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

[Roll Roons]

The Post still has Warren as the best non-Harris pick:

I'd like to add it's not just about what percentage of people say they'll support Biden, but enthusiasm for the ticket from those who supported a more progressive candidate and how genuine Biden's policy proposals (in which there are things for progressives to like) are seen. With Warren on the ticket, it definitely adds credibility to the notion that he'll actually try to do the things he lists.

The problem is that Warren would motivate the right more than she would the left.

The right is going to be super motivated no matter what.

Have you seen the national polling?  A lot of the right/center-right don't currently seem very motivated to vote against Biden, but it's easy to imagine then enthused to vote against Warren.

The types that would be enthused against Warren are going to come out for Trump regardless. Any woman Biden picks will be relentlessly demonized and you're naive if you're not counting on that.

And I'd say you're being naive if you think Warren doesn't occupy a special place in the right's fevered dreams (along with Sanders and the squad).

She (and they) do now because they are more known. But if you think a different woman Biden picks will be treated like him (an old white guy) you're naive.

Duckworth will be very difficult for Trump and team to attack. Any attempt will make them look even worse, just like it did to Joe Walsh and Mark Kirk when she ran against them.

[Heebie Jeebie]

The Post still has Warren as the best non-Harris pick:

I'd like to add it's not just about what percentage of people say they'll support Biden, but enthusiasm for the ticket from those who supported a more progressive candidate and how genuine Biden's policy proposals (in which there are things for progressives to like) are seen. With Warren on the ticket, it definitely adds credibility to the notion that he'll actually try to do the things he lists.

The problem is that Warren would motivate the right more than she would the left.

The right is going to be super motivated no matter what.

Have you seen the national polling?  A lot of the right/center-right don't currently seem very motivated to vote against Biden, but it's easy to imagine then enthused to vote against Warren.

The types that would be enthused against Warren are going to come out for Trump regardless. Any woman Biden picks will be relentlessly demonized and you're naive if you're not counting on that.

And I'd say you're being naive if you think Warren doesn't occupy a special place in the right's fevered dreams (along with Sanders and the squad).

She (and they) do now because they are more known. But if you think a different woman Biden picks will be treated like him (an old white guy) you're naive.

No, you're naive.

Seriously, though, I'm not arguing that any woman would be treated like Biden--she won't.  The sexism that characterized Clinton's treatment will still be there whether Biden picks Warren, Harris, Duckworth, or whomever.  But it's not just sexism I'm talking about--Warren is an avatar of the Left in a way that other potential running mates aren't, and those kinds of narratives take time to establish.  Put Warren on the ticket and all those "Biden is just a Trojan Horse for the extremists" takes suddenly have a lot more heft with voters.  

[Beet]

The Post still has Warren as the best non-Harris pick:

I'd like to add it's not just about what percentage of people say they'll support Biden, but enthusiasm for the ticket from those who supported a more progressive candidate and how genuine Biden's policy proposals (in which there are things for progressives to like) are seen. With Warren on the ticket, it definitely adds credibility to the notion that he'll actually try to do the things he lists.

The problem is that Warren would motivate the right more than she would the left.

The right is going to be super motivated no matter what.

Have you seen the national polling?  A lot of the right/center-right don't currently seem very motivated to vote against Biden, but it's easy to imagine then enthused to vote against Warren.

The types that would be enthused against Warren are going to come out for Trump regardless. Any woman Biden picks will be relentlessly demonized and you're naive if you're not counting on that.

And I'd say you're being naive if you think Warren doesn't occupy a special place in the right's fevered dreams (along with Sanders and the squad).

She (and they) do now because they are more known. But if you think a different woman Biden picks will be treated like him (an old white guy) you're naive.

No, you're naive.

Seriously, though, I'm not arguing that any woman would be treated like Biden--she won't.  The sexism that characterized Clinton's treatment will still be there whether Biden picks Warren, Harris, Duckworth, or whomever.  But it's not just sexism I'm talking about--Warren is an avatar of the Left in a way that other potential running mates aren't, and those kinds of narratives take time to establish.  Put Warren on the ticket and all those "Biden is just a Trojan Horse for the extremists" takes suddenly have a lot more heft with voters.  

You forget how well Sanders was polling in the GE. Having someone as "an avatar of the Left" means nothing by itself when Biden when the platform doesn't support the most scary policies. If the argument is "well he just can't pick a progressive, period", I would disagree. And Warren is not seen as far left as Sanders, AOC, or the rest of the squad.

[Heebie Jeebie]

The Post still has Warren as the best non-Harris pick:

I'd like to add it's not just about what percentage of people say they'll support Biden, but enthusiasm for the ticket from those who supported a more progressive candidate and how genuine Biden's policy proposals (in which there are things for progressives to like) are seen. With Warren on the ticket, it definitely adds credibility to the notion that he'll actually try to do the things he lists.

The problem is that Warren would motivate the right more than she would the left.

The right is going to be super motivated no matter what.

Have you seen the national polling?  A lot of the right/center-right don't currently seem very motivated to vote against Biden, but it's easy to imagine then enthused to vote against Warren.

The types that would be enthused against Warren are going to come out for Trump regardless. Any woman Biden picks will be relentlessly demonized and you're naive if you're not counting on that.

And I'd say you're being naive if you think Warren doesn't occupy a special place in the right's fevered dreams (along with Sanders and the squad).

She (and they) do now because they are more known. But if you think a different woman Biden picks will be treated like him (an old white guy) you're naive.

No, you're naive.

Seriously, though, I'm not arguing that any woman would be treated like Biden--she won't.  The sexism that characterized Clinton's treatment will still be there whether Biden picks Warren, Harris, Duckworth, or whomever.  But it's not just sexism I'm talking about--Warren is an avatar of the Left in a way that other potential running mates aren't, and those kinds of narratives take time to establish.  Put Warren on the ticket and all those "Biden is just a Trojan Horse for the extremists" takes suddenly have a lot more heft with voters.  

You forget how well Sanders was polling in the GE. Having someone as "an avatar of the Left" means nothing by itself when Biden when the platform doesn't support the most scary policies. If the argument is "well he just can't pick a progressive, period", I would disagree. And Warren is not seen as far left as Sanders, AOC, or the rest of the squad.

Harris, Duckworth, et. al. are all plenty progressive and would be fine choices, so there's no reason to think that progressive values alone are enough to make someone ineligeable.  But Biden's whole campaign strategy is "don't antagonize or alienate moderates," and Warren has built her entire career on antagonizing and alienating moderates in ways the others just haven't.  Which works just fine in many contexts--it's made her a very effective reformer and Senator. But it would be a handicap in a presidential campaign.  Right now, Biden is winning and winning big. Why would he pick Warren and risk totally upending a winning strategy?

[Interlocutor is just not there yet]

I hope Biden picks his running mate soon because this thread has just about run its course.

Any longer and this will become another "Bernie Bros Are Stupid" thread

[Da2017]

Susan Rice biggest problem is she is too elite to connect with the average voter.

[BidenHarris2020]

Susan Rice biggest problem is she is too elite to connect with the average voter.

Nice way of saying "uppity black woman"...

[Beet]

The Post still has Warren as the best non-Harris pick:

I'd like to add it's not just about what percentage of people say they'll support Biden, but enthusiasm for the ticket from those who supported a more progressive candidate and how genuine Biden's policy proposals (in which there are things for progressives to like) are seen. With Warren on the ticket, it definitely adds credibility to the notion that he'll actually try to do the things he lists.

The problem is that Warren would motivate the right more than she would the left.

The right is going to be super motivated no matter what.

Have you seen the national polling?  A lot of the right/center-right don't currently seem very motivated to vote against Biden, but it's easy to imagine then enthused to vote against Warren.

The types that would be enthused against Warren are going to come out for Trump regardless. Any woman Biden picks will be relentlessly demonized and you're naive if you're not counting on that.

And I'd say you're being naive if you think Warren doesn't occupy a special place in the right's fevered dreams (along with Sanders and the squad).

She (and they) do now because they are more known. But if you think a different woman Biden picks will be treated like him (an old white guy) you're naive.

No, you're naive.

Seriously, though, I'm not arguing that any woman would be treated like Biden--she won't.  The sexism that characterized Clinton's treatment will still be there whether Biden picks Warren, Harris, Duckworth, or whomever.  But it's not just sexism I'm talking about--Warren is an avatar of the Left in a way that other potential running mates aren't, and those kinds of narratives take time to establish.  Put Warren on the ticket and all those "Biden is just a Trojan Horse for the extremists" takes suddenly have a lot more heft with voters.  

You forget how well Sanders was polling in the GE. Having someone as "an avatar of the Left" means nothing by itself when Biden when the platform doesn't support the most scary policies. If the argument is "well he just can't pick a progressive, period", I would disagree. And Warren is not seen as far left as Sanders, AOC, or the rest of the squad.

Harris, Duckworth, et. al. are all plenty progressive and would be fine choices, so there's no reason to think that progressive values alone are enough to make someone ineligeable.  But Biden's whole campaign strategy is "don't antagonize or alienate moderates," and Warren has built her entire career on antagonizing and alienating moderates in ways the others just haven't.  Which works just fine in many contexts--it's made her a very effective reformer and Senator. But it would be a handicap in a presidential campaign.  Right now, Biden is winning and winning big. Why would he pick Warren and risk totally upending a winning strategy?

She has "built her entire career on antagonizing and alienating moderates"? That's a really objective characterization... Not. She's built her entire career fighting for the middle class against billionaires and fighting against corruption. Those are generally popular causes and moderates aren't going to be scared off by them. Most people know that there are deep problems with the way the country is run and Biden will do best by honestly running on the fact that structural change is needed. That will give him a substantive message to hang onto during a rocky campaign more than just "not Trump" and it will help him more in the long run.

[Roll Roons]

Susan Rice biggest problem is she is too elite to connect with the average voter.

Yes. She has lived in the Beltway for pretty much her whole life. And to a lesser extent, the same is true of Harris. Is growing up the daughters of professors in Berkeley really an appealing background?

Just choose Duckworth. It's not that hard.

[Da2017]

Susan Rice biggest problem is she is too elite to connect with the average voter.

Yes. She has lived in the Beltway for pretty much her whole life. And to a lesser extent, the same is true of Harris. Is growing up the daughters of professors in Berkeley really an appealing background?

Just choose Duckworth. It's not that hard.
[/quote]

True at the very least Harris has a personable touch to her, something that Rice lacks.

[BidenHarris2020]

Susan Rice biggest problem is she is too elite to connect with the average voter.

Yes. She has lived in the Beltway for pretty much her whole life. And to a lesser extent, the same is true of Harris. Is growing up the daughters of professors in Berkeley really an appealing background?

Just choose Duckworth. It's not that hard.

They're elitist because their parents, and in Kamala's case her immigrant parents sought to better themselves through higher learnig. a child of Indian and Jamaican immigrants is elitist. Really? This thread gets more ridiculous with each passing day. If anything Harris is the embodiment of the so called American Dream.

[Devils30]

Susan Rice biggest problem is she is too elite to connect with the average voter.

Yes. She has lived in the Beltway for pretty much her whole life. And to a lesser extent, the same is true of Harris. Is growing up the daughters of professors in Berkeley really an appealing background?

Just choose Duckworth. It's not that hard.

The problem isn't Rice and Harris having families that wanted to better themselves, we all strive for it. It's both of them are part of an insider crowd that most people (especially outside DC and NYC) simply don't identify with.

[BidenHarris2020]

God forbid women, especially black women dare to have ambition and enter traditionally white spaces. The thought of them having power scares the hell out of half this forum.

[McGarnagle]

I hope Biden picks his running mate soon because this thread has just about run its course.

Any longer and this will become another "Bernie Bros Are Stupid" thread

A lot of Democrats haven't gotten the memo that the nomination has already been decided, that they won, and that they should get over it. They have more contempt for the left wing of their party than they do their actual opponents, the Republicans.

[Morning in Atlas]

Bernie bros are going to Bernie Bro.

https://twitter.com/IsaacDovere/status/1286462426142187525

Sexists are going to sexist.

[NYSforKennedy2024]

https://twitter.com/IsaacDovere/status/1286462426142187525

Oh sh**t...it could actually be Bass, couldn't it?

[Ferguson97]

https://twitter.com/IsaacDovere/status/1286462426142187525

Oh sh**t...it could actually be Bass, couldn't it?

Those groups don’t really have influence

[NYSforKennedy2024]

https://twitter.com/IsaacDovere/status/1286462426142187525

Oh sh**t...it could actually be Bass, couldn't it?

Those groups don’t really have influence

You really don't think anyone in that Biden-Sanders Task Force has any influential connections to the decision making process?

I know his campaign staff is full NeoLib, but still, there's some influential figures in that group. This certainly helps Bass' (eh, I see many similarities to Palin)/Baldwin's (PLEASE) chances.

[Morning in Atlas]

https://twitter.com/IsaacDovere/status/1286462426142187525

Oh sh**t...it could actually be Bass, couldn't it?

It could.

Will it be? Probably not. OR doesn't exactly have influence.

[Morning in Atlas]

Bernie bros are going to Bernie Bro.

https://twitter.com/IsaacDovere/status/1286462426142187525

Honestly, this makes me favor Harris and Duckworth even more.  I love Warren, but if the Bernie bros think she'd be an acceptable running mate that's a good sign she'd be a bad pick.

LOL at them being against a disabled war vet female POC.

Girl bye.

Of course, this all ignores the fact that they've put a black woman on their shortlist.

If you're going to feed into Republican narratives about the race card, at least make it somewhat believable.

[Morning in Atlas]

This is hilarious. The arrogance lmao

I don't see the problem with this. If, say, Bloomberg or Third Way wanted to blacklist Warren or Nina Turner, they're perfectly in their right to. I vehemently disagree with them, but they're just as important to winning and just as much of a part of the coalition as we are.

It's not about "lol u lost tho." It's about humility and unity.

Honestly, this makes me favor Harris and Duckworth even more.  I love Warren, but if the Bernie bros think she'd be an acceptable running mate that's a good sign she'd be a bad pick.

Imagine abandoning all your principles to trigger the Berners.

[brucejoel99]

https://twitter.com/IsaacDovere/status/1286462426142187525

Oh sh**t...it could actually be Bass, couldn't it?

Eh, I don't think so. In the Pod Save America "Veepstakes!" special, they talked about how during one of the Veepstakes for Kerry or Obama, there was a candidate that wasn't gonna be the nominee but was getting a lot of buzz. They used the opportunity to draw the press' attention away as they approached the announcement. Part of me wonders if this story isn't just a little bit of that, especially considering Bass apparently isn't a fan of the spotlight & hasn't received the type of vetting that other prospective nominees have.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Bernie bros are going to Bernie Bro.

https://twitter.com/IsaacDovere/status/1286462426142187525

Sexists are going to sexist.

You mean the people who called Warren a "snake" and Harris a "cop"?
Absolutely agree.

[Heebie Jeebie]

Honestly, this makes me favor Harris and Duckworth even more.  I love Warren, but if the Bernie bros think she'd be an acceptable running mate that's a good sign she'd be a bad pick.

Imagine abandoning all your principles to trigger the Berners.

It's not about triggering anyone.  The people represented in that tweet are, by their own acknowledgement, at the edge of what is politically salient in this country--they're out far past the center-left.  You don't win a wide majority or form a governing coalition by veering so far from the center--not at the presidential level.  Warren, Sanders, and their ilk obviously have what it takes to be highly successful Senators and legislators, but there are different constraints on presidential aspirants. 

[Heebie Jeebie]

The Post still has Warren as the best non-Harris pick:

I'd like to add it's not just about what percentage of people say they'll support Biden, but enthusiasm for the ticket from those who supported a more progressive candidate and how genuine Biden's policy proposals (in which there are things for progressives to like) are seen. With Warren on the ticket, it definitely adds credibility to the notion that he'll actually try to do the things he lists.

The problem is that Warren would motivate the right more than she would the left.

The right is going to be super motivated no matter what.

Have you seen the national polling?  A lot of the right/center-right don't currently seem very motivated to vote against Biden, but it's easy to imagine then enthused to vote against Warren.

The types that would be enthused against Warren are going to come out for Trump regardless. Any woman Biden picks will be relentlessly demonized and you're naive if you're not counting on that.

And I'd say you're being naive if you think Warren doesn't occupy a special place in the right's fevered dreams (along with Sanders and the squad).

She (and they) do now because they are more known. But if you think a different woman Biden picks will be treated like him (an old white guy) you're naive.

No, you're naive.

Seriously, though, I'm not arguing that any woman would be treated like Biden--she won't.  The sexism that characterized Clinton's treatment will still be there whether Biden picks Warren, Harris, Duckworth, or whomever.  But it's not just sexism I'm talking about--Warren is an avatar of the Left in a way that other potential running mates aren't, and those kinds of narratives take time to establish.  Put Warren on the ticket and all those "Biden is just a Trojan Horse for the extremists" takes suddenly have a lot more heft with voters.  

You forget how well Sanders was polling in the GE. Having someone as "an avatar of the Left" means nothing by itself when Biden when the platform doesn't support the most scary policies. If the argument is "well he just can't pick a progressive, period", I would disagree. And Warren is not seen as far left as Sanders, AOC, or the rest of the squad.

Harris, Duckworth, et. al. are all plenty progressive and would be fine choices, so there's no reason to think that progressive values alone are enough to make someone ineligeable.  But Biden's whole campaign strategy is "don't antagonize or alienate moderates," and Warren has built her entire career on antagonizing and alienating moderates in ways the others just haven't.  Which works just fine in many contexts--it's made her a very effective reformer and Senator. But it would be a handicap in a presidential campaign.  Right now, Biden is winning and winning big. Why would he pick Warren and risk totally upending a winning strategy?

She has "built her entire career on antagonizing and alienating moderates"? That's a really objective characterization... Not. She's built her entire career fighting for the middle class against billionaires and fighting against corruption. Those are generally popular causes and moderates aren't going to be scared off by them. Most people know that there are deep problems with the way the country is run and Biden will do best by honestly running on the fact that structural change is needed. That will give him a substantive message to hang onto during a rocky campaign more than just "not Trump" and it will help him more in the long run.

Biden and pretty much every prominent Democratic office-holder have also "built entire careers fighting for the middle class against billionaires and fighting corruption."  I'm not here to slag Warren's ideology or motives--I'm just talking about affect.  Warren is confrontational and aggressive.  She's a fighter.  I love that about her and think it serves her really well as a legislator in a coalition-oriented body like Congress.  But it's a counterproductive trait as a presidential, or vice presidential, candidate.  I'm talking basic negative polarization:  mobilization is the flip side of polarization--when party activists are sharply divided by ideology and demography, what excites your side will be the very thing that energizes the other side.