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

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

The Kamala Harris saga has been way overblown,  that's why people snipe at each other. If she was so good to be Veep, why did she flop so badly as a Prez candidate

I like Susan Rice better than Harris, hopefully she is picked but some dont like Rice

So Kamala Harris isn't good enough because she couldn't get elected as a presidential candidate, so Susan Rice is your pick? Someone whose highest-held elected office was student council president in high school? Man, I know people on this forum love to hate Kamala Harris, but at least judge her by standards that you yourself can stick to.

I feel like, for Kamala folks, we have to be either totally for Harris/fawning over her as the VP pick, or we hate her.  There's definitely a middle ground.  I don't hate her, and I think there are a lot worse choices out there, but that doesn't mean I'm enthused by her/she's my first choice.  It also doesn't mean it will affect my vote one way or the other, though. 

I'm not really a Kamala person, I think she's the best pick but I'm not a huge Kamala supporter by any means. I was simply pointing out that it seems Harris and Rice were being held to vastly different standards by the user I replied to.

[wbrocks67]

Do people who say "she was a flop as a prez candidate, why/how can she be VP" have never heard of Joe Biden?

[DisneyDem]

Do people who say "she was a flop as a prez candidate, why/how can she be VP" have never heard of Joe Biden?

Fair. But I think there is is slight difference here . Joe Biden ran a stable campaign from the Gardner. He was never able to get out of that. But he had a few memorable debate moments and people in the post debate polls always came away impressed with him, so even though he couldn’t parlay it into anything real, he raced his profile slightly. One of the people on pod save America made this point when comparing him to Cory Booker. Harris on the other hand started with a huge rally, huge fundraising and a huge debate performance and then got hit with bad decision after bad decision. So yes they were both “failed candidates“ but it’s relative. Different types of failure.

[Interlocutor is just not there yet]

The Kamala Harris saga has been way overblown,  that's why people snipe at each other. If she was so good to be Veep, why did she flop so badly as a Prez candidate

I like Susan Rice better than Harris, hopefully she is picked but some dont like Rice

So Kamala Harris isn't good enough because she couldn't get elected as a presidential candidate, so Susan Rice is your pick? Someone whose highest-held elected office was student council president in high school? Man, I know people on this forum love to hate Kamala Harris, but at least judge her by standards that you yourself can stick to.

You dont live in California,  she does nothing for the homeless on Skid Row, I can understand Feinstein,  but both other them never come down to LA and talk about the homeless issue on Skid Row.

Sacramento,  SF LA, have the most homeless than any other region in the country, due to the influx of nonimmigrant migrating from the cold Midwest to Cali for warmth in the winter time

You originally implied that she's not a good VP pick because she lost the presidential primary. I pointed out that Susan Rice, your preferred pick, has never even run for office. Now you're bringing up homelessness, which I believe you on, but has nothing to do with the double standard of your earlier comments.

If Harris failing to do well in the presidential primaries proves that she is a weak candidate, what suggests to you that someone who has never run for office would be better?

Brace yourselves for the "Stop taking him seriously" and "He's a forum institution" takes

[politics_king]

https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/16/politics/biden-kamala-harris-2020-vp-keisha-lance-bottoms-elizabeth-warren/index.html

It's been a minute since this weekly article has come out, but I always find it interesting, it's changed somewhat and there's a major slip for Elizabeth Warren in this ranking system. But this is just an opinion piece so we always take it for a grain of salt.

Top 5
1.) Kamala Harris
2.) Keisha Lance Bottoms
3.) Susan Rice
4.) Tammy Duckworth
5.) Michelle Lujan Grisham

[Devils30]

I’d have Duckworth as high as anyone at this stage

[TrendsareUsuallyReal]

I’d have Duckworth as high as anyone at this stage

I have a feeling she's going to be the pick. She endorsed Biden before her state actually voted and beat most other VP options in it. Harris seems too "inevitable" and inevitable picks more often than not seem to get passed over (Bayh, Romney, Portman). Kaine got it in 2016 basically out of default since there were no other real choices Clinton could choose without compromising a Senate seat at the time, and Pence got it because literally no one besides Christie, Pence, and Gingrich wanted the job.

There's also the fact that the debate blindside is probably not being weighed appropriately enough in the rankings. The juxtaposition between ticket mates is never a good look. Let alone the fact that Jill Biden is still apparently holding a grudge against Harris for that.

[Orwell]

I’d have Duckworth as high as anyone at this stage

I have a feeling she's going to be the pick. She endorsed Biden before her state actually voted and beat most other VP options in it. Harris seems too "inevitable" and inevitable picks more often than not seem to get passed over (Bayh, Romney, Portman). Kaine got it in 2016 basically out of default since there were no other real choices Clinton could choose without compromising a Senate seat at the time, and Pence got it because literally no one besides Christie, Pence, and Gingrich wanted the job.

There's also the fact that the debate blindside is probably not being weighed appropriately enough in the rankings. The juxtaposition between ticket mates is never a good look. Let alone the fact that Jill Biden is still apparently holding a grudge against Harris for that.

I am of the opinion Harris isn't bad, but she's just boring. There is nothing that really screams new Democratic party about Harris. I want Duckworth personally, but I won't mind Harris.

As for your comment on inevitable VP picks, I don't think people really saw Bayh or Romney as inevitable. Romney I know thought that he had deserved the Vice Presidential slot with McCain. However, I recently read Gamechange, and according to the authors, Pawlenty was actually the pick that was the runnerup and that McCain never seriously considered Romney because he didn't like him. Bayh was definitely a frontrunner for the Vice Presidency, and according to David Plouffe he was a coin toss away from the Vice Presidency, but there is also the rumor that he told Kaine, "You're the choice of my heart, but Joe is the choice of my head." So I wonder the veracity of how close Bayh was.

[Ogre Mage]

Reporting in 2008 was that Obama's choice was down to Biden and Bayh.  Kaine was in the final 3 but was eliminated first because he was too inexperienced at that time and Obama was also too inexperienced.  So who would be an experienced hand reassuring to the middle of the country?  Either Biden or Bayh fit the bill on paper.  It's not clear what made the final decision but some things I've read suggested Biden came across better in the interview.

[wbrocks67]

I’d have Duckworth as high as anyone at this stage

I have a feeling she's going to be the pick. She endorsed Biden before her state actually voted and beat most other VP options in it. Harris seems too "inevitable" and inevitable picks more often than not seem to get passed over (Bayh, Romney, Portman). Kaine got it in 2016 basically out of default since there were no other real choices Clinton could choose without compromising a Senate seat at the time, and Pence got it because literally no one besides Christie, Pence, and Gingrich wanted the job.

There's also the fact that the debate blindside is probably not being weighed appropriately enough in the rankings. The juxtaposition between ticket mates is never a good look. Let alone the fact that Jill Biden is still apparently holding a grudge against Harris for that.

I am of the opinion Harris isn't bad, but she's just boring. There is nothing that really screams new Democratic party about Harris. I want Duckworth personally, but I won't mind Harris.

As for your comment on inevitable VP picks, I don't think people really saw Bayh or Romney as inevitable. Romney I know thought that he had deserved the Vice Presidential slot with McCain. However, I recently read Gamechange, and according to the authors, Pawlenty was actually the pick that was the runnerup and that McCain never seriously considered Romney because he didn't like him. Bayh was definitely a frontrunner for the Vice Presidency, and according to David Plouffe he was a coin toss away from the Vice Presidency, but there is also the rumor that he told Kaine, "You're the choice of my heart, but Joe is the choice of my head." So I wonder the veracity of how close Bayh was.

[wbrocks67]

I’d have Duckworth as high as anyone at this stage

I have a feeling she's going to be the pick. She endorsed Biden before her state actually voted and beat most other VP options in it. Harris seems too "inevitable" and inevitable picks more often than not seem to get passed over (Bayh, Romney, Portman). Kaine got it in 2016 basically out of default since there were no other real choices Clinton could choose without compromising a Senate seat at the time, and Pence got it because literally no one besides Christie, Pence, and Gingrich wanted the job.

There's also the fact that the debate blindside is probably not being weighed appropriately enough in the rankings. The juxtaposition between ticket mates is never a good look. Let alone the fact that Jill Biden is still apparently holding a grudge against Harris for that.

I am of the opinion Harris isn't bad, but she's just boring. There is nothing that really screams new Democratic party about Harris. I want Duckworth personally, but I won't mind Harris.

Completely disagree with this. Not sure how you can come to the conclusion of Harris "boring", but someone like Duckworth isn't? Also, Harris is a black and indian female in her 50s, how does that not scream 'new Democratic party'? Again, nothing about Duckworth screams that either.

Again, the hate boner people here have for Harris is so odd to me.

[TrendsareUsuallyReal]

You need to seriously chill tf out accusing people of having hate boners for the crime of not preferring Harris as VP.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

I’m personally on the Bottoms train. I think she’d be an excellent pick. Kamala is the safest. Perhaps that’s what Joe will go for

[brucejoel99]

https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/16/politics/biden-kamala-harris-2020-vp-keisha-lance-bottoms-elizabeth-warren/index.html

It's been a minute since this weekly article has come out, but I always find it interesting, it's changed somewhat and there's a major slip for Elizabeth Warren in this ranking system. But this is just an opinion piece so we always take it for a grain of salt.

Top 5
1.) Kamala Harris
2.) Keisha Lance Bottoms
3.) Susan Rice
4.) Tammy Duckworth
5.) Michelle Lujan Grisham

This is the sh*ttiest Veepstakes analysis I've seen to date. KLB at #2 because she got COVID? Really, Chris...? His equally irrational analysis of the primary debates always boiled my blood. Having him on staff really drags down CNN's credibility. If he's not a troll, then he's most certainly the worst pundit in the game.

Before Floyd & even after Floyd for a few weeks, he had Klobuchar as #1. Since then, he's had Harris at #1 pretty much the rest of the time & he has slowly pushed Warren further & further back to where she's now at #8. I honestly think he just dislikes Warren a ton & finds reasons every week to demote her, despite her rise in some polls & Biden's adoption of many of her plans; he did the same thing to her with his debate reviews: she always fell in the loser column except that time she castrated Bloomberg on live TV.

Hell, Biden literally said last week that "I am grateful to so many - including my friend Elizabeth Warren, labor unions, & other progressive partners for their help in putting together this bold new set of policies aimed at healing our economy & ensuring good, dignified jobs for American workers," but not a mention of that in this list. Imagine if Biden had said something that direct about any other candidate! But yeah, if he thinks Warren has no chance, then she's probably doing okay.

[ShadowRocket]

Reporting in 2008 was that Obama's choice was down to Biden and Bayh.  Kaine was in the final 3 but was eliminated first because he was too inexperienced at that time and Obama was also too inexperienced.  So who would be an experienced hand reassuring to the middle of the country?  Either Biden or Bayh fit the bill on paper.  It's not clear what made the final decision but some things I've read suggested Biden came across better in the interview.

My understanding  is that there was simply better chemistry between Obama and Biden  than there was with Bayh.

I've never seen it mentioned in the reporting  but there was also the issue picking Bayh would've likely have cost the Dems a Senate seat as Mitch Daniels was governor of IN and despite being up for reelection that year he was still facing a weak challenger.

[Heebie Jeebie]

Here's a fun hypothetical I posed to myself:  If I knew nothing at all about how the veepstakes had played out over the last few months, who would I guess was in the running?  Knowing nothing about how the competition has been covered, I think my top ten would be...

1. Kamala Harris
2. Kirsten Gillibrand
3. Tammy Duckworth
4. Maria Cantwell
5. Amy Klobuchar
6. Kate Brown
7. Catherine Cortez Masto
8. Michelle Lujan Grisham
9. Maggie Hassan
10. Gina Raimondo

I'm genuinely surprised that some of these names seemingly haven't received any public consideration at all.

[xavier110]

It's going to be Kamala. It always was going to be Kamala. Dem consultants are very predictable.

[Lord Halifax]

https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/16/politics/biden-kamala-harris-2020-vp-keisha-lance-bottoms-elizabeth-warren/index.html

It's been a minute since this weekly article has come out, but I always find it interesting, it's changed somewhat and there's a major slip for Elizabeth Warren in this ranking system. But this is just an opinion piece so we always take it for a grain of salt.

Top 5
1.) Kamala Harris
2.) Keisha Lance Bottoms
3.) Susan Rice
4.) Tammy Duckworth
5.) Michelle Lujan Grisham

This is the sh*ttiest Veepstakes analysis I've seen to date. KLB at #2 because she got COVID? Really, Chris...? His equally irrational analysis of the primary debates always boiled my blood. Having him on staff really drags down CNN's credibility. If he's not a troll, then he's most certainly the worst pundit in the game.

That's not his reason for having KLB at #2 just an update of the situation, he has had her at #2 for a long time now based on her status within Biden's inner circle/"Bidenworld" (being his "go to" person on race, "spokesperson", early backer etc.). He doesn't move candidates up and down unless something has changed and apparently he doesn't think Rice and Duckworth have passed KLB.

[DisneyDem]

I love Warren and strongly dislike Harris, but if I’m being honest, I kind of think taking either one of them runs the risk of overshadowing Joe. Thinking with my head instead of my heart they should be a three person Battle between rice, Duckworth, and bass. All three are acceptable to Lincoln project types, but have no obvious baggage with the left wing. All three unquestionably confident and ready to step in to the presidency but at the same time it still keeps the race about a binary choice between Trump and Joe.

[Da2017]

I love Warren and strongly dislike Harris, but if I’m being honest, I kind of think taking either one of them runs the risk of overshadowing Joe. Thinking with my head instead of my heart they should be a three person Battle between rice, Duckworth, and bass. All three are acceptable to Lincoln project types, but have no obvious baggage with the left wing. All three unquestionably confident and ready to step in to the presidency but at the same time it still keeps the race about a binary choice between Trump and Joe.

Susan Rice would be huge gift to the right. She is easy to smear. If you look closely she has lot of baggage. On top of that she has never held elected office.

[Rookie Yinzer]

I love Warren and strongly dislike Harris, but if I’m being honest, I kind of think taking either one of them runs the risk of overshadowing Joe. Thinking with my head instead of my heart they should be a three person Battle between rice, Duckworth, and bass. All three are acceptable to Lincoln project types, but have no obvious baggage with the left wing. All three unquestionably confident and ready to step in to the presidency but at the same time it still keeps the race about a binary choice between Trump and Joe.

Duckworth is the only one you listed who is viable to me. She has a wonderful personal story and is inoffensive. Didn’t Bass say she’s not interested inheriting the party in a post on the last few pages? Rice has never faced the rigors of a campaign. Biden has been in national politics for 50 years and was VP. We don’t need her on the ticket for “foreign policy”.

[Interlocutor is just not there yet]

It's going to be Kamala. It always was going to be Kamala. Dem consultants are very predictable.

Agreed, but we already have 100+ pages of this take. We know

[Devils30]

I love Warren and strongly dislike Harris, but if I’m being honest, I kind of think taking either one of them runs the risk of overshadowing Joe. Thinking with my head instead of my heart they should be a three person Battle between rice, Duckworth, and bass. All three are acceptable to Lincoln project types, but have no obvious baggage with the left wing. All three unquestionably confident and ready to step in to the presidency but at the same time it still keeps the race about a binary choice between Trump and Joe.

Duckworth is the only one you listed who is viable to me. She has a wonderful personal story and is inoffensive. Didn’t Bass say she’s not interested inheriting the party in a post on the last few pages? Rice has never faced the rigors of a campaign. Biden has been in national politics for 50 years and was VP. We don’t need her on the ticket for “foreign policy”.

Duckworth is just a much tougher target for the right, especially compared to Harris and Rice. Do you think if Harris said what Duckworth did about statues that it would also bounce right off her?

[DisneyDem]

I love Warren and strongly dislike Harris, but if I’m being honest, I kind of think taking either one of them runs the risk of overshadowing Joe. Thinking with my head instead of my heart they should be a three person Battle between rice, Duckworth, and bass. All three are acceptable to Lincoln project types, but have no obvious baggage with the left wing. All three unquestionably confident and ready to step in to the presidency but at the same time it still keeps the race about a binary choice between Trump and Joe.

Duckworth is the only one you listed who is viable to me. She has a wonderful personal story and is inoffensive. Didn’t Bass say she’s not interested inheriting the party in a post on the last few pages? Rice has never faced the rigors of a campaign. Biden has been in national politics for 50 years and was VP. We don’t need her on the ticket for “foreign policy”.

Sorry to disagree with you again because despite our big difference on Harris I actually really respect you, but I disagree with both of your Points. Bass did say that, but as Jim Clybourn pointed out, that’s not necessarily a bad thing. My own take on it is when I had Democrats ever done well by anointing someone in advance? I think of Al Gore, Hillary Clinton, even Mario Cuomo is botched attempt. They all look kind of similar to this. And as I stated before, Rice is not there to balance the ticket. She is there to double down on the message of experience. It’s like Al Gore in 1992

[ηєω ƒяσηтιєя]

I love Warren and strongly dislike Harris, but if I’m being honest, I kind of think taking either one of them runs the risk of overshadowing Joe. Thinking with my head instead of my heart they should be a three person Battle between rice, Duckworth, and bass. All three are acceptable to Lincoln project types, but have no obvious baggage with the left wing. All three unquestionably confident and ready to step in to the presidency but at the same time it still keeps the race about a binary choice between Trump and Joe.

Duckworth is the only one you listed who is viable to me. She has a wonderful personal story and is inoffensive. Didn’t Bass say she’s not interested inheriting the party in a post on the last few pages? Rice has never faced the rigors of a campaign. Biden has been in national politics for 50 years and was VP. We don’t need her on the ticket for “foreign policy”.

Sorry to disagree with you again because despite our big difference on Harris I actually really respect you, but I disagree with both of your Points. Bass did say that, but as Jim Clybourn pointed out, that’s not necessarily a bad thing. My own take on it is when I had Democrats ever done well by anointing someone in advance? I think of Al Gore, Hillary Clinton, even Mario Cuomo is botched attempt. They all look kind of similar to this. And as I stated before, Rice is not there to balance the ticket. She is there to double down on the message of experience. It’s like Al Gore in 1992

Experience? What experience does Rice have that outweighs Biden's or Harris's?

Susan Rice has NEVER held political office. Also, Biden doesn't need any foreign policy help.