Why Jared Polis will be Harris's running mate in 2024
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 19, 2024, 05:17:37 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Presidential Election Trends (Moderator: 100% pro-life no matter what)
  Why Jared Polis will be Harris's running mate in 2024
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]
Author Topic: Why Jared Polis will be Harris's running mate in 2024  (Read 1976 times)
Heebie Jeebie
jeb_arlo
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,183
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: September 13, 2020, 12:43:33 PM »

Roy Cooper would be 67 on election day 2024, 75 in 2032 when he'd be expected to top the ticket. He's too old to be a viable pick.

Who said he had to run in 2032 in his own right?

That's the whole job of the vice president--be prepared to lead the country and the party if and when the sitting president can no longer do so. 

Well, yes. But just because you serve as vice doesn't mean you're obligated to run in an election in your own right afterwards. Go ask Dick Cheney.

Bush was a Washington novice and Cheney had decades of Washington insider experience and connections, so I can kind of understand how he was a reasonable pick back in 2000.  He was actually prepared to govern in a way that Bush wasn't.  Cooper would bring none of that to a Harris administration--his entire public career has been confined to North Carolina.  Choosing Cooper as a running mate would be an entirely political calculation, and not an especially good one at that.

To be clear, I like Cooper and I hope he continues to hold some future office once his governorship is over.  He's just not a good pick for the national ticket, especially when there are better options out there (Polis!). 

I'd like to point out Biden was picked under the assumption he wouldn't seek the Presidency much like Cheney.

In this instance, Obama failed at one of his most basic responsibilities as leader of the Democratic party--picking a viable successor.  Choosing Biden was a way of punting on the responsibility, and it was a bad decision.  If Obama wanted Clinton to be his successor, he should have chosen her for the 2008 ticket.  But at the time, Obama (like everyone else) correctly recognized that Clinton would be an electoral liability.  Had he picked Tim Kaine as he should have, we'd be all be preparing for a fourth consecutive Democratic administration.
Logged
Orwell
JacksonHitchcock
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,413
United States
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: September 13, 2020, 12:48:32 PM »

Roy Cooper would be 67 on election day 2024, 75 in 2032 when he'd be expected to top the ticket. He's too old to be a viable pick.

Who said he had to run in 2032 in his own right?

That's the whole job of the vice president--be prepared to lead the country and the party if and when the sitting president can no longer do so. 

Well, yes. But just because you serve as vice doesn't mean you're obligated to run in an election in your own right afterwards. Go ask Dick Cheney.

Bush was a Washington novice and Cheney had decades of Washington insider experience and connections, so I can kind of understand how he was a reasonable pick back in 2000.  He was actually prepared to govern in a way that Bush wasn't.  Cooper would bring none of that to a Harris administration--his entire public career has been confined to North Carolina.  Choosing Cooper as a running mate would be an entirely political calculation, and not an especially good one at that.

To be clear, I like Cooper and I hope he continues to hold some future office once his governorship is over.  He's just not a good pick for the national ticket, especially when there are better options out there (Polis!). 

I'd like to point out Biden was picked under the assumption he wouldn't seek the Presidency much like Cheney.

In this instance, Obama failed at one of his most basic responsibilities as leader of the Democratic party--picking a viable successor.  Choosing Biden was a way of punting on the responsibility, and it was a bad decision.  If Obama wanted Clinton to be his successor, he should have chosen her for the 2008 ticket.  But at the time, Obama (like everyone else) correctly recognized that Clinton would be an electoral liability.  Had he picked Tim Kaine as he should have, we'd be all be preparing for a fourth consecutive Democratic administration.

Tim Kaine was the 3rd option, it was basically a 50/50 tossup between Bayh and Biden and he picked Biden.
Logged
Heebie Jeebie
jeb_arlo
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,183
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: September 13, 2020, 12:58:34 PM »

Roy Cooper would be 67 on election day 2024, 75 in 2032 when he'd be expected to top the ticket. He's too old to be a viable pick.

Who said he had to run in 2032 in his own right?

That's the whole job of the vice president--be prepared to lead the country and the party if and when the sitting president can no longer do so. 

Well, yes. But just because you serve as vice doesn't mean you're obligated to run in an election in your own right afterwards. Go ask Dick Cheney.

Bush was a Washington novice and Cheney had decades of Washington insider experience and connections, so I can kind of understand how he was a reasonable pick back in 2000.  He was actually prepared to govern in a way that Bush wasn't.  Cooper would bring none of that to a Harris administration--his entire public career has been confined to North Carolina.  Choosing Cooper as a running mate would be an entirely political calculation, and not an especially good one at that.

To be clear, I like Cooper and I hope he continues to hold some future office once his governorship is over.  He's just not a good pick for the national ticket, especially when there are better options out there (Polis!). 

I'd like to point out Biden was picked under the assumption he wouldn't seek the Presidency much like Cheney.

In this instance, Obama failed at one of his most basic responsibilities as leader of the Democratic party--picking a viable successor.  Choosing Biden was a way of punting on the responsibility, and it was a bad decision.  If Obama wanted Clinton to be his successor, he should have chosen her for the 2008 ticket.  But at the time, Obama (like everyone else) correctly recognized that Clinton would be an electoral liability.  Had he picked Tim Kaine as he should have, we'd be all be preparing for a fourth consecutive Democratic administration.

Tim Kaine was the 3rd option, it was basically a 50/50 tossup between Bayh and Biden and he picked Biden.

Yes, and Kaine was an objectively better choice than either of those two.  Regardless, my point is that a nominee has a responsibility to plan for the future of their party.  A good veep choice is far and away the best method of ensuring an orderly and successful transfer of leadership.
Logged
It’s so Joever
Forumlurker161
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,985


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: September 13, 2020, 02:00:19 PM »

Please no, please no, please no, please no, please no.
Logged
LabourJersey
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,186
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: September 14, 2020, 01:37:00 PM »

Polis seems like a random candidate. IIRC he only won the race cause he self-funded with his huge net worth.

If you're gonna pick a wealthy Dem governor, might as well pick Phil Murphy. For all of his flaws, Murphy's handled COVID better than Polis from what I gather
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.037 seconds with 11 queries.