Biden says he’ll announce a VP selection panel by May 1. That’d kind of be a waste if he had already picked someone, wouldn’t it?

DaveSchmidt said:

Biden says he’ll announce a VP selection panel by May 1. That’d kind of be a waste if he had already picked someone, wouldn’t it?

 No. Timing is important.

Jaytee said:

Morganna said:

If it's Harris, she didn't tip her hand in this morning's interview with Joy Reid.. She said she had no idea if she was being vetted so there's that.

I'm still betting on Warren.

 I agree, Liz is exhibiting symptoms of uncontrollable excitement....

 As a fan of Warren I doubt it. In fact do either one of you wish to bet actual money?

STANV said:

 As a fan of Warren I doubt it. In fact do either one of you wish to bet actual money?

 Why do you doubt it? Your positions on things seem very well thought out so I'm curious as to why you feel that she isn't the pick. Since we have some time before he announces I think it would be interesting to debate it.

I've turned it around and upside down and convinced myself that it is more than wishful thinking on my part. 

basil said:

Klinker dude, you are just for some reason too emotional about this. Relax. And then help Biden beat satan and his worshippers.

 Sorry dude, unwanted touching and rape just kind of bother me a little bit.  Crazy. I know.  

New evidence surfaces in Tara Reade allegation against Biden

Morganna said:

 Why do you doubt it? Your positions on things seem very well thought out so I'm curious as to why you feel that she isn't the pick. Since we have some time before he announces I think it would be interesting to debate it.

I've turned it around and upside down and convinced myself that it is more than wishful thinking on my part. 

 I think he has to go with a minority, an African-American or Latina, more likely the former. Or he has to go with a Midwesterner. I don't think a White Harvard Professor fills the bill.

Warren and Biden's temperaments don't strike me as a natural fit, and Biden has previously said he and his VP need to be "simpatico." Granted, my impressions are via the media filters; I've never met either Warren or Sanders in person. With that caveat in mind, they strike me as just a bit too far apart to make a smooth partnership.

STANV said:

 I think he has to go with a minority, an African-American or Latina, more likely the former. Or he has to go with a Midwesterner. I don't think a White Harvard Professor fills the bill.

 Factoring that in, I think that she has the best shot of bringing in the Progressive base, which might not be the case with Harris or Klobuchar. And she had  broader support among women than the other two candidates. 

Biden is associated with PA so not sure Klobuchar delivers that much more of the midwest.  He won partly because African Americans, helped by James Clyburn's  endorsement, delivered South Carolina. I think the Obama's will campaign for him as well.

So I'm thinking the most dissatisfied group that Biden needs to win over is the Progressive base, a slot best filled by Warren.

I don't think women are going to be happy if once again we support, rally for and donate to another female candidate who is discounted. Well at least this one won't be happy. My friend still hasn't taken her Warren sign down.

Morganna said:

STANV said:

 I think he has to go with a minority, an African-American or Latina, more likely the former. Or he has to go with a Midwesterner. I don't think a White Harvard Professor fills the bill.

 Factoring that in, I think that she has the best shot of bringing in the Progressive base, which might not be the case with Harris or Klobuchar. And she had  broader support among women than the other two candidates. 

Biden is associated with PA so not sure Klobuchar delivers that much more of the midwest.  He won partly because African Americans, helped by James Clyburn[s  endorsement, delivered South Carolina. I think the Obama's will campaign for him as well.

So I'm thinking the most dissatisfied group that Biden needs to win over is the Progressive base, a slot best filled by Warren.
 

I think you're right here. 

Klinker said:

 Sorry dude, unwanted touching and rape just kind of bother me a little bit.  Crazy. I know.  

New evidence surfaces in Tara Reade allegation against Biden

Two thoughts:

1. Rapist? Really?
2. Trump's army is going to produce a steady stream of dirt on whoever the Democratic nominee is. Some of it will be exaggerated and some of it will be plain old lies. None of it will be objectively true. Just look at him perform over the last 3+ years: if he feels he has a weak spot he will just brazenly accuse his opponent of the exact thing he is ******* up (like when he botched his response to Covid-19, the first thing he did was blame Obama on leaving behind a very bad response program for pandemics and he had done a tremendous job rebuilding that).

Trump very well knows he is a con man, a liar, and a cheat. He also knows he is a terrible business man (otherwise he would have disclosed his tax returns). He will just try to stick all these labels on Biden so he can say: see we are equivalent in that respect. I do not think you believe Trump and Biden are equally morally corrupt, but if you would seriously believe that, then you deserve to live in a country with a president like trump.

basil said:

Klinker said:

 Sorry dude, unwanted touching and rape just kind of bother me a little bit.  Crazy. I know.  

New evidence surfaces in Tara Reade allegation against Biden

Two thoughts:

1. Rapist? Really?

Yes.  Former Biden staffer Tara Reade says that Biden sexually assaulted her when she worked for him in the 1990s.  As is the often the case with these things, there isn't any physical evidence of a crime at this point but she did discuss it with several other people at the time so, at the very least, it is not something that is being invented just because Biden is running for President.  

This has been widely reported, in the New York Times and elsewhere,  I am a little surprised that you haven't heard about it 

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/26/politics/stacey-abrams-joe-biden-2020-election/index.html

Klinker said:

basil said:

Klinker said:

 Sorry dude, unwanted touching and rape just kind of bother me a little bit.  Crazy. I know.  

New evidence surfaces in Tara Reade allegation against Biden

Two thoughts:

1. Rapist? Really?

Yes.  Former Biden staffer Tara Reade says that Biden sexually assaulted her when she worked for him in the 1990s.  As is the often the case with these things, there isn't any physical evidence of a crime at this point but she did discuss it with several other people at the time so, at the very least, it is not something that is being invented just because Biden is running for President.  

This has been widely reported, in the New York Times and elsewhere,  I am a little surprised that you haven't heard about it 

The issue is not nearly as cut and dried as you are making it. Unfortunately Tara Reade doesn't seem to be the most reliable of accusers.

basil said:

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/26/politics/stacey-abrams-joe-biden-2020-election/index.html

 I guess she is entitled to change her position but this was her previous posture. Two quotes from 

STACEY ABRAMS SHOOTS DOWN THE BIDEN RUMOR: “YOU DON’T RUN FOR SECOND PLACE”

BY TINA NGUYEN

"During a press tour on Wednesday for her memoir, Stacey Abrams, the African-American state legislator who nearly won the Georgia governor’s race in 2018, repeatedly shot down rumors that she was joining Biden as a pre-emptive running mate. “I think you don’t run for second place,” Abrams said on The View. “If I’m going to enter a primary, then I’m going to enter a primary.” Her announcement was met with loud cheers."

"Ultimately, it took a no-holds-barred interview from Abrams to fully quash the rumors. And she delivered: not only did she suggest she would not be Biden’s running mate, but she went so far as to propose that, in this political moment, she could beat him in a primary. “I do not know if I’m running. I’m thinking about everything,” she said on The View. “Part of my opportunity right now is that I have a number of options I didn’t know about before. The Senate race, running for governor again—possibly running for president.”

basil said:

Two thoughts:

1. Rapist? Really?

Slate:Two People Recall Tara Reade Describing Assault or Harassment by Joe Biden

Really....right now we have to stop the freakin bleeding and get this country into the ICU, stabilize it then we move to a recovery room. You harping on negative issues because you hate someone, will flat line this country. Suck it up and fall in line. 2024 we will figure out what we have to do. We don’t need any saboteurs in the tent. Can’t you look at the big picture objectively? Try it sometimes.

Really ... was that last comment supposed to be persuasive?

Jaytee said:

Really....right now we have to stop the freakin bleeding and get this country into the ICU, stabilize it then we move to a recovery room. You harping on negative issues because you hate someone, will flat line this country. Suck it up and fall in line. 2024 we will figure out what we have to do. We don’t need any saboteurs in the tent. Can’t you look at the big picture objectively? Try it sometimes.

 Yeah, maybe we should just sweep it under the rug....  I mean, its just a woman.  

Klinker said:

 Yeah, maybe we should just sweep it under the rug....  I mean, its just a woman.  

 Can Biden be replaced now? What is it that you want? You would prefer 4 more years of this madness? You are basically doing trump’s work for him. Isn’t that enough to make you see the big picture instead of going on and on on this. 

DaveSchmidt said:

Really ... was that last comment supposed to be persuasive?

 Do you come here with the intention of persuading people? I don’t. 

Jaytee said:

 Do you come here with the intention of persuading people? I don’t. 

 Just offending them, apparently.

Jaytee said:

 Can Biden be replaced now? What is it that you want? You would prefer 4 more years of this madness? You are basically doing trump’s work for him. Isn’t that enough to make you see the big picture instead of going on and on on this. 

 We have some time to before the convention.  Who knows, perhaps this will be resolved by then.  That said, if by August it is clear that Biden is not a viable candidate, then yes, he will have to be replaced.  Its either that or to move forward to certain defeat in November and I get the sense you aren't so keen on that prospect.

As to the general question of whether issues of rape and sexual assault ought to be taken seriously even when the are inconvenient, I think history will judge us by how we respond.

Jaytee said:

Do you come here with the intention of persuading people? I don’t.

Oh. Your imperatives (suck it up, fall in line, look at the big picture, try it) were a series of commands, not suggestions. Sorry, I misunderstood.

Not a good look for Stacy Abrams.

CNN: Stacey Abrams on sexual assault allegation against former VP: 'I believe Joe Biden'

"Abrams, who has made a public and direct pitch to be Biden's running mate, told CNN's Don Lemon on "CNN Tonight."

"The New York Times did a deep investigation and they found that the accusation was not credible. I believe Joe Biden." Her comments come as Reade's allegation gains new attention while Biden -- now the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee -- prepares to take on President Donald Trump in the general election. The Times report that Abrams referred to did not make a determination on whether Reade's allegation was credible.

Did Abrams not understand the Times report or is she purposefully mischaracterizing its conclusions?  

Klinker said:

Not a good look for Stacy Abrams.

CNN: Stacey Abrams on sexual assault allegation against former VP: 'I believe Joe Biden'

"Abrams, who has made a public and direct pitch to be Biden's running mate, told CNN's Don Lemon on "CNN Tonight."

"The New York Times did a deep investigation and they found that the accusation was not credible. I believe Joe Biden." Her comments come as Reade's allegation gains new attention while Biden -- now the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee -- prepares to take on President Donald Trump in the general election. The Times report that Abrams referred to did not make a determination on whether Reade's allegation was credible.

Did Abrams not understand the Times report or is she purposefully mischaracterizing its conclusions?  

I don't think Abrams is different from any other person who accepts Biden's denial.

nohero said:

I don't think Abrams is different from any other person who accepts Biden's denial.

 The others are not actively campaigning to be the VP pick.

OTOH Klinker is one of those predisposed to not believe the denial.

nohero said:

I don't think Abrams is different from any other person who accepts Biden's denial.

 The question wasn't whether she believed the woman, the question was whether she understood the article and knowingly lied about its conclusion.  

The presumptive nominee has a long been known for his problematic relationship with facts, do we really seen a veep who is simpatico with him in this regard?

Klinker said:

 The question wasn't whether she believed the woman, the question was whether she understood the article and knowingly lied about its conclusion.  

The presumptive nominee has a long been known for his problematic relationship with facts, do we really seen a veep who is simpatico with him in this regard?

You have to admit you are a bit biased against Biden (I am being very generous here)

Klinker said:

nohero said:

I don't think Abrams is different from any other person who accepts Biden's denial.

 The question wasn't whether she believed the woman, the question was whether she understood the article and knowingly lied about its conclusion.  

Or she actually read it and understood it very well.   

nohero said:

Klinker said:

nohero said:

I don't think Abrams is different from any other person who accepts Biden's denial.

 The question wasn't whether she believed the woman, the question was whether she understood the article and knowingly lied about its conclusion.  

Or she actually read it and understood it very well.   

Yeah, while the article may not have explicitly said that the charge is unsupported, it was clearly kind of skeptical. Abrams' characterization of the article is not unreasonable.