Biden's VP?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Pete Buttigieg would be a pretty rad ticket. And btw a lot of “Republican lite” and Independents I know really like Pete. So, it could be a winner.

My knucklehead husband, who originally liked Trump when there were a lot of other candidates, (we laughed in his face), likes Pete A LOT. disgusted Pete dropped out. So I think Pete would be an amazing choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Klobuchar for the hundredth time. Their exchange when she endorsed him spoke volumes.

A woman being VP is one step closer to a female president. Not sure if she would be impactful in the most critical states/policy areas.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Klobuchar for the hundredth time. Their exchange when she endorsed him spoke volumes.

A woman being VP is one step closer to a female president. Not sure if she would be impactful in the most critical states/policy areas.

A woman VP has 50/50 odds that she will take over for Joe before his first term is up. I love Joe and will vote for him, but I don’t think he will make it thru four years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Joe needs a VP who can help with 1) Latino voters, 2) young voters, and 3) socialists/progressives. He needs an AOC type of VP. He can have a poor man version of AOC in Andrew Yang.

No he doesn't. For the thousandth time, he needs PA, WI, MI, FL. Turnout among white suburban and working class voters (and black voters, which he already has) will be the essential. Latino voters don't tend to work as a single bloc and young voters don't turn out. Socialists/progressives are a lost cause and are smaller in number than the first bloc. Hillary came close, only low turnout in a small handful of swing states sealed her fate. Super Tuesday indicates that anti-Trump sentiment will take care of that problem but numbers in swing states remains crucial.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Joe needs a VP who can help with 1) Latino voters, 2) young voters, and 3) socialists/progressives. He needs an AOC type of VP. He can have a poor man version of AOC in Andrew Yang.

Yang, like Mayor Pete and Stacy Abrams, is not experienced enough to backstop a 70something President.

I really like Yang, but I have to agree. I’m glad to see he’s dusted himself off and is starting on a new project. Expect to hear from him in the future.

KLOBUCHAR.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Klobuchar for the hundredth time. Their exchange when she endorsed him spoke volumes.

That’s a solid ticket.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Klobuchar for the hundredth time. Their exchange when she endorsed him spoke volumes.

That’s a solid ticket.

Whitmer would be better, so much more appealing. Amy is competent but her personality is a turnoff.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Joe needs a VP who can help with 1) Latino voters, 2) young voters, and 3) socialists/progressives. He needs an AOC type of VP. He can have a poor man version of AOC in Andrew Yang.

No he doesn't. For the thousandth time, he needs PA, WI, MI, FL. Turnout among white suburban and working class voters (and black voters, which he already has) will be the essential. Latino voters don't tend to work as a single bloc and young voters don't turn out. Socialists/progressives are a lost cause and are smaller in number than the first bloc. Hillary came close, only low turnout in a small handful of swing states sealed her fate. Super Tuesday indicates that anti-Trump sentiment will take care of that problem but numbers in swing states remains crucial.

In addition, you can't trust socialists progressives to actually show up come November. There are any number of issues or situations that will make them throw a temper tantrum and just not show up. Much better to concentrate on voters that if you win them, you can count on them to actually show up and vote. The socialists progressives will be very fervently with you and devoted to you...until they aren't. And then they will abandon the ticket and stay home. They are idealogues and not reliable.

[Anonymous]

Amy Klobuchar. It's a done deal, just hasn't been announced yet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The betting markets have kamala harris at 5-2, Stacy abrams 4-1 and klobuchar at 5-1. I think klobuchar is more likely that Stacy Abrams but we’ll see. Harris is in safe senate seat. This is her chance to make history.

Harris wasn't seriously considered due to her debate attack and Ca. residency. Stacy is unproven and relatively unknown. It is Amy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Joe needs a VP who can help with 1) Latino voters, 2) young voters, and 3) socialists/progressives. He needs an AOC type of VP. He can have a poor man version of AOC in Andrew Yang.

No he doesn't. For the thousandth time, he needs PA, WI, MI, FL. Turnout among white suburban and working class voters (and black voters, which he already has) will be the essential. Latino voters don't tend to work as a single bloc and young voters don't turn out. Socialists/progressives are a lost cause and are smaller in number than the first bloc. Hillary came close, only low turnout in a small handful of swing states sealed her fate. Super Tuesday indicates that anti-Trump sentiment will take care of that problem but numbers in swing states remains crucial.

But Biden could lose Colorado, New Hampshire and New Mexico. He needs almost all of the Sanders supporters to win.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Joe needs a VP who can help with 1) Latino voters, 2) young voters, and 3) socialists/progressives. He needs an AOC type of VP. He can have a poor man version of AOC in Andrew Yang.

No he doesn't. For the thousandth time, he needs PA, WI, MI, FL. Turnout among white suburban and working class voters (and black voters, which he already has) will be the essential. Latino voters don't tend to work as a single bloc and young voters don't turn out. Socialists/progressives are a lost cause and are smaller in number than the first bloc. Hillary came close, only low turnout in a small handful of swing states sealed her fate. Super Tuesday indicates that anti-Trump sentiment will take care of that problem but numbers in swing states remains crucial.

But Biden could lose Colorado, New Hampshire and New Mexico. He needs almost all of the Sanders supporters to win.

Lol you are nuts. Those are solid locks for Biden.

[Anonymous]

Detroit mayor Mike Duggan

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Joe needs a VP who can help with 1) Latino voters, 2) young voters, and 3) socialists/progressives. He needs an AOC type of VP. He can have a poor man version of AOC in Andrew Yang.

No he doesn't. For the thousandth time, he needs PA, WI, MI, FL. Turnout among white suburban and working class voters (and black voters, which he already has) will be the essential. Latino voters don't tend to work as a single bloc and young voters don't turn out. Socialists/progressives are a lost cause and are smaller in number than the first bloc. Hillary came close, only low turnout in a small handful of swing states sealed her fate. Super Tuesday indicates that anti-Trump sentiment will take care of that problem but numbers in swing states remains crucial.

But Biden could lose Colorado, New Hampshire and New Mexico. He needs almost all of the Sanders supporters to win.

I live in New Mexico. There is NO way New Mexico is going red. Ditto Colorado.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Amy Klobuchar. It's a done deal, just hasn't been announced yet.

I would be fine with that. I’ve always liked Amy Klobuchar. They would do extremely well with middle class suburban moms I imagine. Combined with Biden’s other natural constituencies, that would probably be enough to win.