Biden's VP?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^^ Adding one more thing. Kamala is very smart. She can overcome all negative criticism around her if she addressed her past record and established confidence around her future record. She hasn’t done that, and has had more of a platform and opportunity to do so than any other VP on the candidate list. Which is another signal of her “flexibility” (corny pun from the pp saying she isn’t able to flex bc of inadequate policy expertise)

Kamala will END Joe Biden’s presidential run if she is his VP. And Susan Rice is just as bad. The Benghazi attack and her defense of the “a video caused it” lie will cost joe the presidency if she’s his VP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ Adding one more thing. Kamala is very smart. She can overcome all negative criticism around her if she addressed her past record and established confidence around her future record. She hasn’t done that, and has had more of a platform and opportunity to do so than any other VP on the candidate list. Which is another signal of her “flexibility” (corny pun from the pp saying she isn’t able to flex bc of inadequate policy expertise)

Kamala will END Joe Biden’s presidential run if she is his VP. And Susan Rice is just as bad. The Benghazi attack and her defense of the “a video caused it” lie will cost joe the presidency if she’s his VP.

+1 swing voters, folks. I believe Duckworth would be the only net positive with this bloc, and Bass would be “do no harm.” 💯 Harris or Rice could blow the ticket’s chances.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So weird how people focus on women's personality (how she acts, talks, looks), but we rarely hear such judgement about men. Actually, maybe it's pretty telling about where we are as a nation.

I think you are wrong. Just look at Trump.

I agree you are wrong. There are many times that people focus on male politician's personalities. Mostly they reserve such criticism for male politicians of the opposite political party, but there are many times that people have criticized Marco Rubio for being a drone, or Rand Paul for being crazy, Biden's gaffes and weird old-timey phrases and so on. Male politicians are criticized for their personality all the time.

It is true that female politicians are frequently criticized for being too forceful, but even men are often criticized for that, they just use different language. How often have male politicians been called demagogues? Frequently when they are called that, it is used as a pejorative rather than a compliment. Or raving? Bernie Sanders has been criticized for being too forceful. Same for Al Sharpton. Look at how people describe Matt Goetz.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ Adding one more thing. Kamala is very smart. She can overcome all negative criticism around her if she addressed her past record and established confidence around her future record. She hasn’t done that, and has had more of a platform and opportunity to do so than any other VP on the candidate list. Which is another signal of her “flexibility” (corny pun from the pp saying she isn’t able to flex bc of inadequate policy expertise)

Kamala will END Joe Biden’s presidential run if she is his VP. And Susan Rice is just as bad. The Benghazi attack and her defense of the “a video caused it” lie will cost joe the presidency if she’s his VP.

+1 swing voters, folks. I believe Duckworth would be the only net positive with this bloc, and Bass would be “do no harm.” 💯 Harris or Rice could blow the ticket’s chances.

So I’m going to raise the risks I think Duckworth could present, though they do not reflect my personal opinion on who she is. I’ve given A lot of quiet thought to her as a potential candidate. I’m going to speak frankly and say that my concern is in the potential of unspoken prejudice against her with a large volume of white American swing voters. Of course there’s no way for me to truly know until the ballots are cast if that is true. The risk of racial backlash for Duckworth against our civil backdrop today heightens the concern as protests and riots rage. I think Duckworth could be racially discriminated against by silent swing voters. Grisham, who is represented by a larger Hispanic population, seems less likely to garner that reaction for one reason — she looks white. I don’t know if this election is the one to risk opening more doors of hate when racial tensions are running so high. On the other hand I think that her heritage allows for a unique diversity building opportunity in dialogue, as all of the 3 candidates. Her military experience is obviously attractive but I also worry she will be discriminated against because of her disability. It is a horrible attitude, but I’m not naive enough to deny its existence. I’m just uncertain on how we could truly measure public sentiment about this. By the way, those are also the reasons I think Whitmer is a win. She is someone that quells those fears for others, and is willing to show them the light. Walk the rest of the country further into diversity. I also think Bass does this well. Grisham could too.

Just more food for thought.

[Anonymous]

Yesterday Politico said Harris does not have the VP position locked down, today they suggest the leader is Susan Rice

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/07/27/susan-rice-top-biden-vice-president-383026

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So weird how people focus on women's personality (how she acts, talks, looks), but we rarely hear such judgement about men. Actually, maybe it's pretty telling about where we are as a nation.

I think you are wrong. Just look at Trump.

I agree you are wrong. There are many times that people focus on male politician's personalities. Mostly they reserve such criticism for male politicians of the opposite political party, but there are many times that people have criticized Marco Rubio for being a drone, or Rand Paul for being crazy, Biden's gaffes and weird old-timey phrases and so on. Male politicians are criticized for their personality all the time.

It is true that female politicians are frequently criticized for being too forceful, but even men are often criticized for that, they just use different language. How often have male politicians been called demagogues? Frequently when they are called that, it is used as a pejorative rather than a compliment. Or raving? Bernie Sanders has been criticized for being too forceful. Same for Al Sharpton. Look at how people describe Matt Goetz.

m


If I have said it once, I have said it a thousand times. People are people before they are anything else. Learning to try to look through a person’s eyes, whether you agree or not, is empowering.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yesterday Politico said Harris does not have the VP position locked down, today they suggest the leader is Susan Rice

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/07/27/susan-rice-top-biden-vice-president-383026

This echoes other articles saying she has a real shot not she’s the leader. I don’t think Biden or his team will be dumb enough to go with a pick that is both polarizing and makes no electoral sense. But the vetting means she’ll be lined up for Sec State.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ Adding one more thing. Kamala is very smart. She can overcome all negative criticism around her if she addressed her past record and established confidence around her future record. She hasn’t done that, and has had more of a platform and opportunity to do so than any other VP on the candidate list. Which is another signal of her “flexibility” (corny pun from the pp saying she isn’t able to flex bc of inadequate policy expertise)

Kamala will END Joe Biden’s presidential run if she is his VP. And Susan Rice is just as bad. The Benghazi attack and her defense of the “a video caused it” lie will cost joe the presidency if she’s his VP.

+1 swing voters, folks. I believe Duckworth would be the only net positive with this bloc, and Bass would be “do no harm.” 💯 Harris or Rice could blow the ticket’s chances.

So I’m going to raise the risks I think Duckworth could present, though they do not reflect my personal opinion on who she is. I’ve given A lot of quiet thought to her as a potential candidate. I’m going to speak frankly and say that my concern is in the potential of unspoken prejudice against her with a large volume of white American swing voters. Of course there’s no way for me to truly know until the ballots are cast if that is true. The risk of racial backlash for Duckworth against our civil backdrop today heightens the concern as protests and riots rage. I think Duckworth could be racially discriminated against by silent swing voters. Grisham, who is represented by a larger Hispanic population, seems less likely to garner that reaction for one reason — she looks white. I don’t know if this election is the one to risk opening more doors of hate when racial tensions are running so high. On the other hand I think that her heritage allows for a unique diversity building opportunity in dialogue, as all of the 3 candidates. Her military experience is obviously attractive but I also worry she will be discriminated against because of her disability. It is a horrible attitude, but I’m not naive enough to deny its existence. I’m just uncertain on how we could truly measure public sentiment about this. By the way, those are also the reasons I think Whitmer is a win. She is someone that quells those fears for others, and is willing to show them the light. Walk the rest of the country further into diversity. I also think Bass does this well. Grisham could too.

Just more food for thought.

I agree Grisham, Whitmer, and Bass have calm, pleasant, and reasonable temperaments that will broadly appeal to voters. Based on depth of legislative experience and leadership, including foreign policy, I prefer Bass. Whitmer is a little too green and both governors will be tied to pandemic outcomes in their state (which could be ugly come fall).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^we tend to stay in our coastal elite bubble and not think enough about swing/ working class voters.

I don’t even care. And I cannot believe that with all that Donald and his crime squad have done that we know about so far that anyone needs to be pandered to like those weak ash people who have already been a party to the GOP’s turn to full on authoritarianism. “Oh boo hoo hoo but the VP choice doesn’t appeal to me”. We all have one choice this November: Joe Biden or the end of America. That’s why I said Joe Biden/Anyone (although somewhat ironically given the +1 replies, my VP choice is Warren).

That’s right. Cuz if your don’t vote Joe, you ain’t black.

Does this mean something to you?

[Anonymous]

Does anyone else think this discussion portends disaster? If the Democrats need to do anything, it’s to not self-destruct again. Somehow, they refuse to learn!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone else think this discussion portends disaster? If the Democrats need to do anything, it’s to not self-destruct again. Somehow, they refuse to learn!

No, it’s only you and your soon to follow +1.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone else think this discussion portends disaster? If the Democrats need to do anything, it’s to not self-destruct again. Somehow, they refuse to learn!

I don't think so at all. I think it portends that we are all fired the fck up to vote for Biden -- or to vote against Trump -- and are trying to figure out who will help convince more people to do the same. I don't se anyone here sincerely saying that they won't vote for Biden or will vote for Trump if their preferred VP pick isn't the one.

I do not have a crystal ball. And I still have PTSD from 2016. And I'm exhausted and worn out and confused from ALL of this sht. But I think Biden's odds of winning even if he picks a ham sandwich as VP are pretty good. Knock wood.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone else think this discussion portends disaster? If the Democrats need to do anything, it’s to not self-destruct again. Somehow, they refuse to learn!

Actually I think this discussion is instructive and probably reflects polling being done by the campaign. We already knew from polls that Warren and Harris have high positives but equally high negatives that pose risk, that Susan Rice is even more polarizing, and that Duckworth, Bass, Grisham, and Whitmer are pretty well liked but less well known. And that each selection has pros and cons. So I think this kind of hashing out is pretty normal. I for one enjoyed new insights on this thread. It doesn’t mean we won’t get on board with whomever is chosen in the end.

[Anonymous]

Rational discourse and respectful debate amongst adults. How refreshing!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone else think this discussion portends disaster? If the Democrats need to do anything, it’s to not self-destruct again. Somehow, they refuse to learn!

Actually I think this discussion is instructive and probably reflects polling being done by the campaign. We already knew from polls that Warren and Harris have high positives but equally high negatives that pose risk, that Susan Rice is even more polarizing, and that Duckworth, Bass, Grisham, and Whitmer are pretty well liked but less well known. And that each selection has pros and cons. So I think this kind of hashing out is pretty normal. I for one enjoyed new insights on this thread. It doesn’t mean we won’t get on board with whomever is chosen in the end.

Except for the one very vocal Harris supporter, who does seem the type to pick up her ball and go home.