many feel that the blacks need to be "rewarded" for their long devotion to the party with a black candidate, it is really not a demographic that he needs help with. So, picking Harris is a nod to his base but ignores areas where he needs to pick to strengthen his chances. Harris' polarizing means that while she has a big positive following, she also has a big negative crowd who really don't want her and she turns off many a moderate, especially those that have been long-time Biden backers. He can't afford to lose those moderate/Independent votes. I think Harris is the riskiest candidate on his short list. It is unlikely to significantly help, and could easily hurt his election chances.

Duckworth who appeals to midwest and moderates who like her military background. She has much more positive than negative support. She can help in Michigan and Wisconsin. Lujan Grisham would be a help with the Latino vote, especially in southern states that are now battlegrounds leaning left like Arizona and Florida and with the completely up-in-the-air Texas battleground. Winning any of those could be the difference between winning and losing. Demmings might be problematic with her questionable police background (a lot of attention has been paid to the fact that she was chief of police in Orlando during one of the most racially oppressive periods in it's history), but she would probably still help win Florida. I think these three are far more likely to be positive additions to his ticket.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only candidate who makes sense to me in terms of both experience and cross-constituency appeal is Duckworth. Especially for swing voters. IF Biden selects a non-AA running mate, I think he could mitigate disappointment by releasing his AA cabinet (Rice and Harris...) and SC picks (Kruger) at the same time. Black voters aren't voting for VP in particular, they're voting for a whole administration.

I don’t actually Duckworth, at all. I don’t think she passes the readiness test at all.

Why is that? I think she’s be a great choice to tick a lot of boxes (since that seems to be important to Biden): woman, minority, vet, a known name, etc.

+1 More than twice as much legislative experience as Harris, executive and health care management experience through the VA, more foreign policy expertise than any prospect other than Rice, plus her military service. She absolutely meets the readiness bar and no one on the list would have stronger appeal to swing voters:

https://www.duckworth.senate.gov/about-tammy/biography

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nobody’s perfect.
Is Pence?

To evangelicals he is. To the rest of the GOP he is inoffensive white bread and fits the "do no harm" ethic. To Trump, he's happy he'd never be overshadowed. So he was a solid pick according to basic VP criteria.

Not sure we have the equivalent of someone who would excite a key part of the base while "doing no harm" to the remaining constituencies.

But to anyone who might like Republicans for the economic policy but isn't basically interested in the Christian version of Sharia law, Pence is a disaster. He let people die of HIV because he hates gay people. Is that who you want at the helm?

I think Harris is great. Demmings is great. Duckworth is great. They're all great. Trump is a gd disaster.

Harris is far too polarizing and unfortunately she does not help in any swing states or battles. A coastal liberal (west instead of east, but otherwise politically the same) does not help in the midwest or southern battleground states. While many feel that the blacks need to be "rewarded" for their long devotion to the party with a black candidate, it is really not a demographic that he needs help with. So, picking Harris is a nod to his base but ignores areas where he needs to pick to strengthen his chances. Harris' polarizing means that while she has a big positive following, she also has a big negative crowd who really don't want her and she turns off many a moderate, especially those that have been long-time Biden backers. He can't afford to lose those moderate/Independent votes. I think Harris is the riskiest candidate on his short list. It is unlikely to significantly help, and could easily hurt his election chances.

Duckworth who appeals to midwest and moderates who like her military background. She has much more positive than negative support. She can help in Michigan and Wisconsin. Lujan Grisham would be a help with the Latino vote, especially in southern states that are now battlegrounds leaning left like Arizona and Florida and with the completely up-in-the-air Texas battleground. Winning any of those could be the difference between winning and losing. Demmings might be problematic with her questionable police background (a lot of attention has been paid to the fact that she was chief of police in Orlando during one of the most racially oppressive periods in it's history), but she would probably still help win Florida. I think these three are far more likely to be positive additions to his ticket.

WTF? If I am Trump, I hope there are people who think like you in high places in the Biden campaign. African Americans are the only reason Biden's pathetic candidacy is where it is. Their turnout and enthusiasm is his primary path to victory in the key states.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nobody’s perfect.
Is Pence?

To evangelicals he is. To the rest of the GOP he is inoffensive white bread and fits the "do no harm" ethic. To Trump, he's happy he'd never be overshadowed. So he was a solid pick according to basic VP criteria.

Not sure we have the equivalent of someone who would excite a key part of the base while "doing no harm" to the remaining constituencies.

But to anyone who might like Republicans for the economic policy but isn't basically interested in the Christian version of Sharia law, Pence is a disaster. He let people die of HIV because he hates gay people. Is that who you want at the helm?

I think Harris is great. Demmings is great. Duckworth is great. They're all great. Trump is a gd disaster.

Harris is far too polarizing and unfortunately she does not help in any swing states or battles. A coastal liberal (west instead of east, but otherwise politically the same) does not help in the midwest or southern battleground states. While many feel that the blacks need to be "rewarded" for their long devotion to the party with a black candidate, it is really not a demographic that he needs help with. So, picking Harris is a nod to his base but ignores areas where he needs to pick to strengthen his chances. Harris' polarizing means that while she has a big positive following, she also has a big negative crowd who really don't want her and she turns off many a moderate, especially those that have been long-time Biden backers. He can't afford to lose those moderate/Independent votes. I think Harris is the riskiest candidate on his short list. It is unlikely to significantly help, and could easily hurt his election chances.

Duckworth who appeals to midwest and moderates who like her military background. She has much more positive than negative support. She can help in Michigan and Wisconsin. Lujan Grisham would be a help with the Latino vote, especially in southern states that are now battlegrounds leaning left like Arizona and Florida and with the completely up-in-the-air Texas battleground. Winning any of those could be the difference between winning and losing. Demmings might be problematic with her questionable police background (a lot of attention has been paid to the fact that she was chief of police in Orlando during one of the most racially oppressive periods in it's history), but she would probably still help win Florida. I think these three are far more likely to be positive additions to his ticket.

+1 I agree these three could potentially help the ticket more than the other prospects. The only thing is the Latinx bloc is not at all uniform culturally, so I'm not entirely sure Lujan Grisham would help significantly outside of the Southwest, but no doubt she's competent and meets the readiness bar.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nobody’s perfect.
Is Pence?

To evangelicals he is. To the rest of the GOP he is inoffensive white bread and fits the "do no harm" ethic. To Trump, he's happy he'd never be overshadowed. So he was a solid pick according to basic VP criteria.

Not sure we have the equivalent of someone who would excite a key part of the base while "doing no harm" to the remaining constituencies.

But to anyone who might like Republicans for the economic policy but isn't basically interested in the Christian version of Sharia law, Pence is a disaster. He let people die of HIV because he hates gay people. Is that who you want at the helm?

I think Harris is great. Demmings is great. Duckworth is great. They're all great. Trump is a gd disaster.

Harris is far too polarizing and unfortunately she does not help in any swing states or battles. A coastal liberal (west instead of east, but otherwise politically the same) does not help in the midwest or southern battleground states. While many feel that the blacks need to be "rewarded" for their long devotion to the party with a black candidate, it is really not a demographic that he needs help with. So, picking Harris is a nod to his base but ignores areas where he needs to pick to strengthen his chances. Harris' polarizing means that while she has a big positive following, she also has a big negative crowd who really don't want her and she turns off many a moderate, especially those that have been long-time Biden backers. He can't afford to lose those moderate/Independent votes. I think Harris is the riskiest candidate on his short list. It is unlikely to significantly help, and could easily hurt his election chances.

Duckworth who appeals to midwest and moderates who like her military background. She has much more positive than negative support. She can help in Michigan and Wisconsin. Lujan Grisham would be a help with the Latino vote, especially in southern states that are now battlegrounds leaning left like Arizona and Florida and with the completely up-in-the-air Texas battleground. Winning any of those could be the difference between winning and losing. Demmings might be problematic with her questionable police background (a lot of attention has been paid to the fact that she was chief of police in Orlando during one of the most racially oppressive periods in it's history), but she would probably still help win Florida. I think these three are far more likely to be positive additions to his ticket.

WTF? If I am Trump, I hope there are people who think like you in high places in the Biden campaign. African Americans are the only reason Biden's pathetic candidacy is where it is. Their turnout and enthusiasm is his primary path to victory in the key states.

And if they know we'll be getting a Black woman Sec of State, Attorney General, and SC justice, you don't think they'll be enthusiastic?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nobody’s perfect.
Is Pence?

To evangelicals he is. To the rest of the GOP he is inoffensive white bread and fits the "do no harm" ethic. To Trump, he's happy he'd never be overshadowed. So he was a solid pick according to basic VP criteria.

Not sure we have the equivalent of someone who would excite a key part of the base while "doing no harm" to the remaining constituencies.

But to anyone who might like Republicans for the economic policy but isn't basically interested in the Christian version of Sharia law, Pence is a disaster. He let people die of HIV because he hates gay people. Is that who you want at the helm?

I think Harris is great. Demmings is great. Duckworth is great. They're all great. Trump is a gd disaster.

Harris is far too polarizing and unfortunately she does not help in any swing states or battles. A coastal liberal (west instead of east, but otherwise politically the same) does not help in the midwest or southern battleground states. While many feel that the blacks need to be "rewarded" for their long devotion to the party with a black candidate, it is really not a demographic that he needs help with. So, picking Harris is a nod to his base but ignores areas where he needs to pick to strengthen his chances. Harris' polarizing means that while she has a big positive following, she also has a big negative crowd who really don't want her and she turns off many a moderate, especially those that have been long-time Biden backers. He can't afford to lose those moderate/Independent votes. I think Harris is the riskiest candidate on his short list. It is unlikely to significantly help, and could easily hurt his election chances.

Duckworth who appeals to midwest and moderates who like her military background. She has much more positive than negative support. She can help in Michigan and Wisconsin. Lujan Grisham would be a help with the Latino vote, especially in southern states that are now battlegrounds leaning left like Arizona and Florida and with the completely up-in-the-air Texas battleground. Winning any of those could be the difference between winning and losing. Demmings might be problematic with her questionable police background (a lot of attention has been paid to the fact that she was chief of police in Orlando during one of the most racially oppressive periods in it's history), but she would probably still help win Florida. I think these three are far more likely to be positive additions to his ticket.

+1 I agree these three could potentially help the ticket more than the other prospects. The only thing is the Latinx bloc is not at all uniform culturally, so I'm not entirely sure Lujan Grisham would help significantly outside of the Southwest, but no doubt she's competent and meets the readiness bar.

Neither is the black bloc - there was an interesting discussion about that on the 538 podcast yesterday

Basically - the analysis goes - black voters divide up much like white voters do: young voters (black and not black) are more progressive and want far more progressive things; older voters (black, and not) are more moderate and incrementalist. https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/politics-podcast-there-arent-secret-trump-voters/

[Anonymous]

He needs a VP that will swing states like Wisconsin. Wisconsin is 100% purple. Do not make mistakes like HC did in 2016.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nobody’s perfect.
Is Pence?

To evangelicals he is. To the rest of the GOP he is inoffensive white bread and fits the "do no harm" ethic. To Trump, he's happy he'd never be overshadowed. So he was a solid pick according to basic VP criteria.

Not sure we have the equivalent of someone who would excite a key part of the base while "doing no harm" to the remaining constituencies.

But to anyone who might like Republicans for the economic policy but isn't basically interested in the Christian version of Sharia law, Pence is a disaster. He let people die of HIV because he hates gay people. Is that who you want at the helm?

I think Harris is great. Demmings is great. Duckworth is great. They're all great. Trump is a gd disaster.

Harris is far too polarizing and unfortunately she does not help in any swing states or battles. A coastal liberal (west instead of east, but otherwise politically the same) does not help in the midwest or southern battleground states. While many feel that the blacks need to be "rewarded" for their long devotion to the party with a black candidate, it is really not a demographic that he needs help with. So, picking Harris is a nod to his base but ignores areas where he needs to pick to strengthen his chances. Harris' polarizing means that while she has a big positive following, she also has a big negative crowd who really don't want her and she turns off many a moderate, especially those that have been long-time Biden backers. He can't afford to lose those moderate/Independent votes. I think Harris is the riskiest candidate on his short list. It is unlikely to significantly help, and could easily hurt his election chances.

Duckworth who appeals to midwest and moderates who like her military background. She has much more positive than negative support. She can help in Michigan and Wisconsin. Lujan Grisham would be a help with the Latino vote, especially in southern states that are now battlegrounds leaning left like Arizona and Florida and with the completely up-in-the-air Texas battleground. Winning any of those could be the difference between winning and losing. Demmings might be problematic with her questionable police background (a lot of attention has been paid to the fact that she was chief of police in Orlando during one of the most racially oppressive periods in it's history), but she would probably still help win Florida. I think these three are far more likely to be positive additions to his ticket.

+1 I agree these three could potentially help the ticket more than the other prospects. The only thing is the Latinx bloc is not at all uniform culturally, so I'm not entirely sure Lujan Grisham would help significantly outside of the Southwest, but no doubt she's competent and meets the readiness bar.

Neither is the black bloc - there was an interesting discussion about that on the 538 podcast yesterday

Basically - the analysis goes - black voters divide up much like white voters do: young voters (black and not black) are more progressive and want far more progressive things; older voters (black, and not) are more moderate and incrementalist. https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/politics-podcast-there-arent-secret-trump-voters/

Yes, and as with other blocs, there is a divide between the educated and uneducated. I'm not at all convinced Susan Rice or Kamala Harris would strongly appeal to Southern or Midwestern Black voters. Demings obviously would appeal to the former, and possibly also the latter with law&order concerns. Bass and Warren are the only progressives on the list to appeal to younger voters. Tricky calculus.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:He needs a VP that will swing states like Wisconsin. Wisconsin is 100% purple. Do not make mistakes like HC did in 2016.

Baldwin, Whitmer, and Duckworth have the strongest midwestern appeal. Looks like Duckworth is the only one left on the shortlist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He needs a VP that will swing states like Wisconsin. Wisconsin is 100% purple. Do not make mistakes like HC did in 2016.

Baldwin, Whitmer, and Duckworth have the strongest midwestern appeal. Looks like Duckworth is the only one left on the shortlist.

+2. I’m concerned about Susan Rice because of the old Republican BENGHAZI EMAILS OBAMA smear machine. Kamala Harris is great, but as others have mentioned, doesn’t bring much to the ticket electorally.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nobody’s perfect.
Is Pence?

To evangelicals he is. To the rest of the GOP he is inoffensive white bread and fits the "do no harm" ethic. To Trump, he's happy he'd never be overshadowed. So he was a solid pick according to basic VP criteria.

Not sure we have the equivalent of someone who would excite a key part of the base while "doing no harm" to the remaining constituencies.

But to anyone who might like Republicans for the economic policy but isn't basically interested in the Christian version of Sharia law, Pence is a disaster. He let people die of HIV because he hates gay people. Is that who you want at the helm?

I think Harris is great. Demmings is great. Duckworth is great. They're all great. Trump is a gd disaster.

Harris is far too polarizing and unfortunately she does not help in any swing states or battles. A coastal liberal (west instead of east, but otherwise politically the same) does not help in the midwest or southern battleground states. While many feel that the blacks need to be "rewarded" for their long devotion to the party with a black candidate, it is really not a demographic that he needs help with. So, picking Harris is a nod to his base but ignores areas where he needs to pick to strengthen his chances. Harris' polarizing means that while she has a big positive following, she also has a big negative crowd who really don't want her and she turns off many a moderate, especially those that have been long-time Biden backers. He can't afford to lose those moderate/Independent votes. I think Harris is the riskiest candidate on his short list. It is unlikely to significantly help, and could easily hurt his election chances.

Duckworth who appeals to midwest and moderates who like her military background. She has much more positive than negative support. She can help in Michigan and Wisconsin. Lujan Grisham would be a help with the Latino vote, especially in southern states that are now battlegrounds leaning left like Arizona and Florida and with the completely up-in-the-air Texas battleground. Winning any of those could be the difference between winning and losing. Demmings might be problematic with her questionable police background (a lot of attention has been paid to the fact that she was chief of police in Orlando during one of the most racially oppressive periods in it's history), but she would probably still help win Florida. I think these three are far more likely to be positive additions to his ticket.

+1 I agree these three could potentially help the ticket more than the other prospects. The only thing is the Latinx bloc is not at all uniform culturally, so I'm not entirely sure Lujan Grisham would help significantly outside of the Southwest, but no doubt she's competent and meets the readiness bar.

Neither is the black bloc - there was an interesting discussion about that on the 538 podcast yesterday

Basically - the analysis goes - black voters divide up much like white voters do: young voters (black and not black) are more progressive and want far more progressive things; older voters (black, and not) are more moderate and incrementalist. https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/politics-podcast-there-arent-secret-trump-voters/

Yes, and as with other blocs, there is a divide between the educated and uneducated. I'm not at all convinced Susan Rice or Kamala Harris would strongly appeal to Southern or Midwestern Black voters. Demings obviously would appeal to the former, and possibly also the latter with law&order concerns. Bass and Warren are the only progressives on the list to appeal to younger voters. Tricky calculus.

Harris would appeal to both educated and uneducated. Remember, Harris went to Howard, which would held ALOT. Susan Rice wouldn't appeal to anyone.

[Anonymous]

I know she wouldn't be an exciting pick, or a geographically beneficial one, but who wouldn't like Karen Bass after hearing her speak?

https://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/election/article244080402.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nobody’s perfect.
Is Pence?

To evangelicals he is. To the rest of the GOP he is inoffensive white bread and fits the "do no harm" ethic. To Trump, he's happy he'd never be overshadowed. So he was a solid pick according to basic VP criteria.

Not sure we have the equivalent of someone who would excite a key part of the base while "doing no harm" to the remaining constituencies.

But to anyone who might like Republicans for the economic policy but isn't basically interested in the Christian version of Sharia law, Pence is a disaster. He let people die of HIV because he hates gay people. Is that who you want at the helm?

I think Harris is great. Demmings is great. Duckworth is great. They're all great. Trump is a gd disaster.

Harris is far too polarizing and unfortunately she does not help in any swing states or battles. A coastal liberal (west instead of east, but otherwise politically the same) does not help in the midwest or southern battleground states. While many feel that the blacks need to be "rewarded" for their long devotion to the party with a black candidate, it is really not a demographic that he needs help with. So, picking Harris is a nod to his base but ignores areas where he needs to pick to strengthen his chances. Harris' polarizing means that while she has a big positive following, she also has a big negative crowd who really don't want her and she turns off many a moderate, especially those that have been long-time Biden backers. He can't afford to lose those moderate/Independent votes. I think Harris is the riskiest candidate on his short list. It is unlikely to significantly help, and could easily hurt his election chances.

Duckworth who appeals to midwest and moderates who like her military background. She has much more positive than negative support. She can help in Michigan and Wisconsin. Lujan Grisham would be a help with the Latino vote, especially in southern states that are now battlegrounds leaning left like Arizona and Florida and with the completely up-in-the-air Texas battleground. Winning any of those could be the difference between winning and losing. Demmings might be problematic with her questionable police background (a lot of attention has been paid to the fact that she was chief of police in Orlando during one of the most racially oppressive periods in it's history), but she would probably still help win Florida. I think these three are far more likely to be positive additions to his ticket.

+1 I agree these three could potentially help the ticket more than the other prospects. The only thing is the Latinx bloc is not at all uniform culturally, so I'm not entirely sure Lujan Grisham would help significantly outside of the Southwest, but no doubt she's competent and meets the readiness bar.

Neither is the black bloc - there was an interesting discussion about that on the 538 podcast yesterday

Basically - the analysis goes - black voters divide up much like white voters do: young voters (black and not black) are more progressive and want far more progressive things; older voters (black, and not) are more moderate and incrementalist. https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/politics-podcast-there-arent-secret-trump-voters/

Yes, and as with other blocs, there is a divide between the educated and uneducated. I'm not at all convinced Susan Rice or Kamala Harris would strongly appeal to Southern or Midwestern Black voters. Demings obviously would appeal to the former, and possibly also the latter with law&order concerns. Bass and Warren are the only progressives on the list to appeal to younger voters. Tricky calculus.

Harris would appeal to both educated and uneducated. Remember, Harris went to Howard, which would held ALOT. Susan Rice wouldn't appeal to anyone.

Help.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He needs a VP that will swing states like Wisconsin. Wisconsin is 100% purple. Do not make mistakes like HC did in 2016.

Baldwin, Whitmer, and Duckworth have the strongest midwestern appeal. Looks like Duckworth is the only one left on the shortlist.

+2. I’m concerned about Susan Rice because of the old Republican BENGHAZI EMAILS OBAMA smear machine. Kamala Harris is great, but as others have mentioned, doesn’t bring much to the ticket electorally.

Given where we are now, I'm a skeptical that Benghazi could be any kind of flash point again. It's seems like 1) a dead horse, and 2) dwarfed by the harm done by the Trump Administration. Would anyone still clinging to their Benghazi outrage be gettable by Biden anyway?

[Anonymous]

It will probably be Val Demings.