Biden VP news megathread (pg 286 - been selected, announcement could be today)

[Orwell]

When Obama picked Biden everyone thought that he was too old to ever run for president again.
And yet here we are.

And we’re not necessarily better off. Biden and Bernie effectively shut out every other candidate in the race. We’ll not have had anything near a wide-open primary in 16 years come 2024. I’d prefer a candidate secure the nomination on their own strengths (Obama ‘08, Clinton ‘92) than on de-facto incumbency (Gore ‘00, Clinton ‘16, Biden ‘20).

You can call it de-facto if you want, but the three candidates listed (Gore, Clinton, Biden) were also the most experienced candidates in their respective fields.  Like it or not, experience is a strength. 

Actually it’s usually a weakness. This is the only cycle since probably ‘68 where experience has been a positive.

Was HRC really the most experienced candidate? She spent 8 years in the Senate and then 4 as SoS sure that seems like a lot but Biden was a Senator for 36 years and then Vice President for another 8 years, Gore was a Congressman for 15 years and then VP for 8. Not to mention his service in Vietnam and his political father. In 2016 Bernie was a Congressman for 25 years and then a Mayor for 8 years before that, O'Malley spent 8 years as Mayor and 8 years as Governor, Chafee spent 8 years in the Senate, 4 years as Governor, and 6 years as Mayor, and was also the son of a prominent politician.


If you want to compare that to the least experienced Democratic nominees since 1968, before their nomination.

George McGovern, US Representative from South Dakota 4 years, US Senator from South Dakota 9 years, Director of "Food for Peace" 2 years, WW2 Veteran

Michael Dukakis, 9 years as Governor of Massachusetts, 8 years in the Massachusetts State Assembly, US Army Veteran

Jimmy Carter, 4 years in the Georgia State Senate, 4 years as Governor of Georgia, Navy Veteran

John Kerry, 2 years as Lt. Governor of Massachusetts, 19 years US Senator from Massachusetts, Vietnam Veteran

So the only Democratic nominee since 1968  that HRC had more experience then was Jimmy Carter, but if you exclude legislature time then Dukakis as well.

[Orwell]

When Obama picked Biden everyone thought that he was too old to ever run for president again.
And yet here we are.

And we’re not necessarily better off. Biden and Bernie effectively shut out every other candidate in the race. We’ll not have had anything near a wide-open primary in 16 years come 2024. I’d prefer a candidate secure the nomination on their own strengths (Obama ‘08, Clinton ‘92) than on de-facto incumbency (Gore ‘00, Clinton ‘16, Biden ‘20).

You can call it de-facto if you want, but the three candidates listed (Gore, Clinton, Biden) were also the most experienced candidates in their respective fields.  Like it or not, experience is a strength.  

Actually it’s usually a weakness. This is the only cycle since probably ‘68 where experience has been a positive.

Was HRC really the most experienced candidate? She spent 8 years in the Senate and then 4 as SoS sure that seems like a lot but Biden was a Senator for 36 years and then Vice President for another 8 years, Gore was a Congressman for 15 years and then VP for 8. Not to mention his service in Vietnam and his political father. In 2016 Bernie was a Congressman for 25 years and then a Mayor for 8 years before that, O'Malley spent 8 years as Mayor and 8 years as Governor, Chafee spent 8 years in the Senate, 4 years as Governor, and 6 years as Mayor, and was also the son of a prominent politician.


If you want to compare that to the least experienced Democratic nominees since 1968, before their nomination.

George McGovern, US Representative from South Dakota 4 years, US Senator from South Dakota 9 years, Director of "Food for Peace" 2 years, WW2 Veteran

Michael Dukakis, 9 years as Governor of Massachusetts, 8 years in the Massachusetts State Assembly, US Army Veteran

Jimmy Carter, 4 years in the Georgia State Senate, 4 years as Governor of Georgia, Navy Veteran

John Kerry, 2 years as Lt. Governor of Massachusetts, 19 years US Senator from Massachusetts, Vietnam Veteran

So the only Democratic nominee since 1968  that HRC had more experience then was Jimmy Carter, but if you exclude legislature time then Dukakis as well.

This is all quantitative, completely ignoring the qualitative element. Being a senator for more years doesn't necessarily mean you're more prepared for the presidency because you've been in a lot of leadership roles or anything like that. Bernie for example ranks near dead last for actual leadership in Congress according to measures of how often the bills he sponsors get to the floor and gets passed, etc.

Hillary was a pretty active senator even though she wasn't there as long as some of these others, and moreover four years as SoS is EXTREMELY valuable foreign policy experience that NONE of these others could compare to. And considering the most power the president directly has is probably in the field of foreign policy, that's pretty damn significant.

Plus, being First Lady can't simply be brushed off either. She had an active office in the White House and was tasked with more responsibility as First Lady than any other in history with the possible exception of Eleanor Roosevelt. Had more power and influence too. She and Bill were partners in just about everything they did. I mean for Christ's sake, she was in charge of one of the most significant and difficult tasks of his presidency -- healthcare reform. It didn't work out, but not for lack of trying on her part. She not only took an active role in Congress, she toured the country trying to sell the legislation to the public.

So when you take 8 years of being almost co-president, plus 8 years in the Senate, plus 4 years as SoS -- that's a damn impressive resume. The important thing was we all knew she would know exactly what she was doing from day one when she entered the White House. She knew everything that had to be done and everybody that had to be talked to. Hell, she knew exactly where to go in the White House itself. It's hard to beat that kind of experience. Just sitting in the Senate for a while isn't quite the same.

The only person who I think is about as experienced as her is John Kerry, due to his time as both a Senator and SoS. They are quite literally the two most qualified people on Earth to be president.

And if you want to talk about being a Mayor of a small town as relevant experience to the presidency... No. Just no. This is why Buttigieg was a non-starter for me. South Bend might as well be on a different planet from Washington, same with Burlington.

When Obama picked Biden everyone thought that he was too old to ever run for president again.
And yet here we are.

And we’re not necessarily better off. Biden and Bernie effectively shut out every other candidate in the race. We’ll not have had anything near a wide-open primary in 16 years come 2024. I’d prefer a candidate secure the nomination on their own strengths (Obama ‘08, Clinton ‘92) than on de-facto incumbency (Gore ‘00, Clinton ‘16, Biden ‘20).

You can call it de-facto if you want, but the three candidates listed (Gore, Clinton, Biden) were also the most experienced candidates in their respective fields.  Like it or not, experience is a strength. 

Actually it’s usually a weakness. This is the only cycle since probably ‘68 where experience has been a positive.

Was HRC really the most experienced candidate? She spent 8 years in the Senate and then 4 as SoS sure that seems like a lot but Biden was a Senator for 36 years and then Vice President for another 8 years, Gore was a Congressman for 15 years and then VP for 8. Not to mention his service in Vietnam and his political father. In 2016 Bernie was a Congressman for 25 years and then a Mayor for 8 years before that, O'Malley spent 8 years as Mayor and 8 years as Governor, Chafee spent 8 years in the Senate, 4 years as Governor, and 6 years as Mayor, and was also the son of a prominent politician.


If you want to compare that to the least experienced Democratic nominees since 1968, before their nomination.

George McGovern, US Representative from South Dakota 4 years, US Senator from South Dakota 9 years, Director of "Food for Peace" 2 years, WW2 Veteran

Michael Dukakis, 9 years as Governor of Massachusetts, 8 years in the Massachusetts State Assembly, US Army Veteran

Jimmy Carter, 4 years in the Georgia State Senate, 4 years as Governor of Georgia, Navy Veteran

John Kerry, 2 years as Lt. Governor of Massachusetts, 19 years US Senator from Massachusetts, Vietnam Veteran

So the only Democratic nominee since 1968  that HRC had more experience then was Jimmy Carter, but if you exclude legislature time then Dukakis as well.

This is all quantitative, completely ignoring the qualitative element. Being a senator for more years doesn't necessarily mean you're more prepared for the presidency because you've been in a lot of leadership roles or anything like that. Bernie for example ranks near dead last for actual leadership in Congress according to measures of how often the bills he sponsors get to the floor and gets passed, etc.

Hillary was a pretty active senator even though she wasn't there as long as some of these others, and moreover four years as SoS is EXTREMELY valuable foreign policy experience that NONE of these others could compare to. And considering the most power the president directly has is probably in the field of foreign policy, that's pretty damn significant.

Plus, being First Lady can't simply be brushed off either. She had an active office in the White House and was tasked with more responsibility as First Lady than any other in history with the possible exception of Eleanor Roosevelt. Had more power and influence too. She and Bill were partners in just about everything they did. I mean for Christ's sake, she was in charge of one of the most significant and difficult tasks of his presidency -- healthcare reform. It didn't work out, but not for lack of trying on her part. She not only took an active role in Congress, she toured the country trying to sell the legislation to the public.

So when you take 8 years of being almost co-president, plus 8 years in the Senate, plus 4 years as SoS -- that's a damn impressive resume. The important thing was we all knew she would know exactly what she was doing from day one when she entered the White House. She knew everything that had to be done and everybody that had to be talked to. Hell, she knew exactly where to go in the White House itself. It's hard to beat that kind of experience. Just sitting in the Senate for a while isn't quite the same.

The only person who I think is about as experienced as her is John Kerry, due to his time as both a Senator and SoS. They are quite literally the two most qualified people on Earth to be president.

And if you want to talk about being a Mayor of a small town as relevant experience to the presidency... No. Just no. This is why Buttigieg was a non-starter for me. South Bend might as well be on a different planet from Washington, same with Burlington.

Agreed with most of this (barring the bit about Sanders not being qualified because he couln't get bills passed in the Senate), but Biden has more experience by time in the federal executive and legislature positions alone, although she has a greater breadth of it. Let's not forget that the deal he struck with Obama made him one of the most influential VPs of the modern era, even if their working relationship seemed relatively normal compared after Bush and Cheney.

If the standard is a decent amount of federal legislative and executive experience and at least ~6 years of both, then Kerry didn't meet it at the time of his candidacy, though he did in subsequent speculated bids that never came to fruition. Al Gore also did, with 24 years (8 in the House/8 in the Senate/8 as VP) to Clinton's 20 (8 as First Lady/8 in the Senate/4 as Sec. of State). From what I can tell, no other Democrat who openly considered a presidential bid post-Carter was as qualified as these three on the criteria above (barring Carter himself being a subject of speculation in 1984).

George H.W. Bush also was very qualified to be President.

I was only referring to Democratic candidates. The list expands a fair bit when you include Republicans.

Why did Reagan pick Bush to be VP in 1980, like he had a respectable show in the primary sure, but nothing more. Like I would have thought Howard Baker or someone of the like would be a better VP, I guess Bush's FOPO was a big deal I would have rather had Baker at VP then Bush at State

[Orwell]

Her DNA test and relentless woke politics is already a needless distraction Biden doesn't need.

Yeah, not like the Trump campaign won't make stupid issues out of any of the potential VP candidates.

Attacking Tammy Duckworth is a lot harder than attacking Warren, and Duckworth holds a similar progressive score.

[Orwell]

Her DNA test and relentless woke politics is already a needless distraction Biden doesn't need.

Yeah, not like the Trump campaign won't make stupid issues out of any of the potential VP candidates.

Attacking Tammy Duckworth is a lot harder than attacking Warren, and Duckworth holds a similar progressive score.

Those scores don't really matter. It's all about perception. Booker and Harris have consistently been ranked as top 5 most progressive senators by basically every ranking system, yet many progressives don't like either of them at all.

Duckworth is also largely unknown and unvetted on the national stage. We know for almost a fact that the worst attack Republicans have against Warren is the “Pocahontas” smear and attacking her as too left. We know what we’re getting with her, Harris, & Klobuchar.

I’d say it’s more of a risk to pick someone who didn’t run for President (Duckworth, Whitmer, Demings) than one of the former 3.

I think what's appealing about Duckworth though is that she is inherently sympathetic in being a wounded veteran. It would be hard to negatively characterize her in the face of that, and anything the Republicans try could backfire hard.

Exactly. Mark Kirk unfortunately learned this the hard way, and I'm sure it would look even worse for Trump if he tried to insult her.

I feel with an utmost certainty we'll hear Trump say "I prefer veterans who weren't injured" people will be all up in arms for a few days but then forget

[Orwell]

At the end of the day, I think Biden needs to pick a woman of color who isn't inexperienced, over 65, or divisive.

Duckworth it is then!

This guy gets it.

[Orwell]

Y'all c'mon...Biden's selective leaks about Klobuchar are just to make it so #woke progressives can breathe a collectives sigh of relief when he invariably picks Harris.  It's the same thing Clinton did in Vilsack and Stavridis.

Veepstakes is all about managing expectations.

Clinton should have picked Stavridis tho

[Orwell]

After Joe's comment today, you really have to think what Harris, Abrams, Lance Bottoms, Demings & Rice all think about this. You could see Harris & Abrams withdrawal there names, they have a future in this party. Lance Bottoms does too but she's been loyal to Joe, Demings could probably spin the gaffe and Susan Rice well they have a long standing relationship so I could see Joe going with familiar. But Joe is really going to shoot himself in the foot if he picks a white woman unless it's Elizabeth Warren, but even then, he just upset the black electorate.

If anyone knows Charlamagne tha God and his work on The Breakfast Club, for the past two years he's been preaching about making sure the Democratic candidate has a Black Agenda to help the community. That's been picked up by Angela Rye and other prominent media personalities pushing the narrative. If Joe really tanks it with the black communities voting bloc, he may need to go in the direction of picking a Latina for the VP slot. But he'd be committing political suicide picking Klobauchar or Whitmer, I have nothing against those two but that would be a mess if he does pick one of them.

After Joe's comment today, you really have to think what Harris, Abrams, Lance Bottoms, Demings & Rice all think about this. You could see Harris & Abrams withdrawal there names, they have a future in this party. Lance Bottoms does too but she's been loyal to Joe, Demings could probably spin the gaffe and Susan Rice well they have a long standing relationship so I could see Joe going with familiar. But Joe is really going to shoot himself in the foot if he picks a white woman unless it's Elizabeth Warren, but even then, he just upset the black electorate.

If anyone knows Charlamagne tha God and his work on The Breakfast Club, for the past two years he's been preaching about making sure the Democratic candidate has a Black Agenda to help the community. That's been picked up by Angela Rye and other prominent media personalities pushing the narrative. If Joe really tanks it with the black communities voting bloc, he may need to go in the direction of picking a Latina for the VP slot. But he'd be committing political suicide picking Klobauchar or Whitmer, I have nothing against those two but that would be a mess if he does pick one of them.

I don't think what Biden said creates a moral quandary for any of these people. Especially considering that he is running against the champion of birtherism.

He needs to watch it with these gaffes. If I have big political aspirations, maybe I take a seat back, take a cabinet position if offered or seek other office. Abrams has big goals, Harris does too. Joe could easily do something so stupid to lose an election during a pandemic.

Great usage of Russ

[Orwell]

https://twitter.com/CNNPolitics/status/1264557261021753344

The more I hear from Demings the more I like her she is going up on the people I would like to see as Biden's VP, she truly is an inspirational woman.

[Orwell]

https://twitter.com/CNNPolitics/status/1264557261021753344

The more I hear from Demings the more I like her she is going up on the people I would like to see as Biden's VP, she truly is an inspirational woman.

Young African Americans still wouldn’t be too keen on a literal cop being on the ticket. Well, young Americans period probably.

Do you Young Americans in vote, period? Is anything on Deming's record worse than Harris? Demings didn't seem to have any major complaints during her time as Chief of Police.

[Orwell]

https://twitter.com/CNNPolitics/status/1264557261021753344

The more I hear from Demings the more I like her she is going up on the people I would like to see as Biden's VP, she truly is an inspirational woman.

Young African Americans still wouldn’t be too keen on a literal cop being on the ticket. Well, young Americans period probably.

Do you Young Americans in vote, period? Is anything on Deming's record worse than Harris? Demings didn't seem to have any major complaints during her time as Chief of Police.

They do when their motivated by a candidate or policies they actually like (see Obama ‘08/‘12 and Abrams ‘18)

"Abrams '18" she lost didn't she?

Demings isn't a career politician and is relatively an outsider, strong on all the bonafides Biden needs to bring to a ticket, Female, African American, Swing State.

[Orwell]

There's no asset Demings has that Kamala doesn't have at least as much, if not more of.

Both black women.
More experience? Harris
Won statewide? Harris
Held higher office? Harris
More name recognition? Harris

Locked up Poor people and then bragged about it? Harris
Attacked Biden during the campaign? Harris
Not from a Swing state? Harris

[Orwell]

It really depends on her record. I'm not familiar with her time as the Orlando police chief, but if she pushed for reforms than I'd say being a literal cop would be an asset.

I'm 95% sure that somebody would dig up an old "Orlando cops shot an unarmed black person" story from when she ran the police department; might not happen, & I'm sure the campaign's checking, but I wouldn't be optimistic.

The story has already been written.
Orlando Weekly, 2008:

A three-month Orlando Weekly investigation, drawing on hundreds of documents and dozens of interviews, suggests OPD has a problem policing its own. The police department, it seems, is a place where rogue cops operate with impunity, and there’s nothing anybody who finds himself at the wrong end of their short fuse can do about it.

Good try, Bernie Bros, but the incident in this article happened a whole... 6 months!! Before Demings became Chief of Police, while it does mention her as lowering his punishment from 2 days to 1, that was because of misconduct on part of the investigation. Anywho if you look into what happened later Trinidad (the offending officer) was fired and was ordered by a federal court to pay $88,000 in damages.

[Orwell]

No Demings, Klobuchar, Abrams, Harris

Warren
Whitmer
Bottoms
Grisham
Quinn
Bustos

Should be the final shortlist. Period.

Joke list.

I'm partial to agree with Frontier here, however, I do think Warren, Whitmer, and Lujan Grisham will end up on the final shortlist, but I think that the other finalists will be Harris, Demings, Klobuchar, Harris, and Duckworth. Out of those 7, I'd say, Harris, Duckworth, and Demings are my preferred picks, but we obviously aren't experts Biden has some of the best in the business handling this, and if a bad pick is made in your opinion, I'd like to remind you that McCain's original choice in 2008 was Joe Lieberman, but it was Vetoed by Steve Schmidt.

[Orwell]

Quinn
Warren
Bottoms
Bustos

That should be the final shortlist. Nothing else.

STOP PUSHING THESE PEOPLE 95% OF AMERICANS HAVE NEVER HEARD OF

[Orwell]

Quinn
Warren
Bottoms
Bustos

That should be the final shortlist. Nothing else.

STOP PUSHING THESE PEOPLE 95% OF AMERICANS HAVE NEVER HEARD OF

Bustos is a poor woman's Amy Klobuchar. She has no baggage.

Bottoms is not going to upstage Biden, something Abrams would do.

No one has ever heard of these people the last time someone so irrelevant was picked as VP was like, Charles Dawes in 1924.

[Orwell]

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/499936-top-democratic-pollster-advised-biden-campaign-to-pick-warren-as-vp

One of the Democratic Party’s top pollsters gave a presentation to senior members of former Vice President Joe Biden’s presidential campaign earlier this month making the case that Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) would provide the most upside as Biden’s running mate.

Stanley Greenberg, who advised the presidential campaigns of both former President Clinton and former Vice President Al Gore, presented a 14-deck slide to the Biden campaign detailing how the likely Democratic nominee needs to grow his support among young people and Democrats who did not support him during the primary.

I think Warren's unlikely in the sense that she'd overshadow Biden, but maybe Massachusetts is the place to go. How would you feel about putting Ed Markey on the ticket?

Um, being from Massachusetts isn't the reason Warren is a good pick. so Markey as a compromise pick makes no sense.

Markey is boring old and white and a man

[Orwell]

Tammy Duckworth anybody? Michelle Lujan Grisham?

Grisham has a scandal right now, just like Whitmer ...

I know about Whitmer, but is Grisham’s the jewelry thing?

What is Whitmer's scandal? The Protests? She has 62% approval rating on the issue.

[Orwell]

Good. If Biden is elected, the 2022 midterms will be bad for Democrats. We'd have a better chance of holding her seat if we have the incumbent running.

I mean, not super much? The map is very good for Democrats https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_United_States_Senate_elections

New Mexico is safe anyway.

New Mexico? She's from Nevada lol.

Oh wait nevermind I was confusing her with someone else.

But NV is also safe.

A Clinton +2 state is not safe. It's not a sure defeat by any means, but opening that seat up is a risk for Democrats and it is winnable for Republicans.

The 2010 Senate map wasn't necessarily favorable to the GOP they still were +5 in the Senate.

The GOP won Special election in Massachusetts and Illinois in the prelude to 2010 and should have won in Deleware it's all about running the right candidate and no race is safe. 

[Orwell]

i am now officially on team harris

let's win this

Looking at your track record I think we can safely say it won't be Warren now

[Orwell]

Before this week, I think Biden was open to a non-POC VP, but this will force his hand. With Demings (strong pick) and Harris (horrible pick) both having law enforcement backgrounds, even though more conventionally qualified, they're likely to see their odds drop.

This is a false argument. Firstly, Black voters (generalizing for the sake of discussion) voted for Biden in the primary because he already represents the politics that they believe in, so the ideological representation of Black voters is already on the ticket: at the top of the ticket. Secondly, the Democratic Party is more than just one African-American voting bloc. Other groups' ideological politics - young Black voters, LGBTQ+ voters, Hispanic/Latino voters, & all other voters - deserve to be represented as well by an ideologically left candidate. This isn't Harris, nor Demings, nor really anybody else but Warren.

I'd also recommend listening to 538's most recent podcast on this subject, which points out that it isn't clear from polling that a woman of color would encourage Black turnout (& it's not even a pro-Warren piece or anything). And I'll just say this: believing that the VP needs to be a woman of color in light of recent events - rather than an actual agenda for Black Americans (let alone a comprehensive & robust one) being needed - is why such an argument comes off as more-than-a-bit tokenizing. I heard somebody in an interview yesterday talking about police brutality & they mentioned Black politicians in Washington: he said that racial representation isn't enough because Black politicians have been unable to change the system that, thus far, has killed Black people. We've had a Black President, Black Attorneys General, & other Black politicians hold influential positions within government, & yet we continue to have a broken criminal justice system & still suffer from numerous civil rights issues.

So honestly, I can't see why it wouldn't be Warren, given the unfortunate state of our current affairs: Michigan is having issues with COVID-19 & the Edenville Dam's failure, so I don't see how Whitmer can help Biden's campaign there or in the Midwest if she's forced to shift focus from her gubernatorial duties to a presidential campaign. That's gonna leave a bad taste in people's mouths in that region & deter Democratic turnouts. The recent race riots have shed light on Klobuchar's prosecutorial record, specifically how she once declined to prosecute the officer responsible. That's not gonna appeal to voters of color, & may indeed discourage turnout. And should she become the VP pick, the recent police killings of unarmed Black people & the resultant race riots will force Harris' prosecutorial record into the media & voters' limelight yet again, particularly to the chargin of those on the Democratic Party's left. And of course Stacey Abrams still ain't happening for all of the reasons that have already been mentioned on here countless times: lacking relevant experience, next-to-no name-recognition at the national level, blatantly auditioning for the V.P. slot, etc.

Anybody else I'm missing? If not, then it's really just Warren who checks all of the boxes at this point.

Yes the 70 year old Harvard Professor is the one that will work to further connect the party with the Working Class and Young voters

[Orwell]

Current (June 2 at 10:00am est) PredictIt prices:

Kamala Harris: 39¢
Val Demings: 16¢
Elizabeth Warren: 12¢
Keisha Lance Bottoms: 9¢
Stacey Abrams: 7¢
Amy Klobuchar: 7¢
Tammy Duckworth: 5¢
Gretchen Whitmer: 5¢
Susan Rice: 4¢

Harris: probably most likely pick at this point, though not my first choice
Demings: never heard of her; unlikely
Warren: 71 y/o; possible but not probable
Bottoms: never heard of her; unlikely
Abrams: possibly a good choice, though it would have been better had she won in 2018
Klobuchar: it will be interesting to see her explain her handling of MN police misconduct; possible
Duckworth: from all I have seen, an excellent choice
Whitmer: another excellent choice (not that I'm biased or anything)
Rice: No

Is Tammy Baldwin on the list? I see her as a better pick than Demings, Bottoms, or Rice.

Baldwin would be in a Sherrod Brown situation where she's probably the pick Biden wants, but we can't afford to give up that Senate seat in a special election possibly with how close the Senate is gonna be

[Orwell]

They are talking about politically experienced. Rice has never run for office before. When was the last time a VP candidate’s first run for office was as VP? Has that happened ever?

Sargent Shriver in '72 had never held elected office. He's the only one in recent memory, though both H.W. Bush and Cheney had been out of elected office for more than a decade when they became VP. There's also Stockdale and LeMay, if you want to count either of them as major VP candidates.

Yeah I edited it when I thought of him, Henry Wallace in 1940 too. But the point is it’s been a long time. Also 1972 was exceptional circumstances.

I'd just like to point out 72 didn't necessarily go well and Shriver was an emergency "our original pick ended up being mentally ill" pick. I guess you can argue the only non experienced VP candidate who ended up being successful is Papi Bush because he was added to balance the ticket with FoPo experience a difference between Bush and Susan Rice is Bush had made a name for himself in the primaries in 1980 by winning Iowa and few other states. Susan Rice isn't very well known.

[Orwell]

3) I’d say Harris dropping out before Iowa shows that Democratic voters don’t want her as President. Demings is a complete unknown, which no, isn’t a good thing. We don’t have the time to define a VP candidate. Of the 2 I’d pick Harris because she already has an identity in national politics, albeit a polarizing one.

Her dropping out because the white donor class decided to go with Pete means the average voter doesn't want her as President? Oh ok...

Her poll numbers were also garbage and she collapsed she went from polling in the midteens in the summer to polling at 3% in Iowa by the time she left the race, here numbers in Nevada were also 3%, here numbers in South Carolina weren't much better at 4%, and in New Hampshire, she only was bringing in 3.5%.

For someone who was supposed to be a top-flight candidate for the nomination she faded, and she faded fast. Probably one of the more disappointing campaigns of the 2020 cycle much like Beto.

Hell by the time she dropped out she was polling in 5th place in her own home state.

[Orwell]

Question - I don’t think either is a great choice, but why does Bottoms keep getting mentioned but not Bowser?

KLB is from Georgia, a swing state and supposedly she can help Biden win Georgia. Muriel Bowser is the mayor of DC, which is the most Democratic city in the country. Also, DC is not a state and not apart of any state.

It looks bad to pick VP purely for identity politics purpose.

Mike Pence was picked to appease Evangelicals, is that not "identity politics"?

Republicans don't care because everything about Trump is 1000x worse.

That wasn't the point. The point is y'all ignore everything designed to cater to white voters but the moment any other group is considered in a VP choice it's identity politics. People all in this thread throwing dog whistles about why it needs to be Amy or Gretchen and that's just fine but someone whispers *pick a Black woman* and it's "shut up Blacks already got their choice".

I didn't say, don't pick a black woman.

I said, don't pick a black woman just for the sake of picking a black woman.

Pick someone who adds something to the ticket (i.e. Val Damings)

What does Val Demings "add"?

Val Demings was chief of police.

She's African American, from a key region of THE BIGGEST swing state, she's an outsider, she is not terrible but Duck is my first choice Demings is probably #3 behind Duck and Harris.

[Orwell]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmVpqyHBJvg

I don't think this needed to be said but VoteVets is supporting Duckworth for VP