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

[Ogre Mage]

Some of you are being disingenuously anti-Kamala. Also, how can some of you say Biden should pick Val Demings or Amy Klobuchar but not Kamala? It just makes no sense and is very *interesting* to say the least.


I don't oppose Elizabeth Warren being the VP but I personally think that 2 old White people at the top of the ticket is just a bad look in 2020. We're supposed to be the party of racial diversity and youth and yet these are the 2 people we choose to lead us?

I get the diversity idea, but that’s not how elections or candidates should be decided. It’d be different if white voters forced us to have an old white guy in charge, but by-and-large it was Blacks who forced Biden on the rest of us.

I’m not anti-Kamala exactly, I’d just prefer Warren because I trust her more to govern and think she’s less likely to run in 2024 and clear the field. VP Harris would basically be running as a de-facto incumbent and I don’t like the idea of us being robbed of a truly competitive primary for 4 cycles in a row.

I prefer Warren to Kamala but I don't care who you are -- the glorious nectar of the goblet of power will convince any VP to run for president in 2024. Plus, they may not need to be a de facto incumbent. There's a pretty high chance that they'll be the literal incumbent, depending on Biden's health. 

hee hee that makes me think everyone is like Gollum going on about "my precious!"

I agree that Vice President [insert female Democrat here] is highly likely to for president in 2024 if Biden steps aside.  Harris and Warren are especially almost certain to given that they ran for president already.  The desire has already been shown.  If a 77 year-old Biden can get the nomination in 2020, a 74 year-old Vice President Warren in 2024 would think "so can I."   

[Ogre Mage]

I'm personally still skeptical on Demings doing that well as a VP candidate. It really wouldn't be hard to find some negative story from the Orlando PD and run with it. Her low profile isn't helpful either. And also because Florida is so fractured she's not really to be much of a boost outside of the I-4 corridor (which as I said in a post a while back is not the only place the Democrats need to do well to win FL; Clinton won the I-4 corridor and still lost).

At this point I think the most likely candidates are Harris and Warren. Things are so chaotic that Biden doesn't need to waste time introducing people to his Veep, especially one that is probably more likely than any modern VP to be President in the next few years.

I think Harris and Warren are most likely also.  But given Klobuchar's plummeting standing and Cortez Masto dropping out, an argument could be made that Demings is 4th or even 3rd in line.

[Ogre Mage]

Why Joe Biden will almost certainly pick a black woman as VP

South Carolina Rep. Jim Clyburn, whose endorsement of Biden days before the primary was, without question, the turning point of the race, was asked about Biden choosing a black woman as his running mate on Wednesday morning in a conversation with The Washington Post's Jonathan Capehart. "The only thing that's a must in this process at this time is to win," Clyburn said. "That's to win. It will be a plus to have an African American woman. It will be a plus to have a Latino. It will be a plus to have a woman."
True enough! But there's a strong case to be made that the best chance of Biden winning the White House is by picking a black woman as his running mate.

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/06/03/politics/joe-biden-vp-kamala-harris-val-demings-keisha-lance-bottoms/index.html

If that is the direction Biden is going in, he should pick Sen. Harris and I think he will.

[Ogre Mage]

At this point I think it's Harris or Demings. I like Keisha Lance Bottoms a lot and I think Biden probably does too, but three or four months of campaign signs with "BIDEN BOTTOMS" written on them spectacularly fails the "first, do no harm" rule.

Maybe it could boost LGBTQ turnout, lol.

[Ogre Mage]

Larry Sabato has Crystal Ball's ranking of possible VP picks up.  

1. Sen. Kamala Harris
2. Rep. Val Demings
3. Sen. Tammy Duckworth
4. Sen. Elizabeth Warren
5. Sen. Tammy Baldwin
6. Gov. Gina Raimondo
7. Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham
8. Gov. Gretchen Whitmer
9. Sen. Maggie Hassan
10. Stacy Abrams

Raimondo being ranked No. 6 is a joke.  The rest looks at least somewhat plausible.

Sabato notes:

When we compiled this list, the three of us each did separate rankings independently of one another, which we then used as the basis for our collective list. While the lists differed substantially in many ways, all three of us had Harris listed in the top position.

http://centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/articles/the-veepstakes-handicapping-bidens-choices/

[Ogre Mage]

Why are the top prospects all cops and prosecutors? So sad.

Sen. Harris and Rep. Demings backgrounds in prosecution and law enforcement might be a weakness in the context of the Democratic Primary, but a general election is a different ball game.  We are no longer only playing to the base.  And historically, it has been common and sometimes easy to paint Democrats as "soft on crime," especially black Democrats.  But Harris and Demings backgrounds cut against that.  Their life experience working in the system but also having first-hand experience with racial and gender discrimination might actually help them navigate between activists demanding justice for police violence and a general electorate who wants security.

[Ogre Mage]

To play devil's advocate re: KLB, does experience really even matter anymore? Let's say, worst case scenario, Biden serves, say, 6-12 months and then dies. Serving as VP for even that long would prepare her for the job, I'd think? Even if Biden never serves a day as President, Trump has proven that effective governance is more of a product of those around the President than the President themselves? KLB with Biden's cabinet and inner circle strikes me as a significantly more comforting scenario.

Even if a president is surrounded by experts they still have to make the ultimate decision.  It was Trumpvirus' decision to ignore expert reports about the coronavirus and publicly downplay the threat.

KLB is untested on the national stage and has never faced the national right wing attack machine.  How is she going to handle that?  How is she going to get up to speed so quickly on matters of federal policy and foreign policy when she has no background in those areas?  Journalists and citizens will be asking questions during the campaign.  And if the ticket wins she will have to jump headlong into them immediately in the midst of multiple crises.  There is a huge risk of her looking out of her depth in front of the entire country when our nominee is 77 years old and we are in the middle of a national crisis.

[Ogre Mage]

Biden got just under 1% in the 2008 Iowa Caucus and then dropped out.  He didn't take it as a sign no one ever wanted him as president (or vice president).

Harris could have stuck around to get 1% in Iowa if she really wanted to, lol.

[Ogre Mage]

I hear this a fair bit, but you'd expect that to show up in her favourability ratings if not VI polls; by the end of her campaign, she was trailing Booker, Buttigieg, Biden, Warren and Sanders on these. Even if you argue that was just a function of significantly higher name recognition for all of these in September-November 2019 (debatable), you have to consider that by the end of her own campaign, Klobuchar had a higher favourability than Harris did by the end of hers, and that other Dems might well have reached her baseline had they managed the initial breakout as Harris (to her credit) did. FWIW I think Klobuchar would be a significantly worse VP pick than Harris, but I'm just not sure Harris' hype died because people were too scared to vote for her (but not Warren who was even more risky according to conventional wisdom, and to whom many of Harris' early backers switched).

I have not seen a comparison of approval ratings but in terms of the regular polling Harris never trailed Booker prior to her dropping out:

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/2020_democratic_presidential_nomination-6730.html

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/sc/south_carolina_democratic_presidential_primary-6824.html

[Ogre Mage]

This seems important

https://twitter.com/politico/status/1269607560853757955

From the article:  

Harris' transformation began in earnest when she left law enforcement in 2016. She conceded at points in the campaign that she wishes she'd done more to advance change, and she credited activism around the Black Lives Matter movement with expanding the range of reforms that came to be viewed as possible. Before releasing her campaign criminal justice plan last fall, which became the foundation for her attitudes today, she spent months in frequent contact with reformers and policymakers.

Harris was wise to begin working on this some time ago.  If she had waited to start until after her presidential bid ended (like Klobuchar) and she was a top VP prospect, she would have zero credibility with Black Lives Matter and their ilk.

We are now in a general election environment and the VP nominee will be required to navigate between multiple constituencies and communities.  The person will need to speak to both BLM and white voters in the suburbs.  I think Harris can.

[Ogre Mage]

Other than the lingering impact of the three-year-long "Kamala is a cop" smear campaign launched against her by the Sanders wing, Harris is the perfect candidate on paper.  And right now is a perfect opportunity for her to cover that weakness.  

Thanks Obama Sanders

And I found her overrated/overhyped before she was even a Senator, let alone primary candidate

Did you vote in the Senate election in 2016? If so, did you vote for Loretta Sanchez?

I did vote in 2016 & I did vote for Harris.

I distinctly remember the debate they had where Harris sleepwalked through it while Sanchez flossed. Sanchez never seemed to take that race seriously enough

My favorite part was when Sanchez did a dab during the Senate debate.  It was like what the hell, lol.

[Ogre Mage]

Ouch.

https://twitter.com/CaraKorte/status/1270931463790383104?s=20

She's on our side so I should not laugh.

*laughs anyway*

Her "campaign" for VP and the reaction to it (like Rep. Clay's comments) was one of the funniest things this political season.

[Ogre Mage]

https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/11/politics/biden-kamala-harris-keisha-lance-bottoms-val-demings/index.html

Top 5 on the List:
1.) Kamala Harris
2.) Keisha Lance Bottoms
3.) Val Demings
4.) Michelle Lujan Grisham
5.) Elizabeth Warren

I suspect Biden makes his choice the last week of July right before August 1st. Maybe August 1st, since it does fall on a Saturday. Allows for that weeks news cycle to get the puff pieces ready to pump out the VP nominee.

I'm really happy to see MLG so high on the list. Two years as governor is kind of thin, but Biden is showing some real weakness with Latinos and he really needs to be thinking about Texas in 2024/28, a state where Lujan Grisham should play well.

Her rise was helped by Sen. Cortez Masto dropping out.  As a former House member she has federal experience and probably could get up to speed in the short time needed.  However, she was dented by jewelry shopping during the quarantine.

[Ogre Mage]

https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/11/politics/biden-kamala-harris-keisha-lance-bottoms-val-demings/index.html

Top 5 on the List:
1.) Kamala Harris
2.) Keisha Lance Bottoms
3.) Val Demings
4.) Michelle Lujan Grisham
5.) Elizabeth Warren

I suspect Biden makes his choice the last week of July right before August 1st. Maybe August 1st, since it does fall on a Saturday. Allows for that weeks news cycle to get the puff pieces ready to pump out the VP nominee.

I'm really happy to see MLG so high on the list. Two years as governor is kind of thin, but Biden is showing some real weakness with Latinos and he really needs to be thinking about Texas in 2024/28, a state where Lujan Grisham should play well.

Her rise was helped by Sen. Cortez Masto dropping out.  As a former House member she has federal experience and probably could get up to speed in the short time needed.  However, she was dented by jewelry shopping during the quarantine.

"Dented?" That should have been the end of her pseudo-candidacy in this VP selection.

The CNN list would suggest that it did not kill her chances.  That said, MLG's odds at being the VP nominee are fairly low.  Her name recognition is low, she is untested nationally and there is nothing to suggest she and Biden have any affinity.  Add in the jewelry unforced error and I would be surprised if she got it.  

[Ogre Mage]

Y’all are like Sandra Bullock in bird box ignoring all of Harris’s obvious problems. Let me pose a hypothetical to you. Suppose there was another black woman in the Senate with a different background and less baggage. Is there any doubt that she would be the leading contender instead of Harris? Y’all have a real  bias towards senators and it shows

It isn't fair to compare Harris to some imaginary idealized black female U.S. Senator.  In reality, that person would have had to make some compromises to rise that high in the ranks too.  And if she ran for president we would hear about them.  The fact that no other black women are in the Senate now illustrates the challenges.

It's not just us who has a bias toward U.S. Senators as running mate.  The entire Democratic Party does.  Look at who has been selected as the Democratic running mate going all the way back to 1944.  It was always a U.S. Senator except for 1972 (Shriver, because McGovern was such a terrible general election candidate no one else would join) and 1984 (Geraldine Ferraro).  Both of those tickets lost.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_major_party_presidential_tickets

[Ogre Mage]

Throwing someone with no experience being a candidate for elected office (Rice) into the crucible of a presidential ticket strikes me as extremely risky and foolish. 

[Ogre Mage]

Susan Rice would actually be a good vice president once in office. I'm not sure how she'd do on the campaign trail, though. Benghazi shouldn't be an issue, but Republicans will make it one. That's why her selection wouldn't be the best in terms of politics. But she would absolutely be a good vice president.

That's my concern also.  She certainly has the government experience to serve if elected.  But on the trail I really don't like the risk of a neophyte candidate.

[Ogre Mage]

I hate how it's almost a mandate that they must be a Senator. Biden seems to be playing around with that, or at least appearing to do so with Bottoms/Demings making the shortlist.

I kinda feel like the "Experience, aka a Senator" take is being used largely as a crutch by the "Must be Harris" crowd. Democrats are gonna turn out & vote for Biden no matter who his running mate is. But it can't be a big city Mayor or Congresswoman because reasons, must be a Senator. And gee, I wonder who that narrows it down to.

I posted earlier in the thread that history very strongly suggests the pick will be a U.S. Senator.  From 1944 on, the Democratic running mate has almost always been a U.S. Senator.  The only exceptions were Shriver in 1972 (who replaced electroshock therapy Senator Eagleton) and Geraldine Ferraro in 1984.  Both of those tickets lost in a landslide.

I would be surprised if Biden, a 30+ year veteran of the Senate, broke the precedent.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_major_party_presidential_tickets

[Ogre Mage]

I'm still fully expecting Harris, seeing as Biden has benefited from playing safe at every turn. Even despite her potential baggage and her failure in the primary (which was true of Biden at one point!) she'd still generate a fawning response from the media and the Democratic base for multiple reasons (first black woman on a ticket! immensely qualified! will hold the Trump admonistration accountable!) and that may outweigh all the negatives.

This. All she needs is a few good moments when she's questioning conservatives like when she ripped apart Barr and Kavanaugh

She comes off as way too aggressive. That’s a problem for Biden.

"Too aggressive?"  No one becomes a U.S. senator by being a shrinking violet.  Male senators don't get described this way.

[Ogre Mage]

At the rate this is going, when Harris is announced people are going to be like "we knew that already," lol.

[Ogre Mage]

So, spoiler alert: turns out Klobuchars statement was 100% planned.

https://twitter.com/CGasparino/status/1273965231182667778?s=20

But Demmings' record as Orlando police chief won't be attacked? Gimme a break.

If the far left goes on about KaMaLa iS a CoP, what would they do with an actual cop?

It's not just the far left who are going to say that in this climate, my dude. Both choices are absolutely terrible, optically, and Biden would legitimately be better served choosing someone tactically less optimal, like Abrams or Bottoms.

Neither of those two can pass the "Ready to be President on Day 1" test. 

[Ogre Mage]

Are there any articles, instances, or historical moments where Duckworth and Biden visibly cooperated or achieved things together? Theres plenty about Kamala and Biden from this cycle, and Demmings was too local of a candidate for her and Biden to really overlap until now. This isn't an attack, I'm more curious since both have had long careers. For instance Duckworth spoke at the 2008 DNC and was part of the Illinois cadre Obama depended on even before she got a district drawn for her. Her time in the House then overlaps with Biden being president of the senate, and Duckworth was recruited to run at a time when Biden presided and potentially was still potentially making moves for a 2016 run (she entered IL-Sen in March 2015).

Why I ask this is because Biden's relationship with his VP and their ability to think on the same wavelength is a characteristic just as important as what they bring to the ticket. It may not be a coin-toss, but there is a comparatively high chance Biden will end up passing the reigns to the first female president sometime during his potential stint in office, and that person needs to be able to pick up the reigns and keep working with most of the Biden team.

Biden and Duckworth recently wrote an editorial together about the rise in hate attacks on Asian-Americans in the wake of the coronavirus.  But historically during her congressional career I did not find anything.

https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/trump-s-encouragement-racism-against-asian-americans-affront-all-americans-ncna1215121

It might have been different if Duckworth's time as U.S. Senator overlapped with Biden's Vice Presidency (since he oversaw that chamber).  I think one advantage Harris has is she and Biden go way back.  Then-Attorney Generals Harris and Beau Biden formed a close bond as they collaborated during the Great Recession foreclosure crisis and other problems.  So the former Vice President knew a lot about her previous work.

[Ogre Mage]

Why isn’t the symbolism of Baldwin versus Mike Pence talked about? I know it’s not ideal because she is White and there’s the special election thing, but I feel like she should be talked about more

It's the special election thing. Baldwin has gotten serious (media) consideration but doesn't seem to be a frontrunner; if I were Biden, I'd seriously consider asking her whether she'd be willing to resign her Senate seat now if she were to be offered the VP slot. They have a much better chance holding WI-SEN in a concurrent special election than in 2021.

That is risky for Sen. Baldwin.  While Biden appears to be in a good position to win 4 1/2 months out, that is a long time.  As the running mate, Baldwin is no longer her own boss and therefore not fully in control of her own destiny.  If the ticket lost she would be out of office. 

And while the risk of losing the Wisconsin Senate seat would be less than in 2021, it is still a risk.  Certainly much more than a Senate seat in CA or IL.

[Ogre Mage]

Yes, Demings may have broader appeal than Harris! To people here, broader appeal means appealing to Bernie's 2% hardcore most leftists. I am referring to the undecided/soft lean Biden moderates.

From what I have seen the anti-Trump Republicans like Harris just fine, despite the fact that they acknowledge she is very liberal. As a matter of fact, the only VP contender they seem to dislike is Warren.

You have a warped view of who swing voters are, most likely because as a foreigner your exposure to people outside the Democratic Party is entirely online. "Anti-Trump Republicans" aren't the concern -- it's the older, whiter, less-ideological, less-"informed", less-college-educated, less-partisan voters who've signaled in polls to be open to voting for Biden. This is a unique opportunity and there's no state in America where this isn't an important voting demographic. But I assure you Harris is poison to this group.

My opposition to Harris has less to do with the 2020 election anyway, and more to do with the consultants and political hacks, who've never won anything being rewarded with the Vice Presidency and keys to the party in four years. It's a straight-up coup. I didn't sign up for this.

Biden may have some appeal to that group but to be frank he does not generate huge enthusiasm from the Democratic base.  He won the primary because he was seen as the most electable.  He needs to get excitement from at least some part of the base.   Expecting the Democratic base to fall in line on the VP pick just to satisfy the above group is unfair not to mention a bad electoral strategy in this era of polarization.  We saw what happened in 2016.  Hatred of Trump is not enough.  And many Democrats put aside our preferred choices to accept Biden as the nominee.

[Ogre Mage]

Yes, Demings may have broader appeal than Harris! To people here, broader appeal means appealing to Bernie's 2% hardcore most leftists. I am referring to the undecided/soft lean Biden moderates.

From what I have seen the anti-Trump Republicans like Harris just fine, despite the fact that they acknowledge she is very liberal. As a matter of fact, the only VP contender they seem to dislike is Warren.

You have a warped view of who swing voters are, most likely because as a foreigner your exposure to people outside the Democratic Party is entirely online. "Anti-Trump Republicans" aren't the concern -- it's the older, whiter, less-ideological, less-"informed", less-college-educated, less-partisan voters who've signaled in polls to be open to voting for Biden. This is a unique opportunity and there's no state in America where this isn't an important voting demographic. But I assure you Harris is poison to this group.

My opposition to Harris has less to do with the 2020 election anyway, and more to do with the consultants and political hacks, who've never won anything being rewarded with the Vice Presidency and keys to the party in four years. It's a straight-up coup. I didn't sign up for this.

Biden may have some appeal to that group but to be frank he does not generate huge enthusiasm from the Democratic base.  He won the primary because he was seen as the most electable.  He needs to get excitement from at least some part of the base.   Expecting the Democratic base to fall in line on the VP pick just to satisfy the above group is unfair not to mention a bad electoral strategy in this era of polarization.  We saw what happened in 2016.  Hatred of Trump is not enough.  And many Democrats put aside our preferred choices to accept Biden as the nominee.

Again, the base will vote for Biden no matter who he picks. The academics, insiders just love Harris style liberalism that is about social issues and is (mostly) hands off on Wall Street. You saw this with Pete, Klobuchar voters as well. It's a unique brand of liberalism to DC, NY, Silicon Valley that has a lot of media power behind it.

That's what we thought in 2016.