Biden's VP?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My guess is that he really wants to do Whitmer or Rice and doesn't want to do Harris. Demmings was a gimmick pick and he doesnt think Bass gas the gravitas.

I think his own personal first choice would be Rice - they know each other really well from the Obama admin, and all the articles about his VP search say he wants a partner and someone he already knows and trusts. But, she does carry a lot of Obama administration baggage and I’m sure Republicans would love to throw out the “Clinton Obama Benghazi emails rarrrrrr” red meat to the base.

Demmings may be a gimmick to you - for me, as a public interest lobbyist, I have been nothing but impressed by her. Wish even 50% of Dem caucus was as well-prepared as she is for hearings and floor time. She is fluent with the materials and subject matter, clearly reading memos and listening to her staff (who also appear top notch). Perhaps the law enforcement background was seen as a detraction - that said, really like her and hope she has a long future in national Dem politics.

I like her for that, too, but that’s also why I like Warren.

I like Warren too. I read her book The Two Income Trap a long time ago. It really explained the middle class was cash strapped and single moms were falling even further behind. Biden should pick Whitmer or Duckworth. I agree Rice could be Sec of State.

DP, and largely agree. It’s always been Whitmer as the wisest pick with all things being equal. Still think Grisham is a strong parallel to her, but Whitmer has some national recognition because she is “that woman”.

Joe Biden isn't going to pick a white woman for the Veep no matterr how many times some of you middled aged white women on dcum fantasize over it . But you know what ? I really want Biden —who is only marginally better than trump intellectually — to pick a white woman .On election day , you'll find out that trump is far from the worst thing that has ever happened to AAs. Not long ago, some of you were all calling klobuchar a 'shoe-in'

I’m PP you’re responding to, advocating for Whitmer. I’m black, and I’m in my early 30s. So, not exactly fitting your description of these middle aged white women fantasizing about the same. What do I fantasize over? I’ll give you a hint. It starts with opening the aperture amongst narrow minded posters like you.

You may fancy yourself enlightened but you're NOT. For better or worse , politics boils down to 'you scratch my back I scratch yours ' . Putting that aside , I challenge you to find a vice presidential candidate since reagan who had little to no foreign policy experience as whitmer ? If Biden was picked over Tim kaine by Obama in 2008 , it was precisely because of his foreign policy experience—he had sat on the Senate foreign affairs committee for a long time .

Dick cheney had once been a defense secretary , a chief of staff and elected federal official . Nobody under Veep consideration in 2000 came close to his foreign policy resume

Al Gore had been in Congress for decades before Clinton tapped him for the no2. Spot.

George H. W. Bush had a long foreign policy resume which before being tapped as Reagan no.2 culminated in him being CIA director.


Setting aside the clear demographic implications of this election, whitmer has no foreign policy whatsoever compared to rice , Harris and bass . This isn't hearsay , these are the facts . What exactly is the upside of picking her ? The Midwest ? Laughable .

PP. I don’t fancy anything missy, and if I did, you certainly wouldn’t be the authority on anything pertaining to what I am. You sound... entitled? Starting off a post by telling me I’m ignorant? Huh. Says so much more about you than you may realize. Your immediate false projection tells me that when I enlightened you to my actual demographic, which didn’t fit your ignorant assumption, you felt ... upset about that. And want to tell me what I don’t know. Mmkay.

This post is more for lurkers reading than you, since I figure you’re resolute in your thinking and have a right to that. I advocate for Whitmer for simple reasons: they are the most relevant criteria for this term in this time with this candidacy. We aren’t in 2004 or 1996. We are in fricking 2020 so there is no parallel to a Trump, Obama, Biden, West, or Kardashian. Trump changed the game for better or worse. My rationale has been shared transparently; I gave this in detail much earlier in this thread, though it may have been unpopular opinion at the time. Whitmer is white and won’t rock the boat. She will govern and willingly collaborate with a strong team of support. She is young and new. And foreign policy is something that is handled best by the SecState, which Rice can surely ease into. I mean, Trump stood in front of the queen of England. Not that he is any measuring stick, but there is nowhere to go from there but up. Being able to work across the aisle with the GOP to set national policy and work to repair our neighborhoods stateside will take a lot of grit and a certain personality that can encourage the downtrodden. You have no idea how many people are just reluctant to serve and support our country because of what this president did to Patriots, pushing them away across every agency. We civilians are the servants who brief each administration, so don’t undervalue the power of a team that will clearly be effective. When things are being done the right way, government is boring and that is how it should be. It hasn’t been like that and the clown car is on autopilot, so we need to think about our engagement strategy using the info and tools we have now. This is not like any other election. People are angry at black people. People are angry at the President. Presidents never tweeted before Trump. People are angry with covid, unemployment, healthcare. An entire conglomerate of Republicans have formed numerous groups to support Biden. Whitmer has the broadest appeal to the broadest amount of voters with the least amount of varied risk. I’d challenge that you prove otherwise. She has stood up to Trump nationally and won’t be bullied easily or attacked for the color of her skin. Men will think twice before gender discrimination and mothers will trust her when she discusses vaccines that we should take without Lysol. She is naturally personable and connects easily.

But I’ve also said that Condoleeza Rice would be a huge bomb to drop for completely different reasons. I’ve also argued that Grisham is more limited with a sw strat than the idea of not making her electability about her race, because she looks white too.

You can’t “set aside the clear demographic implications”. That is literally what is driving this vote. Trump got in on those “demographic implications”.
We ain’t in Kansas anymore, Missy. We are all here. All of us. And we are allowed voices of differing opinion while still respecting the power of general agreement. That includes comedians like Sarah Cooper and TikTok teens trolling a rally. You didn’t factor these types of events I to the politics of the 90s and 00s. Times are changing, keep up, big data can tell us a lot more than your desk binder.

Joe has enough foreign policy experience as a former VP to not make this a deal-breaker. And as I’ve also said before BNMW. As most all of my people are at this point. And clearly so are many “middle aged white women”. You do a disservice to everyone when you reduce an anonymous forum to one demographic. There are Asians, Indian, Muslim, Christian, Agnostiv, Athiest, Black, Mixed, and even foreign fingers behind many opinions here. Try to broaden your thinking without intentionally disparaging or trying to intimidate other people. You might enjoy it if you leave the dark side! We should be on the same team.

PS:
You don’t know me, what I know about politics, or anything else. You only know what I choose to share. I won’t make assumptions about you in the future if you will respect the same with me or any other poster.

Trump didn't change anything except for delusional prissy airheads like you. His presidency is an outlier not the norm. I'm glad you couldn't find a convincing argument other than she's white and won't rock the boat. Well,America needs someone to rock the boat if not then why not klobuchar ? you're saying a whole bunch of nothing , just rambling about nonentities as if you have early onset dementia—you probably do.

You're clinging on to this bipartisanship fetish as if you've just crawled from under a rock where you've been living for all your thirties. Where was that bipartisanship when obama was elected ? I guess Republicans are finally going to become civilized and not the the entrenched racists that they are because a white woman will be on the ticket ? Geez , you're clinically insane but I love a good trains wreck.

The vice president is the closets collaborator to the president , the one with whom he talks and deliberated about everything beforemeeting any cabinet secretary ,a Veep without foreign policy experience in a world of increasing dumpster fire is a risk that only someone who has learned nothing will take . Any ambassador can be named sec of State. So your dumb argument doesn't hold any pertinence. As I said, at this point I'm actually rooting for old Joe to name whitmer , come back here on November 4th and tell us how you feel. Hopefully you wouldn't drink yourself to death on election night.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My takeaway from this sort of weird thread is that the white woman who looks like any third white woman in a generic UMC suburb—will get the nod because she is the “safe” choice. She will thrill the suburban white women who see themselves and their daughters in her and be ok enough for their husbands. Clinches MI and PA and maybe helps elsewhere in other parts of flyover country, Biden’s “gaffe” perhaps suggests he may think African Americans will support him 96-4 in any and all events. Harris becomes AG and S.Rice becomes sec. of state. Maybe the thought is that the vaguely racist male swing voters would be turned off by a woman of color VP. That’s the post, folks.

Really? Why couldn't white women see themselves in Hilary Clinton? I mean what does whitmer have Hilary didnt have ? Are you actually serious with this argument ? It has a weird combination of being pathetic and unbelievably dumb.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My guess is that he really wants to do Whitmer or Rice and doesn't want to do Harris. Demmings was a gimmick pick and he doesnt think Bass gas the gravitas.

I think his own personal first choice would be Rice - they know each other really well from the Obama admin, and all the articles about his VP search say he wants a partner and someone he already knows and trusts. But, she does carry a lot of Obama administration baggage and I’m sure Republicans would love to throw out the “Clinton Obama Benghazi emails rarrrrrr” red meat to the base.

Demmings may be a gimmick to you - for me, as a public interest lobbyist, I have been nothing but impressed by her. Wish even 50% of Dem caucus was as well-prepared as she is for hearings and floor time. She is fluent with the materials and subject matter, clearly reading memos and listening to her staff (who also appear top notch). Perhaps the law enforcement background was seen as a detraction - that said, really like her and hope she has a long future in national Dem politics.

I like her for that, too, but that’s also why I like Warren.

I like Warren too. I read her book The Two Income Trap a long time ago. It really explained the middle class was cash strapped and single moms were falling even further behind. Biden should pick Whitmer or Duckworth. I agree Rice could be Sec of State.

DP, and largely agree. It’s always been Whitmer as the wisest pick with all things being equal. Still think Grisham is a strong parallel to her, but Whitmer has some national recognition because she is “that woman”.

Joe Biden isn't going to pick a white woman for the Veep no matterr how many times some of you middled aged white women on dcum fantasize over it . But you know what ? I really want Biden —who is only marginally better than trump intellectually — to pick a white woman .On election day , you'll find out that trump is far from the worst thing that has ever happened to AAs. Not long ago, some of you were all calling klobuchar a 'shoe-in'

I’m PP you’re responding to, advocating for Whitmer. I’m black, and I’m in my early 30s. So, not exactly fitting your description of these middle aged white women fantasizing about the same. What do I fantasize over? I’ll give you a hint. It starts with opening the aperture amongst narrow minded posters like you.

You may fancy yourself enlightened but you're NOT. For better or worse , politics boils down to 'you scratch my back I scratch yours ' . Putting that aside , I challenge you to find a vice presidential candidate since reagan who had little to no foreign policy experience as whitmer ? If Biden was picked over Tim kaine by Obama in 2008 , it was precisely because of his foreign policy experience—he had sat on the Senate foreign affairs committee for a long time .

Dick cheney had once been a defense secretary , a chief of staff and elected federal official . Nobody under Veep consideration in 2000 came close to his foreign policy resume

Al Gore had been in Congress for decades before Clinton tapped him for the no2. Spot.

George H. W. Bush had a long foreign policy resume which before being tapped as Reagan no.2 culminated in him being CIA director.


Setting aside the clear demographic implications of this election, whitmer has no foreign policy whatsoever compared to rice , Harris and bass . This isn't hearsay , these are the facts . What exactly is the upside of picking her ? The Midwest ? Laughable .

PP. I don’t fancy anything missy, and if I did, you certainly wouldn’t be the authority on anything pertaining to what I am. You sound... entitled? Starting off a post by telling me I’m ignorant? Huh. Says so much more about you than you may realize. Your immediate false projection tells me that when I enlightened you to my actual demographic, which didn’t fit your ignorant assumption, you felt ... upset about that. And want to tell me what I don’t know. Mmkay.

This post is more for lurkers reading than you, since I figure you’re resolute in your thinking and have a right to that. I advocate for Whitmer for simple reasons: they are the most relevant criteria for this term in this time with this candidacy. We aren’t in 2004 or 1996. We are in fricking 2020 so there is no parallel to a Trump, Obama, Biden, West, or Kardashian. Trump changed the game for better or worse. My rationale has been shared transparently; I gave this in detail much earlier in this thread, though it may have been unpopular opinion at the time. Whitmer is white and won’t rock the boat. She will govern and willingly collaborate with a strong team of support. She is young and new. And foreign policy is something that is handled best by the SecState, which Rice can surely ease into. I mean, Trump stood in front of the queen of England. Not that he is any measuring stick, but there is nowhere to go from there but up. Being able to work across the aisle with the GOP to set national policy and work to repair our neighborhoods stateside will take a lot of grit and a certain personality that can encourage the downtrodden. You have no idea how many people are just reluctant to serve and support our country because of what this president did to Patriots, pushing them away across every agency. We civilians are the servants who brief each administration, so don’t undervalue the power of a team that will clearly be effective. When things are being done the right way, government is boring and that is how it should be. It hasn’t been like that and the clown car is on autopilot, so we need to think about our engagement strategy using the info and tools we have now. This is not like any other election. People are angry at black people. People are angry at the President. Presidents never tweeted before Trump. People are angry with covid, unemployment, healthcare. An entire conglomerate of Republicans have formed numerous groups to support Biden. Whitmer has the broadest appeal to the broadest amount of voters with the least amount of varied risk. I’d challenge that you prove otherwise. She has stood up to Trump nationally and won’t be bullied easily or attacked for the color of her skin. Men will think twice before gender discrimination and mothers will trust her when she discusses vaccines that we should take without Lysol. She is naturally personable and connects easily.

But I’ve also said that Condoleeza Rice would be a huge bomb to drop for completely different reasons. I’ve also argued that Grisham is more limited with a sw strat than the idea of not making her electability about her race, because she looks white too.

You can’t “set aside the clear demographic implications”. That is literally what is driving this vote. Trump got in on those “demographic implications”.
We ain’t in Kansas anymore, Missy. We are all here. All of us. And we are allowed voices of differing opinion while still respecting the power of general agreement. That includes comedians like Sarah Cooper and TikTok teens trolling a rally. You didn’t factor these types of events I to the politics of the 90s and 00s. Times are changing, keep up, big data can tell us a lot more than your desk binder.

Joe has enough foreign policy experience as a former VP to not make this a deal-breaker. And as I’ve also said before BNMW. As most all of my people are at this point. And clearly so are many “middle aged white women”. You do a disservice to everyone when you reduce an anonymous forum to one demographic. There are Asians, Indian, Muslim, Christian, Agnostiv, Athiest, Black, Mixed, and even foreign fingers behind many opinions here. Try to broaden your thinking without intentionally disparaging or trying to intimidate other people. You might enjoy it if you leave the dark side! We should be on the same team.

PS:
You don’t know me, what I know about politics, or anything else. You only know what I choose to share. I won’t make assumptions about you in the future if you will respect the same with me or any other poster.

Trump didn't change anything except for delusional prissy airheads like you. His presidency is an outlier not the norm. I'm glad you couldn't find a convincing argument other than she's white and won't rock the boat. Well,America needs someone to rock the boat if not then why not klobuchar ? you're saying a whole bunch of nothing , just rambling about nonentities as if you have early onset dementia—you probably do.

You're clinging on to this bipartisanship fetish as if you've just crawled from under a rock where you've been living for all your thirties. Where was that bipartisanship when obama was elected ? I guess Republicans are finally going to become civilized and not the the entrenched racists that they are because a white woman will be on the ticket ? Geez , you're clinically insane but I love a good trains wreck.

The vice president is the closets collaborator to the president , the one with whom he talks and deliberated about everything beforemeeting any cabinet secretary ,a Veep without foreign policy experience in a world of increasing dumpster fire is a risk that only someone who has learned nothing will take . Any ambassador can be named sec of State. So your dumb argument doesn't hold any pertinence. As I said, at this point I'm actually rooting for old Joe to name whitmer , come back here on November 4th and tell us how you feel. Hopefully you wouldn't drink yourself to death on election night.

+1 Why not Klobuchar?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My takeaway from this sort of weird thread is that the white woman who looks like any third white woman in a generic UMC suburb—will get the nod because she is the “safe” choice. She will thrill the suburban white women who see themselves and their daughters in her and be ok enough for their husbands. Clinches MI and PA and maybe helps elsewhere in other parts of flyover country, Biden’s “gaffe” perhaps suggests he may think African Americans will support him 96-4 in any and all events. Harris becomes AG and S.Rice becomes sec. of state. Maybe the thought is that the vaguely racist male swing voters would be turned off by a woman of color VP. That’s the post, folks.

Really? Why couldn't white women see themselves in Hilary Clinton? I mean what does whitmer have Hilary didnt have ? Are you actually serious with this argument ? It has a weird combination of being pathetic and unbelievably dumb.

And uber-sexist.

[Anonymous]

If Whitmer is in the mix, then bring back Klobuchar. Klobuchar > Whitmer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My guess is that he really wants to do Whitmer or Rice and doesn't want to do Harris. Demmings was a gimmick pick and he doesnt think Bass gas the gravitas.

I think his own personal first choice would be Rice - they know each other really well from the Obama admin, and all the articles about his VP search say he wants a partner and someone he already knows and trusts. But, she does carry a lot of Obama administration baggage and I’m sure Republicans would love to throw out the “Clinton Obama Benghazi emails rarrrrrr” red meat to the base.

Demmings may be a gimmick to you - for me, as a public interest lobbyist, I have been nothing but impressed by her. Wish even 50% of Dem caucus was as well-prepared as she is for hearings and floor time. She is fluent with the materials and subject matter, clearly reading memos and listening to her staff (who also appear top notch). Perhaps the law enforcement background was seen as a detraction - that said, really like her and hope she has a long future in national Dem politics.

I like her for that, too, but that’s also why I like Warren.

I like Warren too. I read her book The Two Income Trap a long time ago. It really explained the middle class was cash strapped and single moms were falling even further behind. Biden should pick Whitmer or Duckworth. I agree Rice could be Sec of State.

DP, and largely agree. It’s always been Whitmer as the wisest pick with all things being equal. Still think Grisham is a strong parallel to her, but Whitmer has some national recognition because she is “that woman”.

Joe Biden isn't going to pick a white woman for the Veep no matterr how many times some of you middled aged white women on dcum fantasize over it . But you know what ? I really want Biden —who is only marginally better than trump intellectually — to pick a white woman .On election day , you'll find out that trump is far from the worst thing that has ever happened to AAs. Not long ago, some of you were all calling klobuchar a 'shoe-in'

I’m PP you’re responding to, advocating for Whitmer. I’m black, and I’m in my early 30s. So, not exactly fitting your description of these middle aged white women fantasizing about the same. What do I fantasize over? I’ll give you a hint. It starts with opening the aperture amongst narrow minded posters like you.

You may fancy yourself enlightened but you're NOT. For better or worse , politics boils down to 'you scratch my back I scratch yours ' . Putting that aside , I challenge you to find a vice presidential candidate since reagan who had little to no foreign policy experience as whitmer ? If Biden was picked over Tim kaine by Obama in 2008 , it was precisely because of his foreign policy experience—he had sat on the Senate foreign affairs committee for a long time .

Dick cheney had once been a defense secretary , a chief of staff and elected federal official . Nobody under Veep consideration in 2000 came close to his foreign policy resume

Al Gore had been in Congress for decades before Clinton tapped him for the no2. Spot.

George H. W. Bush had a long foreign policy resume which before being tapped as Reagan no.2 culminated in him being CIA director.


Setting aside the clear demographic implications of this election, whitmer has no foreign policy whatsoever compared to rice , Harris and bass . This isn't hearsay , these are the facts . What exactly is the upside of picking her ? The Midwest ? Laughable .

PP. I don’t fancy anything missy, and if I did, you certainly wouldn’t be the authority on anything pertaining to what I am. You sound... entitled? Starting off a post by telling me I’m ignorant? Huh. Says so much more about you than you may realize. Your immediate false projection tells me that when I enlightened you to my actual demographic, which didn’t fit your ignorant assumption, you felt ... upset about that. And want to tell me what I don’t know. Mmkay.

This post is more for lurkers reading than you, since I figure you’re resolute in your thinking and have a right to that. I advocate for Whitmer for simple reasons: they are the most relevant criteria for this term in this time with this candidacy. We aren’t in 2004 or 1996. We are in fricking 2020 so there is no parallel to a Trump, Obama, Biden, West, or Kardashian. Trump changed the game for better or worse. My rationale has been shared transparently; I gave this in detail much earlier in this thread, though it may have been unpopular opinion at the time. Whitmer is white and won’t rock the boat. She will govern and willingly collaborate with a strong team of support. She is young and new. And foreign policy is something that is handled best by the SecState, which Rice can surely ease into. I mean, Trump stood in front of the queen of England. Not that he is any measuring stick, but there is nowhere to go from there but up. Being able to work across the aisle with the GOP to set national policy and work to repair our neighborhoods stateside will take a lot of grit and a certain personality that can encourage the downtrodden. You have no idea how many people are just reluctant to serve and support our country because of what this president did to Patriots, pushing them away across every agency. We civilians are the servants who brief each administration, so don’t undervalue the power of a team that will clearly be effective. When things are being done the right way, government is boring and that is how it should be. It hasn’t been like that and the clown car is on autopilot, so we need to think about our engagement strategy using the info and tools we have now. This is not like any other election. People are angry at black people. People are angry at the President. Presidents never tweeted before Trump. People are angry with covid, unemployment, healthcare. An entire conglomerate of Republicans have formed numerous groups to support Biden. Whitmer has the broadest appeal to the broadest amount of voters with the least amount of varied risk. I’d challenge that you prove otherwise. She has stood up to Trump nationally and won’t be bullied easily or attacked for the color of her skin. Men will think twice before gender discrimination and mothers will trust her when she discusses vaccines that we should take without Lysol. She is naturally personable and connects easily.

But I’ve also said that Condoleeza Rice would be a huge bomb to drop for completely different reasons. I’ve also argued that Grisham is more limited with a sw strat than the idea of not making her electability about her race, because she looks white too.

You can’t “set aside the clear demographic implications”. That is literally what is driving this vote. Trump got in on those “demographic implications”.
We ain’t in Kansas anymore, Missy. We are all here. All of us. And we are allowed voices of differing opinion while still respecting the power of general agreement. That includes comedians like Sarah Cooper and TikTok teens trolling a rally. You didn’t factor these types of events I to the politics of the 90s and 00s. Times are changing, keep up, big data can tell us a lot more than your desk binder.

Joe has enough foreign policy experience as a former VP to not make this a deal-breaker. And as I’ve also said before BNMW. As most all of my people are at this point. And clearly so are many “middle aged white women”. You do a disservice to everyone when you reduce an anonymous forum to one demographic. There are Asians, Indian, Muslim, Christian, Agnostiv, Athiest, Black, Mixed, and even foreign fingers behind many opinions here. Try to broaden your thinking without intentionally disparaging or trying to intimidate other people. You might enjoy it if you leave the dark side! We should be on the same team.

PS:
You don’t know me, what I know about politics, or anything else. You only know what I choose to share. I won’t make assumptions about you in the future if you will respect the same with me or any other poster.

Trump didn't change anything except for delusional prissy airheads like you. His presidency is an outlier not the norm. I'm glad you couldn't find a convincing argument other than she's white and won't rock the boat. Well,America needs someone to rock the boat if not then why not klobuchar ? you're saying a whole bunch of nothing , just rambling about nonentities as if you have early onset dementia—you probably do.

You're clinging on to this bipartisanship fetish as if you've just crawled from under a rock where you've been living for all your thirties. Where was that bipartisanship when obama was elected ? I guess Republicans are finally going to become civilized and not the the entrenched racists that they are because a white woman will be on the ticket ? Geez , you're clinically insane but I love a good trains wreck.

The vice president is the closets collaborator to the president , the one with whom he talks and deliberated about everything beforemeeting any cabinet secretary ,a Veep without foreign policy experience in a world of increasing dumpster fire is a risk that only someone who has learned nothing will take . Any ambassador can be named sec of State. So your dumb argument doesn't hold any pertinence. As I said, at this point I'm actually rooting for old Joe to name whitmer , come back here on November 4th and tell us how you feel. Hopefully you wouldn't drink yourself to death on election night.

+1 Why not Klobuchar?

Right, because all white women are interchangeable. Gross.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My guess is that he really wants to do Whitmer or Rice and doesn't want to do Harris. Demmings was a gimmick pick and he doesnt think Bass gas the gravitas.

I think his own personal first choice would be Rice - they know each other really well from the Obama admin, and all the articles about his VP search say he wants a partner and someone he already knows and trusts. But, she does carry a lot of Obama administration baggage and I’m sure Republicans would love to throw out the “Clinton Obama Benghazi emails rarrrrrr” red meat to the base.

Demmings may be a gimmick to you - for me, as a public interest lobbyist, I have been nothing but impressed by her. Wish even 50% of Dem caucus was as well-prepared as she is for hearings and floor time. She is fluent with the materials and subject matter, clearly reading memos and listening to her staff (who also appear top notch). Perhaps the law enforcement background was seen as a detraction - that said, really like her and hope she has a long future in national Dem politics.

I like her for that, too, but that’s also why I like Warren.

I like Warren too. I read her book The Two Income Trap a long time ago. It really explained the middle class was cash strapped and single moms were falling even further behind. Biden should pick Whitmer or Duckworth. I agree Rice could be Sec of State.

DP, and largely agree. It’s always been Whitmer as the wisest pick with all things being equal. Still think Grisham is a strong parallel to her, but Whitmer has some national recognition because she is “that woman”.

Joe Biden isn't going to pick a white woman for the Veep no matterr how many times some of you middled aged white women on dcum fantasize over it . But you know what ? I really want Biden —who is only marginally better than trump intellectually — to pick a white woman .On election day , you'll find out that trump is far from the worst thing that has ever happened to AAs. Not long ago, some of you were all calling klobuchar a 'shoe-in'

I’m PP you’re responding to, advocating for Whitmer. I’m black, and I’m in my early 30s. So, not exactly fitting your description of these middle aged white women fantasizing about the same. What do I fantasize over? I’ll give you a hint. It starts with opening the aperture amongst narrow minded posters like you.

You may fancy yourself enlightened but you're NOT. For better or worse , politics boils down to 'you scratch my back I scratch yours ' . Putting that aside , I challenge you to find a vice presidential candidate since reagan who had little to no foreign policy experience as whitmer ? If Biden was picked over Tim kaine by Obama in 2008 , it was precisely because of his foreign policy experience—he had sat on the Senate foreign affairs committee for a long time .

Dick cheney had once been a defense secretary , a chief of staff and elected federal official . Nobody under Veep consideration in 2000 came close to his foreign policy resume

Al Gore had been in Congress for decades before Clinton tapped him for the no2. Spot.

George H. W. Bush had a long foreign policy resume which before being tapped as Reagan no.2 culminated in him being CIA director.


Setting aside the clear demographic implications of this election, whitmer has no foreign policy whatsoever compared to rice , Harris and bass . This isn't hearsay , these are the facts . What exactly is the upside of picking her ? The Midwest ? Laughable .

PP. I don’t fancy anything missy, and if I did, you certainly wouldn’t be the authority on anything pertaining to what I am. You sound... entitled? Starting off a post by telling me I’m ignorant? Huh. Says so much more about you than you may realize. Your immediate false projection tells me that when I enlightened you to my actual demographic, which didn’t fit your ignorant assumption, you felt ... upset about that. And want to tell me what I don’t know. Mmkay.

This post is more for lurkers reading than you, since I figure you’re resolute in your thinking and have a right to that. I advocate for Whitmer for simple reasons: they are the most relevant criteria for this term in this time with this candidacy. We aren’t in 2004 or 1996. We are in fricking 2020 so there is no parallel to a Trump, Obama, Biden, West, or Kardashian. Trump changed the game for better or worse. My rationale has been shared transparently; I gave this in detail much earlier in this thread, though it may have been unpopular opinion at the time. Whitmer is white and won’t rock the boat. She will govern and willingly collaborate with a strong team of support. She is young and new. And foreign policy is something that is handled best by the SecState, which Rice can surely ease into. I mean, Trump stood in front of the queen of England. Not that he is any measuring stick, but there is nowhere to go from there but up. Being able to work across the aisle with the GOP to set national policy and work to repair our neighborhoods stateside will take a lot of grit and a certain personality that can encourage the downtrodden. You have no idea how many people are just reluctant to serve and support our country because of what this president did to Patriots, pushing them away across every agency. We civilians are the servants who brief each administration, so don’t undervalue the power of a team that will clearly be effective. When things are being done the right way, government is boring and that is how it should be. It hasn’t been like that and the clown car is on autopilot, so we need to think about our engagement strategy using the info and tools we have now. This is not like any other election. People are angry at black people. People are angry at the President. Presidents never tweeted before Trump. People are angry with covid, unemployment, healthcare. An entire conglomerate of Republicans have formed numerous groups to support Biden. Whitmer has the broadest appeal to the broadest amount of voters with the least amount of varied risk. I’d challenge that you prove otherwise. She has stood up to Trump nationally and won’t be bullied easily or attacked for the color of her skin. Men will think twice before gender discrimination and mothers will trust her when she discusses vaccines that we should take without Lysol. She is naturally personable and connects easily.

But I’ve also said that Condoleeza Rice would be a huge bomb to drop for completely different reasons. I’ve also argued that Grisham is more limited with a sw strat than the idea of not making her electability about her race, because she looks white too.

You can’t “set aside the clear demographic implications”. That is literally what is driving this vote. Trump got in on those “demographic implications”.
We ain’t in Kansas anymore, Missy. We are all here. All of us. And we are allowed voices of differing opinion while still respecting the power of general agreement. That includes comedians like Sarah Cooper and TikTok teens trolling a rally. You didn’t factor these types of events I to the politics of the 90s and 00s. Times are changing, keep up, big data can tell us a lot more than your desk binder.

Joe has enough foreign policy experience as a former VP to not make this a deal-breaker. And as I’ve also said before BNMW. As most all of my people are at this point. And clearly so are many “middle aged white women”. You do a disservice to everyone when you reduce an anonymous forum to one demographic. There are Asians, Indian, Muslim, Christian, Agnostiv, Athiest, Black, Mixed, and even foreign fingers behind many opinions here. Try to broaden your thinking without intentionally disparaging or trying to intimidate other people. You might enjoy it if you leave the dark side! We should be on the same team.

PS:
You don’t know me, what I know about politics, or anything else. You only know what I choose to share. I won’t make assumptions about you in the future if you will respect the same with me or any other poster.

Trump didn't change anything except for delusional prissy airheads like you. His presidency is an outlier not the norm. I'm glad you couldn't find a convincing argument other than she's white and won't rock the boat. Well,America needs someone to rock the boat if not then why not klobuchar ? you're saying a whole bunch of nothing , just rambling about nonentities as if you have early onset dementia—you probably do.

You're clinging on to this bipartisanship fetish as if you've just crawled from under a rock where you've been living for all your thirties. Where was that bipartisanship when obama was elected ? I guess Republicans are finally going to become civilized and not the the entrenched racists that they are because a white woman will be on the ticket ? Geez , you're clinically insane but I love a good trains wreck.

The vice president is the closets collaborator to the president , the one with whom he talks and deliberated about everything beforemeeting any cabinet secretary ,a Veep without foreign policy experience in a world of increasing dumpster fire is a risk that only someone who has learned nothing will take . Any ambassador can be named sec of State. So your dumb argument doesn't hold any pertinence. As I said, at this point I'm actually rooting for old Joe to name whitmer , come back here on November 4th and tell us how you feel. Hopefully you wouldn't drink yourself to death on election night.

+1 Why not Klobuchar?

Right, because all white women are interchangeable. Gross.

OK Let me be very clear here. Klobuchar's experience > Whitmer's experience. Not sure where you people think a Gov. of less than 2 years is up to the task of being the VEEP or PRES. No wonder America is where it is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My takeaway from this sort of weird thread is that the white woman who looks like any third white woman in a generic UMC suburb—will get the nod because she is the “safe” choice. She will thrill the suburban white women who see themselves and their daughters in her and be ok enough for their husbands. Clinches MI and PA and maybe helps elsewhere in other parts of flyover country, Biden’s “gaffe” perhaps suggests he may think African Americans will support him 96-4 in any and all events. Harris becomes AG and S.Rice becomes sec. of state. Maybe the thought is that the vaguely racist male swing voters would be turned off by a woman of color VP. That’s the post, folks.

Really? Why couldn't white women see themselves in Hilary Clinton? I mean what does whitmer have Hilary didnt have ? Are you actually serious with this argument ? It has a weird combination of being pathetic and unbelievably dumb.

Hrc is a Wellesley YLS grad - the average FUPA toting white woman cannot relate to her.

Whitmer is culturally more relatable to this set than HRc.

Whitmer would be culturally more relatable than Gina Raimondo for example as well because of Gina’s educational background

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If Whitmer is in the mix, then bring back Klobuchar. Klobuchar > Whitmer.

True but Klobs is a Chicago - Yale grad.

Whitmer’s salt of the earth like Sarah palin

Joe went to a TTT himself so he feels threatened by those that didn’t go.

Rice is different because joe will feel superior as being “in the arena” compared to her (she’s never ran for anything).

But someone who has held elected office and isn’t TTT - joe feels dumb around those types.

There is a great NYT article where it highlights how during meetings people would let joe ramble and then just ignore him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My guess is that he really wants to do Whitmer or Rice and doesn't want to do Harris. Demmings was a gimmick pick and he doesnt think Bass gas the gravitas.

I think his own personal first choice would be Rice - they know each other really well from the Obama admin, and all the articles about his VP search say he wants a partner and someone he already knows and trusts. But, she does carry a lot of Obama administration baggage and I’m sure Republicans would love to throw out the “Clinton Obama Benghazi emails rarrrrrr” red meat to the base.

Demmings may be a gimmick to you - for me, as a public interest lobbyist, I have been nothing but impressed by her. Wish even 50% of Dem caucus was as well-prepared as she is for hearings and floor time. She is fluent with the materials and subject matter, clearly reading memos and listening to her staff (who also appear top notch). Perhaps the law enforcement background was seen as a detraction - that said, really like her and hope she has a long future in national Dem politics.

I like her for that, too, but that’s also why I like Warren.

I like Warren too. I read her book The Two Income Trap a long time ago. It really explained the middle class was cash strapped and single moms were falling even further behind. Biden should pick Whitmer or Duckworth. I agree Rice could be Sec of State.

DP, and largely agree. It’s always been Whitmer as the wisest pick with all things being equal. Still think Grisham is a strong parallel to her, but Whitmer has some national recognition because she is “that woman”.

Joe Biden isn't going to pick a white woman for the Veep no matterr how many times some of you middled aged white women on dcum fantasize over it . But you know what ? I really want Biden —who is only marginally better than trump intellectually — to pick a white woman .On election day , you'll find out that trump is far from the worst thing that has ever happened to AAs. Not long ago, some of you were all calling klobuchar a 'shoe-in'

I’m PP you’re responding to, advocating for Whitmer. I’m black, and I’m in my early 30s. So, not exactly fitting your description of these middle aged white women fantasizing about the same. What do I fantasize over? I’ll give you a hint. It starts with opening the aperture amongst narrow minded posters like you.

You may fancy yourself enlightened but you're NOT. For better or worse , politics boils down to 'you scratch my back I scratch yours ' . Putting that aside , I challenge you to find a vice presidential candidate since reagan who had little to no foreign policy experience as whitmer ? If Biden was picked over Tim kaine by Obama in 2008 , it was precisely because of his foreign policy experience—he had sat on the Senate foreign affairs committee for a long time .

Dick cheney had once been a defense secretary , a chief of staff and elected federal official . Nobody under Veep consideration in 2000 came close to his foreign policy resume

Al Gore had been in Congress for decades before Clinton tapped him for the no2. Spot.

George H. W. Bush had a long foreign policy resume which before being tapped as Reagan no.2 culminated in him being CIA director.


Setting aside the clear demographic implications of this election, whitmer has no foreign policy whatsoever compared to rice , Harris and bass . This isn't hearsay , these are the facts . What exactly is the upside of picking her ? The Midwest ? Laughable .

PP. I don’t fancy anything missy, and if I did, you certainly wouldn’t be the authority on anything pertaining to what I am. You sound... entitled? Starting off a post by telling me I’m ignorant? Huh. Says so much more about you than you may realize. Your immediate false projection tells me that when I enlightened you to my actual demographic, which didn’t fit your ignorant assumption, you felt ... upset about that. And want to tell me what I don’t know. Mmkay.

This post is more for lurkers reading than you, since I figure you’re resolute in your thinking and have a right to that. I advocate for Whitmer for simple reasons: they are the most relevant criteria for this term in this time with this candidacy. We aren’t in 2004 or 1996. We are in fricking 2020 so there is no parallel to a Trump, Obama, Biden, West, or Kardashian. Trump changed the game for better or worse. My rationale has been shared transparently; I gave this in detail much earlier in this thread, though it may have been unpopular opinion at the time. Whitmer is white and won’t rock the boat. She will govern and willingly collaborate with a strong team of support. She is young and new. And foreign policy is something that is handled best by the SecState, which Rice can surely ease into. I mean, Trump stood in front of the queen of England. Not that he is any measuring stick, but there is nowhere to go from there but up. Being able to work across the aisle with the GOP to set national policy and work to repair our neighborhoods stateside will take a lot of grit and a certain personality that can encourage the downtrodden. You have no idea how many people are just reluctant to serve and support our country because of what this president did to Patriots, pushing them away across every agency. We civilians are the servants who brief each administration, so don’t undervalue the power of a team that will clearly be effective. When things are being done the right way, government is boring and that is how it should be. It hasn’t been like that and the clown car is on autopilot, so we need to think about our engagement strategy using the info and tools we have now. This is not like any other election. People are angry at black people. People are angry at the President. Presidents never tweeted before Trump. People are angry with covid, unemployment, healthcare. An entire conglomerate of Republicans have formed numerous groups to support Biden. Whitmer has the broadest appeal to the broadest amount of voters with the least amount of varied risk. I’d challenge that you prove otherwise. She has stood up to Trump nationally and won’t be bullied easily or attacked for the color of her skin. Men will think twice before gender discrimination and mothers will trust her when she discusses vaccines that we should take without Lysol. She is naturally personable and connects easily.

But I’ve also said that Condoleeza Rice would be a huge bomb to drop for completely different reasons. I’ve also argued that Grisham is more limited with a sw strat than the idea of not making her electability about her race, because she looks white too.

You can’t “set aside the clear demographic implications”. That is literally what is driving this vote. Trump got in on those “demographic implications”.
We ain’t in Kansas anymore, Missy. We are all here. All of us. And we are allowed voices of differing opinion while still respecting the power of general agreement. That includes comedians like Sarah Cooper and TikTok teens trolling a rally. You didn’t factor these types of events I to the politics of the 90s and 00s. Times are changing, keep up, big data can tell us a lot more than your desk binder.

Joe has enough foreign policy experience as a former VP to not make this a deal-breaker. And as I’ve also said before BNMW. As most all of my people are at this point. And clearly so are many “middle aged white women”. You do a disservice to everyone when you reduce an anonymous forum to one demographic. There are Asians, Indian, Muslim, Christian, Agnostiv, Athiest, Black, Mixed, and even foreign fingers behind many opinions here. Try to broaden your thinking without intentionally disparaging or trying to intimidate other people. You might enjoy it if you leave the dark side! We should be on the same team.

PS:
You don’t know me, what I know about politics, or anything else. You only know what I choose to share. I won’t make assumptions about you in the future if you will respect the same with me or any other poster.

Trump didn't change anything except for delusional prissy airheads like you. His presidency is an outlier not the norm. I'm glad you couldn't find a convincing argument other than she's white and won't rock the boat. Well,America needs someone to rock the boat if not then why not klobuchar ? you're saying a whole bunch of nothing , just rambling about nonentities as if you have early onset dementia—you probably do.

You're clinging on to this bipartisanship fetish as if you've just crawled from under a rock where you've been living for all your thirties. Where was that bipartisanship when obama was elected ? I guess Republicans are finally going to become civilized and not the the entrenched racists that they are because a white woman will be on the ticket ? Geez , you're clinically insane but I love a good trains wreck.

The vice president is the closets collaborator to the president , the one with whom he talks and deliberated about everything beforemeeting any cabinet secretary ,a Veep without foreign policy experience in a world of increasing dumpster fire is a risk that only someone who has learned nothing will take . Any ambassador can be named sec of State. So your dumb argument doesn't hold any pertinence. As I said, at this point I'm actually rooting for old Joe to name whitmer , come back here on November 4th and tell us how you feel. Hopefully you wouldn't drink yourself to death on election night.

+1 Why not Klobuchar?

Right, because all white women are interchangeable. Gross.

OK Let me be very clear here. Klobuchar's experience > Whitmer's experience. Not sure where you people think a Gov. of less than 2 years is up to the task of being the VEEP or PRES. No wonder America is where it is.

Let’s see Whitmer and Klobuchar were both county prosecutors. Whitmer spent several years in state legislature, which Klobuchar didn’t. Whitmer has run one of the larger states during a pandemic- Klobuchar has not. Klobuchar has been a senator which gives her a foreign policy edge that is not super necessary as similar to Biden. Klobuchar has not run a state or really anything. I would say they have different experience. I wouldn’t agree that Klobuchar has more experience per se.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Whitmer is in the mix, then bring back Klobuchar. Klobuchar > Whitmer.

True but Klobs is a Chicago - Yale grad.

Whitmer’s salt of the earth like Sarah palin

Joe went to a TTT himself so he feels threatened by those that didn’t go.

Rice is different because joe will feel superior as being “in the arena” compared to her (she’s never ran for anything).

But someone who has held elected office and isn’t TTT - joe feels dumb around those types.

There is a great NYT article where it highlights how during meetings people would let joe ramble and then just ignore him.

Right, the Big Ten is a TTT...good lord, no wonder Trump got elected. Classist AF.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My takeaway from this sort of weird thread is that the white woman who looks like any third white woman in a generic UMC suburb—will get the nod because she is the “safe” choice. She will thrill the suburban white women who see themselves and their daughters in her and be ok enough for their husbands. Clinches MI and PA and maybe helps elsewhere in other parts of flyover country, Biden’s “gaffe” perhaps suggests he may think African Americans will support him 96-4 in any and all events. Harris becomes AG and S.Rice becomes sec. of state. Maybe the thought is that the vaguely racist male swing voters would be turned off by a woman of color VP. That’s the post, folks.

Really? Why couldn't white women see themselves in Hilary Clinton? I mean what does whitmer have Hilary didnt have ? Are you actually serious with this argument ? It has a weird combination of being pathetic and unbelievably dumb.

Hrc is a Wellesley YLS grad - the average FUPA toting white woman cannot relate to her.

Whitmer is culturally more relatable to this set than HRc.

Whitmer would be culturally more relatable than Gina Raimondo for example as well because of Gina’s educational background

Whitmer was a member of Michigan House of Rep and then Michigan State Senate for many years. She was the Michigan Senate’s first female Democratic leader. She went to Michigan State for her law degree. No one cares she didn’t go to Wellesley or Yale. Most people in this country go to their state school now that college cost is out of control. Obama had about the same amount of experience or less than Whitmer. He was a one time Senator where as Whitmer is a Governor. She has been dealing with the issues that matter for this country.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My takeaway from this sort of weird thread is that the white woman who looks like any third white woman in a generic UMC suburb—will get the nod because she is the “safe” choice. She will thrill the suburban white women who see themselves and their daughters in her and be ok enough for their husbands. Clinches MI and PA and maybe helps elsewhere in other parts of flyover country, Biden’s “gaffe” perhaps suggests he may think African Americans will support him 96-4 in any and all events. Harris becomes AG and S.Rice becomes sec. of state. Maybe the thought is that the vaguely racist male swing voters would be turned off by a woman of color VP. That’s the post, folks.

Really? Why couldn't white women see themselves in Hilary Clinton? I mean what does whitmer have Hilary didnt have ? Are you actually serious with this argument ? It has a weird combination of being pathetic and unbelievably dumb.

Good looks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My takeaway from this sort of weird thread is that the white woman who looks like any third white woman in a generic UMC suburb—will get the nod because she is the “safe” choice. She will thrill the suburban white women who see themselves and their daughters in her and be ok enough for their husbands. Clinches MI and PA and maybe helps elsewhere in other parts of flyover country, Biden’s “gaffe” perhaps suggests he may think African Americans will support him 96-4 in any and all events. Harris becomes AG and S.Rice becomes sec. of state. Maybe the thought is that the vaguely racist male swing voters would be turned off by a woman of color VP. That’s the post, folks.

Really? Why couldn't white women see themselves in Hilary Clinton? I mean what does whitmer have Hilary didnt have ? Are you actually serious with this argument ? It has a weird combination of being pathetic and unbelievably dumb.

Hrc is a Wellesley YLS grad - the average FUPA toting white woman cannot relate to her.

Whitmer is culturally more relatable to this set than HRc.

Whitmer would be culturally more relatable than Gina Raimondo for example as well because of Gina’s educational background

Whitmer was a member of Michigan House of Rep and then Michigan State Senate for many years. She was the Michigan Senate’s first female Democratic leader. She went to Michigan State for her law degree. No one cares she didn’t go to Wellesley or Yale. Most people in this country go to their state school now that college cost is out of control. Obama had about the same amount of experience or less than Whitmer. He was a one time Senator where as Whitmer is a Governor. She has been dealing with the issues that matter for this country.

Gina raimondo has been 10x the governor that whitmer is, is smarter, works out more, just overall outshines Whitmer on every dimension.

So explain why whitmer is top tier and raimondo isnt?

[Anonymous]

What is TTT