Biden's VP?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of the candidates have strengths and weaknesses. I truly believe any of them would be an asset in certain respects but I do worry Rice could hurt the ticket. And Warren, even though they’re the strongest in terms of policy chops. Bass too. Is it a coincidence the strongest women in terms of policy are the most demonized? I wonder. These are the three who are most reassuring to me in terms of knowing their stuff, but seem weakest in terms of electability. I have no clue who is the right choice at this point.

At any rate, I wish Biden well with this tough decision and will of course be voting blue no matter who.

I love Harris. But something about her made her campaign flop. Unless someone can explain what that is, and how it would change, I’m concerned. She was the early favorite. Until people saw her in action. People— even POC— found her off putting. Not sure why?

I was a big fan of Kamala's run for Senate and an early supporter in her presidential race. The biggest issue with Harris was that she never really had a policy vision or identity in the race. She came out strong as a progressive in the beginning. She even said that she supported Medicare for All at a debate but then backtracked saying she didn't hear the question properly. She tried to brand her prosecutorial record as that of a "progressive prosecutor" despite being incredibly tough on crime. When the topic of tech monopolies came up, Harris advocated for banning Donald Trump from twitter, a rather pathetic policy goal. She attacked Biden on bussing which seemed great, but it turned out to be pre-packaged with tweets and tshirts ready to go. There were constant moments like this that slowly revealed that Harris didn't have a real message.

Voters eventually saw through this and she continued to decline in the polls. Her campaign was also poorly run and there was a lot of infighting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Safest path to a win with swing votes/states
1.Whitmer
2.Duckworth

Warren is my favorite because she is so smart but not safe with swing voters.
Maybe Demings
No to Harris and Bass and Rice.

We get it. You don’t want to see a WOC in the role. Well based on his gaffes this week, apparently neither does Joe

You do realize Duckworth is a WOC? Is she not “enough” WOC? Is that what you are saying? Obama was half white. Harris is half Indian. Are the POC “enough”?

[Anonymous]

I know, I know its FOX, but what does it imply:

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-unannounced-trip-convention-center

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of the candidates have strengths and weaknesses. I truly believe any of them would be an asset in certain respects but I do worry Rice could hurt the ticket. And Warren, even though they’re the strongest in terms of policy chops. Bass too. Is it a coincidence the strongest women in terms of policy are the most demonized? I wonder. These are the three who are most reassuring to me in terms of knowing their stuff, but seem weakest in terms of electability. I have no clue who is the right choice at this point.

At any rate, I wish Biden well with this tough decision and will of course be voting blue no matter who.

Duckworth. I really want to see Ds make inroads with vets and members of the military. Asian. A mom with young kids, lots her legs in combat, smart and tough as nails. She ticks a lot of boxes. I think she might have run this time, but she had just given birth.

Also like Whitmer.

Rice is a terrible pick. It already looks like Obama’s third term. Dems need to move beyond just Obama nostalgia. And I would love someone with actual governing experience.

Bass has not impressed, but I haven’t seen a ton of her.

I love Harris. But something about her made her campaign flop. Unless someone can explain what that is, and how it would change, I’m concerned. She was the early favorite. Until people saw her in action. People— even POC— found her off putting. Not sure why?

Val Demmings would be great too.

But Duckworth’s #1 on my radar.

I am one of those people who had high hopes for Harris. She did not debate too well. That was a downer for me. And she could not elaborate on her plans in depth. To me she comes across as a good package but not much substance.

+1

[Anonymous]

I love Warren. But fear this is not the year for another older white politician on the ticket.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I know, I know its FOX, but what does it imply:

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-unannounced-trip-convention-center

He went to practice his announcement and/or convention speech.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I know, I know its FOX, but what does it imply:

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-unannounced-trip-convention-center

Well Kamala was tweeting during this time so it was not her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know, I know its FOX, but what does it imply:

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-unannounced-trip-convention-center

Well Kamala was tweeting during this time so it was not her.

The candidates themselves aren’t always the ones doing the tweeting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of the candidates have strengths and weaknesses. I truly believe any of them would be an asset in certain respects but I do worry Rice could hurt the ticket. And Warren, even though they’re the strongest in terms of policy chops. Bass too. Is it a coincidence the strongest women in terms of policy are the most demonized? I wonder. These are the three who are most reassuring to me in terms of knowing their stuff, but seem weakest in terms of electability. I have no clue who is the right choice at this point.

At any rate, I wish Biden well with this tough decision and will of course be voting blue no matter who.

I love Harris. But something about her made her campaign flop. Unless someone can explain what that is, and how it would change, I’m concerned. She was the early favorite. Until people saw her in action. People— even POC— found her off putting. Not sure why?

I was a big fan of Kamala's run for Senate and an early supporter in her presidential race. The biggest issue with Harris was that she never really had a policy vision or identity in the race. She came out strong as a progressive in the beginning. She even said that she supported Medicare for All at a debate but then backtracked saying she didn't hear the question properly. She tried to brand her prosecutorial record as that of a "progressive prosecutor" despite being incredibly tough on crime. When the topic of tech monopolies came up, Harris advocated for banning Donald Trump from twitter, a rather pathetic policy goal. She attacked Biden on bussing which seemed great, but it turned out to be pre-packaged with tweets and tshirts ready to go. There were constant moments like this that slowly revealed that Harris didn't have a real message.

Voters eventually saw through this and she continued to decline in the polls. Her campaign was also poorly run and there was a lot of infighting.

This is spot-on. Kamalas consistant message was diversity. Except when you have no substance or plans to actually uplift the black/brown communities you claim to be empowering, “diversity” is pointless

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I know, I know its FOX, but what does it imply:

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-unannounced-trip-convention-center

Any of the Congress/Senate candidates as well as Susan Rice could easily have gotten to Delaware from DC. If it was a Senator or Congresswoman there likely would have been US Capital police protection and a Governor they would have also had protection...all of which the media likely would have picked up on. So, I’ll go with practicing his speech as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of the candidates have strengths and weaknesses. I truly believe any of them would be an asset in certain respects but I do worry Rice could hurt the ticket. And Warren, even though they’re the strongest in terms of policy chops. Bass too. Is it a coincidence the strongest women in terms of policy are the most demonized? I wonder. These are the three who are most reassuring to me in terms of knowing their stuff, but seem weakest in terms of electability. I have no clue who is the right choice at this point.

At any rate, I wish Biden well with this tough decision and will of course be voting blue no matter who.

I love Harris. But something about her made her campaign flop. Unless someone can explain what that is, and how it would change, I’m concerned. She was the early favorite. Until people saw her in action. People— even POC— found her off putting. Not sure why?

I was a big fan of Kamala's run for Senate and an early supporter in her presidential race. The biggest issue with Harris was that she never really had a policy vision or identity in the race. She came out strong as a progressive in the beginning. She even said that she supported Medicare for All at a debate but then backtracked saying she didn't hear the question properly. She tried to brand her prosecutorial record as that of a "progressive prosecutor" despite being incredibly tough on crime. When the topic of tech monopolies came up, Harris advocated for banning Donald Trump from twitter, a rather pathetic policy goal. She attacked Biden on bussing which seemed great, but it turned out to be pre-packaged with tweets and tshirts ready to go. There were constant moments like this that slowly revealed that Harris didn't have a real message.

Voters eventually saw through this and she continued to decline in the polls. Her campaign was also poorly run and there was a lot of infighting.

This is spot-on. Kamalas consistant message was diversity. Except when you have no substance or plans to actually uplift the black/brown communities you claim to be empowering, “diversity” is pointless

Especially when you have a history of undermining those same communities with your “tough on crime” record.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know, I know its FOX, but what does it imply:

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-unannounced-trip-convention-center

Any of the Congress/Senate candidates as well as Susan Rice could easily have gotten to Delaware from DC. If it was a Senator or Congresswoman there likely would have been US Capital police protection and a Governor they would have also had protection...all of which the media likely would have picked up on. So, I’ll go with practicing his speech as well.

Could also have been a good smokescreen though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Safest path to a win with swing votes/states
1.Whitmer
2.Duckworth

Warren is my favorite because she is so smart but not safe with swing voters.
Maybe Demings
No to Harris and Bass and Rice.

We get it. You don’t want to see a WOC in the role. Well based on his gaffes this week, apparently neither does Joe

No. Warren is my favorite. I have liked her for years. She did great at the debate. But I realize that she may be too progressive for a win. So what really matters is the safest pick. Bass is too controversial already. Harris and Rice will send people in the other direction because of things they have said or done. So far Duckworth and Whitmer seem like the safest pick. I like Demings but don’t know enough about her or how she polls. But you can make it all about race if that is what is important to you. If that is what is important to Joe then he can too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Safest path to a win with swing votes/states
1.Whitmer
2.Duckworth

Warren is my favorite because she is so smart but not safe with swing voters.
Maybe Demings
No to Harris and Bass and Rice.

We get it. You don’t want to see a WOC in the role. Well based on his gaffes this week, apparently neither does Joe

NP. Whitmer and Duckworth are more qualified than the shortlisted WOC of color. We get it, you have some deep-seeded issues against white women - and do not recognize their own status as marginalized members of society. Ahistorical and troubling, but what-evs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Safest path to a win with swing votes/states
1.Whitmer
2.Duckworth

Warren is my favorite because she is so smart but not safe with swing voters.
Maybe Demings
No to Harris and Bass and Rice.

We get it. You don’t want to see a WOC in the role. Well based on his gaffes this week, apparently neither does Joe

NP. Whitmer and Duckworth are more qualified than the shortlisted WOC of color. We get it, you have some deep-seeded issues against white women - and do not recognize their own status as marginalized members of society. Ahistorical and troubling, but what-evs.

“More qualified” ...that are not even in the same tier as Warren and Rice. Warren is the most qualified on domestic policy and fiscal issues and Rice is most qualified on global pandemics and foreign policy. Now, that is not saying that Whitmer and Duckworth are unqualified, let’s just be realistic as to where they stand on qualifications.