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

[Horus]

If Biden picks Rice he will lose. Take it to the bank.

[Devils30]

I just don't think Harris, Rice have a life story that will connect well with a wide array of voters. Warren could have had that but her wonky plans being emphasized over her biography blunted that.

You're starting to become very, very annoying. Please, can you just not mention Kamala Harris at all until Joe makes his decision? Can you do that for the sake of everyone?

It's the new left, we can't take criticism of anyone in our orbit. So my answer to you is no.

That said, this thread is running in circles anyway so I am not sure mentioning her further does any good for the discussion.

My point is not that Kamala (or Rice or Warren) is a bad person. Its that electorally I don't feel any of these three offer much in terms of aiding the largest possible victory. Senate seats like Montana, Georgia, Iowa are more likely to flip if Biden wins by 14% than 5%. That is simply a fact and my point is Biden will have an easier time as President with more Senators, more representatives.

And just to clear everything, I will certainly vote for Biden even if either of these three are on the ticket.

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

https://twitter.com/daveweigel/status/1279810234014367745

You're supposed to, but O'Rourke and Warren got worse as their campaigns continued and I'm still bearish on Harris' ability to do this.

[redjohn]

Only Harris and Warren have dealt with grueling Presidential campaigning and are prepared for the scrutiny and criticism that comes with such a visible spot. Voters are also fairly familiar with both.

Harris strikes me as a very Kaine-esque pick. She's not very risky, will make the same base that elected Biden in the primaries happy, but also may not have much sway or impact on voters outside of that base. She's not a bad choice, obviously. She's very intelligent, telegenic, and comes off as very VP-like. She'd also be a historic pick, and electing the first Black woman VP would fire up a lot of voters, but mostly people who are already in Biden's camp.

Warren would be a somewhat risky pick because of her past statements criticizing Biden, and their ideological differences. But it would be a major outreach effort to the left that may be necessary. She's also amazing in debates and would have no trouble ripping Pence apart on the stage. There's also the potential that her being to the left of Biden could cause some voters to question how moderate Biden really is.

It's not an easy choice between these two candidates. I think Warren would be an electrifying pick that would unite 95% of the American left and boost Biden quite a bit. But there's also very legitimate reasons for picking Harris.

[ηєω ƒяσηтιєя]

I just don't think Harris, Rice have a life story that will connect well with a wide array of voters. Warren could have had that but her wonky plans being emphasized over her biography blunted that.

You're starting to become very, very annoying. Please, can you just not mention Kamala Harris at all until Joe makes his decision? Can you do that for the sake of everyone?

I feel like you could also take that advice.

Really? I rarely even reply to this thread. You must be mistaken.

[ηєω ƒяσηтιєя]

I just don't think Harris, Rice have a life story that will connect well with a wide array of voters. Warren could have had that but her wonky plans being emphasized over her biography blunted that.

You're starting to become very, very annoying. Please, can you just not mention Kamala Harris at all until Joe makes his decision? Can you do that for the sake of everyone?

It's the new left, we can't take criticism of anyone in our orbit. So my answer to you is no.

That said, this thread is running in circles anyway so I am not sure mentioning her further does any good for the discussion.

My point is not that Kamala (or Rice or Warren) is a bad person. Its that electorally I don't feel any of these three offer much in terms of aiding the largest possible victory. Senate seats like Montana, Georgia, Iowa are more likely to flip if Biden wins by 14% than 5%. That is simply a fact and my point is Biden will have an easier time as President with more Senators, more representatives.

And just to clear everything, I will certainly vote for Biden even if either of these three are on the ticket.

Of course, Kamala can be criticized. However, most of your "criticisms" are baseless and repetitive.

[South Dakota Democrat]

I just don't think Harris, Rice have a life story that will connect well with a wide array of voters. Warren could have had that but her wonky plans being emphasized over her biography blunted that.

You're starting to become very, very annoying. Please, can you just not mention Kamala Harris at all until Joe makes his decision? Can you do that for the sake of everyone?

I feel like you could also take that advice.

Really? I rarely even reply to this thread. You must be mistaken.

....um...??

[wbrocks67]

I think the interview today is just a good example of why someone like Duckworth should not be picked. For better or for worse, presidential contenders are just better picks (Harris, Warren, etc.) because they've been battle tested and have been through a national campaign, and learn how to conduct themselves in situations like this (or moreso than others like regular Senators). Duckworth fell right through the trap. It's not really her fault though, b/c she hasn't been tested enough in situations to know better imo.

Also I really don't understand why Rice is even being discussed at this point. Picking her literally makes no sense. It would make more sense to even pick Abrams or Demings at this point. Yes, she has experience, but Republicans would yell BENGHAZI and that already is way more of a liability than anyone else being mentioned right now. Not to mention, she's the least inspiring pick out of the entire group - and she would be way too much Obama. People love Obama and they love Joe, but putting TWO major Obama admin people in the same ticket would just be way too much - and I love Obama. It literally would make no sense.

At the end of the day, objectively, Harris is not perfect (none of them are), but she ticks off the most boxes ultimately, and IMO, would bring the most excitement to the ticket. Recent polls seem to suggest the same thing.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

This thread has gotten way out of control

[Da2017]

I think the interview today is just a good example of why someone like Duckworth should not be picked. For better or for worse, presidential contenders are just better picks (Harris, Warren, etc.) because they've been battle tested and have been through a national campaign, and learn how to conduct themselves in situations like this (or moreso than others like regular Senators). Duckworth fell right through the trap. It's not really her fault though, b/c she hasn't been tested enough in situations to know better imo.

Also I really don't understand why Rice is even being discussed at this point. Picking her literally makes no sense. It would make more sense to even pick Abrams or Demings at this point. Yes, she has experience, but Republicans would yell BENGHAZI and that already is way more of a liability than anyone else being mentioned right now. Not to mention, she's the least inspiring pick out of the entire group - and she would be way too much Obama. People love Obama and they love Joe, but putting TWO major Obama admin people in the same ticket would just be way too much - and I love Obama. It literally would make no sense.

At the end of the day, objectively, Harris is not perfect (none of them are), but she ticks off the most boxes ultimately, and IMO, would bring the most excitement to the ticket. Recent polls seem to suggest the same thing.

That interview has given me some pause about Duckworth.I still think Harris the best pick. Warren is ok,but I think Biden could do better. Rice I think would be a drag. I could see her making an embarssing gaffe. There are plenty liabilities outside of Benghazi.

[GeneralMacArthur]

What's this Duckworth interview thing?

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

What's this Duckworth interview thing?

She got asked if she thought the Washington statues should come down and equivocated somewhat at first. This "having a conversation" schtick embodied by the likes of O'Rourke 2020 often fails to pull in radicals and simultaneously alienates moderates.*

*Radicals and moderates on a particular given issue, that is.

[DisneyDem]

I know I’m biased against Harris, but I feel like the anti-rice hate here it is excessive. She demonstrated considerable charisma in her interview today, she has a working relationship with Joe, and she’s black and not tied to Cops, can speak forcefully about the pandemic and the failures of the Trump administration they’re in, and sends republicans down a dated rabbit hole Here is where my personal preference stacks of assuming Duckworth is out
1. Warren
2. Rice
3. KLB
4. Val
5. A wild card such as MLG or Baldwin
6. Harris

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

To anyone still seriously suggest MLG, (not sure if I've said something along these lines before, but) I must point you in the direction of the Dominic Cummings scandal in the UK. The risk of jewellerygate going something like that is too high for her placement on the ticket to be worthwhile.

Can anyone make a good case for why a Biden-Grisham ticket would be safe from such criticisms?

[Orwell]

I think the interview today is just a good example of why someone like Duckworth should not be picked. For better or for worse, presidential contenders are just better picks (Harris, Warren, etc.) because they've been battle tested and have been through a national campaign, and learn how to conduct themselves in situations like this (or moreso than others like regular Senators). Duckworth fell right through the trap. It's not really her fault though, b/c she hasn't been tested enough in situations to know better imo.

Also I really don't understand why Rice is even being discussed at this point. Picking her literally makes no sense. It would make more sense to even pick Abrams or Demings at this point. Yes, she has experience, but Republicans would yell BENGHAZI and that already is way more of a liability than anyone else being mentioned right now. Not to mention, she's the least inspiring pick out of the entire group - and she would be way too much Obama. People love Obama and they love Joe, but putting TWO major Obama admin people in the same ticket would just be way too much - and I love Obama. It literally would make no sense.

At the end of the day, objectively, Harris is not perfect (none of them are), but she ticks off the most boxes ultimately, and IMO, would bring the most excitement to the ticket. Recent polls seem to suggest the same thing.

This is has happened twice in the last like 50 years if we take it from 1972 to Present we have these tickets

Democrats

McGovern/Shriver
Carter/Mondale
Carter/Mondale
Mondale/Ferraro
Dukakis/Bentsen
Clinton/Gore
Clinton/Gore
Gore/Lieberman
Kerry/Edwards
Obama/Biden
Obama/Biden
Clinton/Kaine
Biden/???

For the GOP

Nixon/Agnew
Ford/Dole
Reagan/Bush
Reagan/Bush
Bush/Quayle
Bush/Quayle
Dole/Kemp
Bush/Cheney
Bush/Cheney
McCain/Palin
Romney/Ryan
Trump/Pence
Trump/Pence



In the last 48 years, we have had a total of 3 primary opponents picked for Vice President, in 2 of those occasions the VP was selected for their experience on Foreign policy and for being more moderate or appealing to a specific part of the party. In the 3rd case John Edwards, there really wasn't any good reason to pick him.


What is Trump going to do in terms of Duckworth's comments? Question her patriotism? Question her intelligence and bleed more of his female support? This is a woman who lost both of her legs in Iraq serving this country that is treading a dangerous path for the President because I think Trump saying, "I like my heroes not wounded" is a great soundbite for an ad to puncture his support in Southwest Georgia and North Carolina. I think the people on Atlas are overestimating the effect of these "culture war" issues. In 2008 for example, 62% of voters said The Economy was their most important issue, followed by 10% saying Iraq, 9% on Healthcare, and 9% on Terrorism. If we look at the exit polls from 2016 we have, 52% of voters on the economy, 13% on Foreign Policy, 13% on Immigration, and 18% on Terrorism.

The United States has not had a combat veteran as President or Vice President since 2001, it is high time that we have someone in office that has seen the horrors of war because our politicians should know what it is like to be sent into harm's way if they are sending these people into conflict zones on the other side of the world.

[wbrocks67]

It's not about what Trump will do - it's about needless headlines that are unnecessary. If Duckworth was the VP nominee right now, we've had a whole news cycle about that interview tbh. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, but we would be in the middle of a 'Joe is radical left who wants to take down all statues' cycle b/c of that interview.

VP picks won't be perfect, but this whole scenario is something that needs to be avoided.

[Bidenworth2020]

https://twitter.com/WaPoSean/status/1279909691762577412?s=20

[roxas11]

I will say this about Rice despite all the criticism she gets on here

I do not for 1 second question that she could step in and actually do the Job of President of the united states. Out all of them she is clearly ready on day one to step in and do the Job

Joe biden knows this and that is why despite all of the controversy he keeps coming back to her


The biggest problem I have with some of the other VP picks
is that Im having a hard time seeing any of them actually take on the job as president if god forbid they would suddenly be put in that situation.

I mean like Duckworth but I would be nervous as hell if she was suddenly a heart beat away from being the president of the untied states

especially after seeing her recent interview

[Devils30]

I didn’t think Duckworth interview was great but she didn’t say tear down Washington, just dodged the question and later issued a statement saying the tear down applied to confederates. She won’t be an easy target for Rs. This said, for some reason I just think Demings is the best option. The far left might not love that she was a cop but most people like police officers who honorably serve the public like her. The risk here really isn’t African-Americans, it’s the whites in Brooklyn and Portland. Places Dems don’t need to worry.

[South Dakota Democrat]

I didn’t think Duckworth interview was great but she didn’t say tear down Washington, just dodged the question and later issued a statement saying the tear down applied to confederates. She won’t be an easy target for Rs. This said, for some reason I just think Demings is the best option. The far left might not love that she was a cop but most people like police officers who honorably serve the public like her. The risk here really isn’t African-Americans, it’s the whites in Brooklyn and Portland. Places Dems don’t need to worry.

Yeah, I don't hate the idea of Demings.

[Dr Oz Lost Party!]

I mean like Duckworth but I would be nervous as hell if she was suddenly a heart beat away from being the president of the untied states

especially after seeing her recent interview

It was literally one interview...

[Da2017]

Duckworth is still in my top picks.

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

I didn’t think Duckworth interview was great but she didn’t say tear down Washington, just dodged the question and later issued a statement saying the tear down applied to confederates. She won’t be an easy target for Rs. This said, for some reason I just think Demings is the best option. The far left might not love that she was a cop but most people like police officers who honorably serve the public like her. The risk here really isn’t African-Americans, it’s the whites in Brooklyn and Portland. Places Dems don’t need to worry.

Demings is not just a cop. She's a cop with a record (as Orlando Police Chief) that could turn off even moderates (given how far they have moved, at least temporarily, on criminal justice issues) and seriously damage Democratic credibility within the BLM movement. Harris' record is a mixed bag with some very bad spots, but Demings' seems worse from the relatively little we know of it (vetting and opposition research would probably reveal a lot more).

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

I can't help but think that if we replaced Duckworth in that interview with a man, let's say Andrew Yang, nobody would've brought it up on this website.

Because Andrew Yang, like any other man, is not a realistic contender for VP-nominee at this point. Anyway, these kind of slip-ups can and do hurt male candidates; although the bar is set lower by a subsection of voters for sexist reasons, plenty of men like O'Rourke have missed it time and time again.

[Bidenworth2020]

It wasn't the best interview I have ever seen, but how was it so bad that people are crossing her off the list? The only slip up was not articulating her position on the monuments well (which she did later).