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

[Pulaski]

I think Biden is realizing he needs to make significant overtures to the Bernie camp. Warren does make sense.

Wrong choice then. Most Berniecrats don't trust Warren at this point. Baldwin is the only prominent female Democrat they'd be comfortable with - and she's younger and would be less controversial.

I'm a Bernie supporter and I'd be very, very happy with Warren. She definitely scuppered his chances by staying in the race too long, but with hindsight she might have felt that when he had the heart attack and she was the frontrunner, he should've dropped out and endorsed her. Her progressive credentials are unquestionable. That said, I think her age is a real limiting factor.

Baldwin seems to be to have progressive appeal, midwestern appeal, and the requisite experience. I'm honestly surprised that people like Klobuchar and Whitmer have seemingly leapfrogged her on the list.

Duckworth too; more moderate than Bladwin, but a record no progressive can really care about (outside guns maybe, in which case we'd have to complain about Bernie's too) and strong military experience to boot.

Excluding Warren, who I just think is too old at this point, my top 3 is probably

1. Baldwin
2. CCM
3. Duckworth

Then, reluctantly, Harris.

[Pulaski]

A recent comment from Mr. Clyburn publicly undercut Ms. Abrams in favor of Ms. Bottoms. Mr. Clyburn, who declined an interview request for this article, said Ms. Abrams lacked sufficient experience.

But Lance Bottoms, with 2 years as mayor of Atlanta, has sufficient experience?

[Pulaski]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but they're leaking details like this to get free press and make every faction of the party feel heard, right?

Like, I assume there will be at least a black candidate and progressive candidate floated right up until the very end, whether or not they've been ruled out internally.

Yeah this makes the most sense to me too. It's also why Warren's still in the picture for me. Watch him turn around and pick Klobuchar now.

[Pulaski]

It really looks to me like Harris should be the inevitable pick at this point. She's not the worst of the bunch (Klobuchar, Hassan), but not the best either (Baldwin, CCM). Warren I'd love but is surely too old. Whitmer is just unrealistic.

[Pulaski]

It really looks to me like Harris should be the inevitable pick at this point. She's not the worst of the bunch (Klobuchar, Hassan), but not the best either (Baldwin, CCM). Warren I'd love but is surely too old. Whitmer is just unrealistic.

Hassan was being seriously considered?

I have no idea. Biden mentioned her as a possibility more than once, but her name pretty quickly fell out of circulation. It’s quite possible she was at least vetted though.

[Pulaski]

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

VP picks don't really help a lot on winning their home states anymore. VP picks don't really do a whole lot of anything electorally, aside from maybe framing perceptions of the ticket overall (and then only slightly). Dem nominees do increasingly have to try and bridge the racial diversity within the party, though; I previously thought Biden may not have to worry about this so much, given he seemingly has strong support in the AA community, but his interview gaffe may nudge him in that direction.

For me, I'd breeze past any more superficial concerns and focus on the main criterion: who is best placed to be a strong nominee 4 years from now, and a great future president? Harris is definitely qualified, but I think Baldwin, Warren and Duckworth are more qualified, and Cortez Masto has virtually identical experience. Baldwin and Duckworth don't seem to be high on the radar, unfortunately, and although Warren's the dream, she old.

Governors aren't usually selected as Dem running mates anyway, and I think with COVID persisting, I can't see Whitmer or Lujan Grisham abandoning their states only 2 years into their first terms. I particularly think with Whitmer, not enough has been made of how she'd be leaving Michigan in the hands of a 38 year-old with no prior political experience. I think CCM is a better pick than Lujan Grisham if Biden's trying to shore up support in the Latino community. Her record as Nevada's AG may be an issue though - she tried at one point to defend the state's SSM ban.

For me, if he's not interested in Baldwin or Duckworth, Biden is looking at a final 4:

1. Elizabeth Warren
2. Kamala Harris
3. Amy Klobuchar (please god no)
4. Catherine Cortez Masto (I don't know if he's seriously looking at her, but she offers something others lower on the list don't).

[Pulaski]

It's Harris. Recent events have made it almost certain that Biden picks an African-American woman, and Demings offers absolutely nothing that Harris doesn't also. Harris ain't the best, but also definitely ain't the worst.

[Pulaski]

I probably prefer Duckworth, but I don't really get the beef. Neither are gonna heavily sway the election, and both would be pretty good presidential candidates in their own right next time around, and indeed would probably be similar presidents. Where's the big diff, in all honesty?

[Pulaski]

I would have thought the big concern with Rice, rather than the Benghazi angle (which would only galvanise staunch Rs) is her lack of electoral history. If she's someone that Biden wants to potentially pass the mantle to, not having proved her ability to campaign and win an election in her own right is surely a worry. I know supposedly it's all about ~ability to govern~ but there are many, many roles, both in and out of cabinet, that ensure she's in the inner ring without being VP.

[Pulaski]

I would have the big concern with Rice, rather than the Benghazi angle (which would only galvanise staunch Rs) is her lack of electoral history. If she's someone that Biden wants to potentially pass the mantle to, not having proved her ability to campaign and win an election in her own right is surely a worry. I know supposedly it's all about ~ability to govern~ but there are many, many roles, both in and out of cabinet, that ensure she's in the inner ring without being VP.

The VP is also someone who is going to have to be a fundraiser and surrogate for the 2022 midterms on Day One. Rice isn’t up to that grueling of a schedule as well as helping sell the POTUS’ policies and dealing with a potentially obstructionist Senate. I don’t see how it’s a contest between Harris and Rice. I don’t care about her foreign policy experience there are a million roles where she can provide that experience.

I wouldn't go that far. She may be, for all I know. But a lack of experience doing so would weigh heavily on Biden's mind, I would have thought.

[Pulaski]

Yeah, let's not forget Dick Cheney in particular. As long as the son doesn't start vocally criticising her on twitter and asking people not to vote for her, I can't see it being an issue at all.

[Pulaski]

Yeah, let's not forget Dick Cheney in particular. As long as the son doesn't start vocally criticising her on twitter and asking people not to vote for her, I can't see it being an issue at all.

He actually might do that though....isn't he a very, very outspoken Trumper?

Even then I can't seeing it being a major issue. Maybe a human interest story for a couple of days, a question at the VP debate, but in times of major recession and deadly pandemic ravaging the nation I can't see the VP nominee's son saying anything really cutting through.

[Pulaski]

I would have the big concern with Rice, rather than the Benghazi angle (which would only galvanise staunch Rs) is her lack of electoral history. If she's someone that Biden wants to potentially pass the mantle to, not having proved her ability to campaign and win an election in her own right is surely a worry. I know supposedly it's all about ~ability to govern~ but there are many, many roles, both in and out of cabinet, that ensure she's in the inner ring without being VP.

The VP is also someone who is going to have to be a fundraiser and surrogate for the 2022 midterms on Day One. Rice isn’t up to that grueling of a schedule as well as helping sell the POTUS’ policies and dealing with a potentially obstructionist Senate. I don’t see how it’s a contest between Harris and Rice. I don’t care about her foreign policy experience there are a million roles where she can provide that experience.

I wouldn't go that far. She may be, for all I know. But a lack of experience doing so would weigh heavily on Biden's mind, I would have thought.

Valid point... of course, if we're basing it on electoral prowess, Harris has only run one federal race and it wasn't even against a Republican. It was against a fellow Democrat when she had the endorsements of pretty much the entire party. Not to mention her management skills are a disaster. Does anyone remember how her campaign had no clear lines of authority and the manager was made the scapegoat for the disasters when he obviously wasn't running the whole show?

In contrast Elizabeth Warren was the top female vote getter in the presidential primaries with 2.8 million votes, 3rd place finisher overall, and the top finisher among 1st time presidential candidates. She also gave Biden tremendous help by going after Michael Bloomberg and allowing Biden to take the "moderate with lots of name rec" lane.

Well, yeah, that's why I'd prefer Warren, Baldwin or Duckworth.

[Pulaski]

Seen two articles today by conservatives (Meghan McCain and S.E. Cupp) and both said they would not vote Biden with Rice on the ticket. Take it for what it is, but I think Rice does more damage than she helps. (not withstanding both those people are ridiculous anyway)

And we need Meghan McCain’s vote why?

She is JOHN MCCAIN'S DAUGHTER, FOR CHRIST'S SAKE.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KHbrNz1RUVY

[Pulaski]

If Biden picks Harris after all of this, he’ll prove once and for all his infuriatingly slow manner of announcing what most people thought he was gonna do anyway. See: running in the first place.

[Pulaski]

Why you gotta personally attack me like this; it even looks like me.

[Pulaski]

Welp. And another one
https://twitter.com/MattMackowiak/status/1292851403384410112?s=19

She spoke at a few events sponsored by the DSA? In the 80s and 90s? Jeez, they're scraping the bottom of the barrel with this one.

[Pulaski]

So is today the day then? Or do we have to wait till the end of the week?

I’m hearing he’s made a firm commitment to name a VP within the first hundred days of his presidency.