The NEW Biden VP discussion thread
drummerboy said:
and just in time, a podcast discussing a new book called "Do Running Mates Matter"
https://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2020/05/lgm-podcast-vp2
The guest’s answer is mostly no — the possible exception being how the choice reflects on the presidential nominee’s qualities and competence — but someone else can always counter with “This time, with a 77-year-old nominee, is different.”
Interesting that both guest and host indirectly call the polling into question by describing voters as unreliable narrators of their own motives and discussing the prejudicial effect of simply asking them to think about the veep. So even if your campaign pollsters find the unicorn who gives you an extra five points in Michigan, you might want to think twice before resting your decision on the finding.
(Along similar lines, how your campaign conducts its polling raises interesting choices. The pro-Warren research by Stan Greenberg that STANV linked to didn’t actually ask about Warren, as far as I can tell from my reading. Greenberg asked battleground voters about their top issues, then decided that Warren’s platform best matched them — which doesn’t account for voters who aren’t crazy about Warren as a candidate even if they share her priorities. Another approach was taken by the new Morning Consult/Politico poll, which did ask about specific individuals. Warren led the possibilities with a plus-three-point edge in “much/somewhat more likely” versus “much/somewhat less likely” to vote for Biden. But it was a nationwide survey, it included only registered Democrats, and all the results were within the margin of error. Also, does it make sense to lump “much” and “somewhat” together in this situation, or does “much” deserve more weight? In which case Warren was minus four points.)
DaveSchmidt said:
The guest’s answer is mostly no — the possible exception being how the choice reflects on the presidential nominee’s qualities and competence — but someone else can always counter with “This time, with a 77-year-old nominee, is different.”
Interesting that both guest and host indirectly call the polling into question by describing voters as unreliable narrators of their own motives and discussing the prejudicial effect of simply asking them to think about the veep. So even if your campaign pollsters find the unicorn who gives you an extra five points in Michigan, you might want to think twice before resting your decision on the finding.
(Along similar lines, how your campaign conducts its polling raises interesting choices. The pro-Warren research by Stan Greenberg that STANV linked to didn’t actually ask about Warren, as far as I can tell from my reading. Greenberg asked battleground voters about their top issues, then decided that Warren’s platform best matched them — which doesn’t account for voters who aren’t crazy about Warren as a candidate even if they share her priorities. Another approach was taken by the new Morning Consult/Politico poll, which did ask about specific individuals. Warren led the possibilities with a plus-three-point edge in “much/somewhat more likely” versus “much/somewhat less likely” to vote for Biden. But it was a nationwide survey, it included only registered Democrats, and all the results were within the margin of error. Also, does it make sense to lump “much” and “somewhat” together in this situation, or does “much” deserve more weight? In which case Warren was minus four points.)
I think you're arguing something different than most of the other people here. I'm reading what you've written to say that Biden should be picking someone he wants to work with, and not pay much attention to electoral considerations. The people I'm addressing (at least whom I think I am), are suggesting candidates whom Biden "should" pick based on how they'll help him with voters. And my point is that if that's your criterion (bringing in more votes), it's probably better to do some polling to see if a VP helps at all (because typically it doesn't), and if it does, which particularly people do best. Otherwise, it's just guy speculation than a person from a particular demographic group or ideological wing of the party brings along like people. Which may or may not be true.
ml1 said:
I think you're arguing something different than most of the other people here. I'm reading what you've written to say that Biden should be picking someone he wants to work with, and not pay much attention to electoral considerations. The people I'm addressing (at least whom I think I am), are suggesting candidates whom Biden "should" pick based on how they'll help him with voters. And my point is that if that's your criterion (bringing in more votes), it's probably better to do some polling to see if a VP helps at all (because typically it doesn't), and if it does, which particularly people do best. Otherwise, it's just guy speculation than a person from a particular demographic group or ideological wing of the party brings along like people. Which may or may not be true.
To be clear, I’m not saying what I think Biden should do. While others here are basing their suggestions and guesses on who might help him electorally, my own reading of Biden is that he has other priorities in mind, so if you’d like to increase your chances of guessing right, in my opinion you’re better off not going down that path.
(I don’t share your “oy” to a “work with” emphasis, but I’m not making an argument either way.)
As for the polling, I’m simply raising some limitations that I see in its reliability and usefulness. As usual.
Speculation continues. Of course all it is is speculation.
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/31/joe-biden-vice-president-george-floyd-291063
STANV said:
Speculation continues. Of course all it is is speculation.
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/31/joe-biden-vice-president-george-floyd-291063
So let me get this straight. 4 men murdered a man but 3 women are going to pay the price. Sounds about right. By the time the Democrats are finished they will find a reason that a woman can't be on the ticket. Political correctness and all. Warren is already guilty of not being a woman of color. Can we reconsider Tulsi Gabbard? Aloha.
STANV said:
Speculation continues. Of course all it is is speculation.
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/31/joe-biden-vice-president-george-floyd-291063
It is really hard to understand the repercussions of real-time events in the middle of a crisis (actually two) when things change so fast. Also, we are very vulnerable as a country at the moment, with Corona, riots, and weak leadership. Don't be surprised if one of our enemies takes advantage of that, and some sort of an international crisis also pops up in the next few months. Or maybe it already has, who knows what Russia is up to with our elections.
Morganna said:
Political correctness and all. Warren is already guilty of not being a woman of color.
People are being presumed guilty and killed in America because they’re black. Is it political correctness to expect politicians, including Biden and his short-listers, to answer for their records? And how does the “guilt” of a U.S. senator whose white experience may (or may not) weigh against her chances of joining the Democratic ticket compare?
I'm not so sure a law-and-order choice for VP (either male OR female) was ever a good look for a Democratic presidential candidate in 2020. Especially one who already is having to explain his own votes on law and order issues in the 1990s.
DaveSchmidt said:
People are being presumed guilty and killed in America because they’re black. Is it political correctness to expect politicians, including Biden and his short-listers, to answer for their records? And how does the “guilt” of a U.S. senator whose white experience may (or may not) weigh against her chances of joining the Democratic ticket compare?
Heads up, this goes into a rant so understand that I'm losing it watching the cities burn. Here goes.
An example of records. Many of the people that I know on FB have been passing around a frenzied story that Klobuchar did not prosecute Chauvin. Nice women, Dems, sincere motives but it was false,they had it wrong but she was found guilty by FB. Big headlines, but something was off about it so I kept digging and sure enough Klobuchar was already sworn in as Senator, no longer the Prosecutor. Didn't stop them from arguing and insisting. And I have no idea what they will try to turn up about Harris or Demings but it sure seems like women get pretty scrutinized.
Warren is being disqualified on several shows, because now the argument is that with the current climate her being white doesn't suffice. Biden was grilled in an interview as to whether he was obligated to pick a candidate of color. That if he didn't people wouldn't turn out to vote. Truth is, I actually was for Cory Booker and Julian Castro but that's beside the point. The point is I'm sick of the Democratic party picking women apart. I actually am getting sick of the Democratic Party the more I engage in these political discussions both here and on FB.
On top of that , I'm turned off by some of the responses both here and on FB about the riots I wonder if female voters who are more skittish about anarchy and violence will start leaning towards the GOP. I'm thinking suburban moms with kids. Small business owners.I think Trump is letting Rome burn because he thinks this plays right into his narrative. Forget just open borders, now the Dems support anarchy
OK I'm done. I'll roll the stone back in front of my cave. If the rioters roll down South Orange Ave. don't say I didn't warn you.
=
The more I engage in these political discussions here, Morganna, the more I’m glad you’re around — rant or no rant.
Morganna said:
On top of that , I'm turned off by some of the responses both here and on FB about the riots I wonder if female voters who are more skittish about anarchy and violence will start leaning towards the GOP. I'm thinking suburban moms with kids. Small business owners.I think Trump is letting Rome burn because he thinks this plays right into his narrative. Forget just open borders, now the Dems support anarchy
This is a valid point, as while there videos of out of control cops, there are also videos of protestors beating the crap out of people and destroying small businesses, and some Democrats seem to only take issue with the first group.
the problem Democrats always have is that many people have no interest in nuanced arguments, and their opponents habitually make bad faith arguments about how Democrats promote criminality.
I'm not sure what the solution is, because it requires people to reject false narratives, and actually consider issues beyond surface observations. But if most people operated that way, there would be no successful right wing media, and certainly no President Trump.
Re Klobuchar: The 2006 police killing that involved Chauvin occurred just nine days before Klobuchar was elected senator, so accounts that say she was running for office at the time don’t convey how late in the campaign it was and how close she was to being a lame duck as county prosecutor. That said, the most thoughtful criticism of Klobuchar’s record that I’ve seen has focused not on Chauvin but on her years of relying on grand juries in police killings just like the 2006 and current cases — a practice that Klobuchar explains in the context of the times but that she says she, too, now regrets.
Morganna said:
OK I'm done. I'll roll the stone back in front of my cave. If the rioters roll down South Orange Ave. don't say I didn't warn you.
=
Few things would surprise me more than rioters streaming out of South Mountain Reservation and rolling down South Orange Avenue. 
As for my Tulsi Gabbard suggestion, I missed Paul's input so I friended him on FB. I'm thinking Tulsi may check off some of the boxes. She adds diversity since that is an issue that is being discussed and I get a Vegan VP who is female as well so I won't be complaining. I'm being creative and optimistic.
And I really just love the idea of listening to her wonderful voice saying Aloha.
You have a better chance of getting the VP slot than Tulsi does.
And you are way more qualified.
sbenois said:
You have a better chance of getting the VP slot than Tulsi does.
And you are way more qualified.
Thank you for the vote of confidence but Aloha sounds awful with a New York accent. Of course I could turn back the clock and go for "Ciao."
Watching Senator Harris just now. I'd love to see her be Biden's VP.
Morganna said:
As for my Tulsi Gabbard suggestion, I missed Paul's input so I friended him on FB. I'm thinking Tulsi may check off some of the boxes. She adds diversity since that is an issue that is being discussed and I get a Vegan VP who is female as well so I won't be complaining. I'm being creative and optimistic.
And I really just love the idea of listening to her wonderful voice saying Aloha.
Plus, she helps with the "Assad is my Homeboy" demographic.
Morganna said:
Watching Senator Harris just now. I'd love to see her be Biden's VP.
I haven't watched it but if we are talking about Black Women I am very impressed by Congresswoman Val Demings and DC Mayor Bowser
There is also the Mayor of Atlanta who endorsed Biden a year ago.
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/06/08/biden-veep-search-304854
STANV said:
There is also the Mayor of Atlanta who endorsed Biden a year ago.
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/06/08/biden-veep-search-304854
I like all 3 women, Demmings, would love to see her pull up on her Harley, been watching her all year, Recently Impressed with Bowser, Bottoms and I'd add Mayor of Chicago Lori Lightfoot, but for me, Sen. Harris has the wow factor. I've been mesmerized by her performances in the Senate. Her questioning of Barr, is a campaign ad. Her exchange with Kavanaugh. She's art. She's a last word woman. I can't imagine her ever reflecting on an exchange with a jerk and thinking "I wish I had said that", because of course , she did.
Morganna said:
As for my Tulsi Gabbard suggestion, I missed Paul's input so I friended him on FB. I'm thinking Tulsi may check off some of the boxes. She adds diversity since that is an issue that is being discussed and I get a Vegan VP who is female as well so I won't be complaining. I'm being creative and optimistic.
And I really just love the idea of listening to her wonderful voice saying Aloha.
Tulsi's previous work with a group promoting gay conversion therapy and anti gay marriage is not something I want in a VP's resume. For 6 years she spoke on behalf of the Alliance for Traditional Marriage and Values, an anti-gay political action committee her father founded, to pass an amendment giving the Hawaii state legislature the power to "reserve marriage to opposite-sex couples.
jamie said:
Tulsi's previous work with a group promoting gay conversion therapy and anti gay marriage is not something I want in a VP's resume. For 6 years she spoke on behalf of the Alliance for Traditional Marriage and Values, an anti-gay political action committee her father founded, to pass an amendment giving the Hawaii state legislature the power to "reserve marriage to opposite-sex couples.
No thanks, not another Pence
is anyone else getting multiple texts from Biden every day?
It's annoying.
jamie said:
Tulsi's previous work with a group promoting gay conversion therapy and anti gay marriage is not something I want in a VP's resume. For 6 years she spoke on behalf of the Alliance for Traditional Marriage and Values, an anti-gay political action committee her father founded, to pass an amendment giving the Hawaii state legislature the power to "reserve marriage to opposite-sex couples.
Yes, it was my flip response to the suggestion that Harris, Demmings, and Klobuchar would have their records scrutinized and that Warren was too white. Here was my first response, which was meant to exhibit my reliance on snark.
I have since seriously commented on what a great messenger Harris was this week. For me it is still Warren, and Harris as my top choices.
Morganna
STANV said:
Speculation continues. Of course all it is is speculation.
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/31/joe-biden-vice-president-george-floyd-291063
So let me get this straight. 4 men murdered a man but 3 women are going to pay the price. Sounds about right. By the time the Democrats are finished they will find a reason that a woman can't be on the ticket. Political correctness and all. Warren is already guilty of not being a woman of color. Can we reconsider Tulsi Gabbard? Aloha.
(My recent serious comment.)
Morganna
STANV said:
There is also the Mayor of Atlanta who endorsed Biden a year ago.
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/06/08/biden-veep-search-304854
I like all 3 women, Demmings, would love to see her pull up on her Harley, been watching her all year, Recently Impressed with Bowser, Bottoms and I'd add Mayor of Chicago Lori Lightfoot, but for me, Sen. Harris has the wow factor. I've been mesmerized by her performances in the Senate. Her questioning of Barr, is a campaign ad. Her exchange with Kavanaugh. She's art. She's a last word woman. I can't imagine her ever reflecting on an exchange with a jerk and thinking "I wish I had said that", because of course , she did.
Funny, I didn’t know a whole lot about Harris before the kavanaugh hearings but a lot of folks spoke highly of her, so I had high expectations. But ultimately I thought she was only so-so vs. kavanaugh. I thought klobuchar, who I knew even less about beforehand, was better.
And through the debates I thought Harris was again, only so-so. She had her moments, but overall I didn’t find her very impressive, and I still don’t. I think Abrams would be a stronger vp choice.
Different strokes for different folks I guess.
Smedley said:
Funny, I didn’t know a whole lot about Harris before the kavanaugh hearings but a lot of folks spoke highly of her, so I had high expectations. But ultimately I thought she was only so-so vs. kavanaugh. I thought klobuchar, who I knew even less about beforehand, was better.
And through the debates I thought Harris was again, only so-so. She had her moments, but overall I didn’t find her very impressive, and I still don’t. I think Abrams would be a stronger vp choice.
Different strokes for different folks I guess.
Did you watch her against Barr? I think you are right that different people just respond to different styles of communication. Here's a few minutes of Sen. Harris questioning Barr.
For Sale
Garage Sales
-
Huge Garage Sale Sale Date: May 4, 2024
More info
Free Items
Rentals
-
Huge Brand New construction Apartment in 2 family home with 4 bedrooms 3 bathrooms
4 Bd | 3Full Ba
$4,500
and just in time, a podcast discussing a new book called "Do Running Mates Matter"
https://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2020/05/lgm-podcast-vp2