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

[Citizen (The) Doctor]

Warren will be the smartest pick, her move to endorse Greenfield, was a power play, since Ds were skeptical about Greenfield and she has made Dems alot better about IA. 4 competetive seats and 3 D incumbents. That's why Greenfield is tied with Ernst, not 10 pts behind

Yeah, two 70+ year olds. That's really going to excite people! Give me a break!

For all the Democrats bragging about their Party being diverse, etc. picking a White Female would have really bad optics for Biden and the Party as a whole!

These takes are hilarious. The people who care most about this are the same people who voted for Warren and Bernie in the primary.

[Citizen (The) Doctor]

You’re usually right in your assessments and I generally agree with you, but this ain’t it. Her endorsements have gone to a slew of progressive candidates (Booker, Bowman, Eastman, Stephen Smith) but she has also endorsed candidates on the more moderate side of things plenty of times. Her organization is about coalition building. I also think it’s strange that she endorsed Hick but I’m not going to act like this is a knock against her progressive bonafides because she’s been endorsing plenty of candidates who align with her values. I think she might’ve endorsed Hick from an electability POV, as polls have shown him crushing Gardner so he seems like the safest bet to flip that seat. This doesn’t bother me and it doesn’t undo everything else she’s done for progressives both before and after her run for POTUS. One bad endorsement does not a snake make.

The problem with this is that you're operating under the assumption that Hickenlooper is a moderate. Hickenlooper is a Blue Dog. He's definitely on the moderate side of the economy question, and his climate record as governor is outright conservative. Colorado isn't a purple state anymore - it's got a decidedly blue tint to it now, and we can do better than someone like Hickenlooper there.

My issue isn't that she endorsed Hickenlooper, but the timing of the endorsement. If she endorsed earlier like Harris did, I'd be fine with it. I'd be a bit disappointed, but I wouldn't be angry. It's different than Jeff Merkley endorsing the DSCC slate or Kamala Harris backing her. It's different from Bernie staying out. She openly attempted to paint Hickenlooper as the progressive candidate despite his actual conservative positions. You know it's bad when her own supporters are dragging her for it.

Her putting her thumb on the scale just as Romanoff is starting to gain steam and traction is what pissed me off. This isn't, say, Yang or Tulsi deciding to endorse Biden over Bernie after Super Tuesday. Sure, Bernie was more aligned with them, but the guy's campaign was dead in the water. Romanoff probably won't win, and a Warren endorsement wouldn't have closed the gap between them. But the momentum is undeniably heavily in Romanoff's direction right now, and a Warren endorsement would have brought a lot of enthusiasm towards his campaign. Her endorsement, to say the very least, stifles that momentum. At best, it's a misjudgment of the race, and at worst it's a calculated political move to shut down a progressive challenger to a conservative Democrat in a blue state. With the timing of the endorsement, I'm more inclined to believe it's the latter.

One endorsement does not make a snake, but this endorsement is part of a greater pattern. Going along with her team's dubious accusations of sexism, staying in for Super Tuesday, this... some of that might be exaggerated, but all that shows that Elizabeth Warren is more interested in being a "player in the game" than pushing a progressive agenda. We don't need another Barack Obama who will use us to get elected and sell us down the river when they get in power. We need someone who we can trust to fight for us.

And as sad as it is, Elizabeth Warren has broken that trust with me.

Wasn't Romanoff running in 2010 to the right of Michael Bennet? He even had a Clinton endorsement. It's pretty clear that all of these folks are just playing the game.

[Citizen (The) Doctor]

I wonder if Warren being in the veepstakes makes it more likely she'll be offered Treasury.

There is no chance she gives up her Senate seat unless she's going for VP. I also don't feel like Biden would offer her that post.

I dunno.  The position may not get as much media coverage, but with the President's backing a talented Treasury Secretary can get a lot more done than a single Senator can, even one who commands the limelight.  Treasury is a powerful department.  Plus, there's gotta be something appealing about being America's first female Treasury Secretary.

I've been reading Adam Tooze's "Crashed" and I can say explicitly that Treasury Secretary is probably one of the most powerful positions in shaping the world at this point.

[Citizen (The) Doctor]

The thing I don't understand about Duckworth not being part of the intellgentsia -- she went to GWU for international affairs and has a PhD for chrissakes. Yeah it's not Ivy League but she's very much still part of the beltway/academic fabric.

[Citizen (The) Doctor]

Picking Warren means risking a loss in 2024. Vice President Warren would be hard to beat in a primary, but unusually risky in the general. Her poll numbers were noticeably worse in match ups with Trump than every other frontrunner with similar percent name ID. This comes from a huge fan of her personally.

She'd also be a President facing a Republican Senate most likely (though hopefully we'll add 3 or 4 new states in 2021), so it'd be this huge gambit just to have all progressive legislation dead on arrival. She wouldn't be powerless, just less likely to ever come to power.

If you get someone in there in 2024 like Pompeo or Rick Scott, I worry the culture Trump's created around the Presidency won't feel normal yet, and they'll behave with equal corruption but much more effectively. And Supreme Court seats as always.

She's less likely to run in 2024 than any of the other candidates. And given the map imbalance from 2016, 2022's map is pretty favorable for Democrats. 2024 is already around 50/50. If Democrats get a majority on 2020 they're likely going to hold it until 2026.

[Citizen (The) Doctor]

Karen Bass eulogized Communist Party USA leader

Add another nail..

Forget VP, I don't even know if I want her in Congress at this point lol

If the point of being in Congress is representing your district, then she's more than qualified for that.

To be honest, these stories about Bass just make me more sympathetic to her, not less, as it would show actual ideological diversity. But then again, I'm of the mind that we're actually in a 3-party system, not a 2-party one.