cutshot818
Junior
2020 VT All-Rookie Team
Posts: 289
|
Post by cutshot818 on Aug 2, 2020 1:47:53 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by holidayhusker on Aug 2, 2020 4:01:26 GMT -5
One of them needs to be coherent, so
|
|
|
Post by geddyleeridesagain on Aug 2, 2020 12:58:03 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by n00b on Aug 2, 2020 14:24:05 GMT -5
Current betting odds on PredictIt
$0.54 Kamala Harris $0.21 Susan Rice $0.11 Karen Bass $0.09 Tammy Duckworth $0.07 Elizabeth Warren $0.05 Val Demmings
|
|
|
Post by cindra on Aug 2, 2020 14:36:45 GMT -5
Rumors are that Biden loves Harris but a lot of Democratic leadership wants someone else because they think she's too ambitious for the spot. Problem is that besides warren and maybe duckworth the other contenders have close to 0 name rec and don't have big electoral advantages
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2020 15:18:08 GMT -5
"Too ambitious" for a woman is what they mean. People are so damned sexist. They think she'll murder him?
|
|
|
Post by vup on Aug 2, 2020 15:23:13 GMT -5
Karen Bass had a Scientology video unearthed, so she is dunzo.
|
|
|
Post by mervinswerved on Aug 2, 2020 15:24:12 GMT -5
I don't see a single option which presents real electoral advantage. I actually think that's a good thing, it's much better for vice presidents to be seen as governing partners and/or potential successors rather than short-term vote getters.
|
|
|
Post by vup on Aug 2, 2020 15:24:14 GMT -5
My personal pick is Senator Elizabeth Warren.
|
|
|
Post by cindra on Aug 2, 2020 15:26:01 GMT -5
My personal pick is Senator Elizabeth Warren. Easily the best from an ideological balance perspective, but it would come off as especially tone-deaf from a racial lens.
|
|
|
Post by cindra on Aug 2, 2020 15:27:40 GMT -5
"Too ambitious" for a woman is what they mean. People are so damned sexist. They think she'll murder him? Eh, they've been in high-profile conflict before during the primary campaign. The school bussing and desegregation issue was maybe the biggest soundbite of the primarie. It's partially the same reason we didn't see an Obama-Clinton ticket in 2008. You don't want a VP who was actively antagonistic to the president even though they're mostly eye to eye on the issues.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2020 15:28:56 GMT -5
Has a VP pick ever provided electoral votes? That is, won a state for a Presidential candidate? Obviously can't be proven, but I have my doubts.
OTOH, there is a good chance this VP could end up President. Either during the first term or in 2024. It's an important pick.
Btw, was Obama ever definitively determined to be ineligible? THAT would have been a fun pick.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2020 15:31:26 GMT -5
"Too ambitious" for a woman is what they mean. People are so damned sexist. They think she'll murder him? Eh, they've been in high-profile conflict before during the primary campaign. The school bussing and desegregation issue was maybe the biggest soundbite of the primarie. It's partially the same reason we didn't see an Obama-Clinton ticket in 2008. You don't want a VP who was actively antagonistic to the president even though they're mostly eye to eye on the issues. Except it happens all the time. But God help you if you're a woman. Reagan picking Bush for starters. It's a huge double standard. Hillary's popularity plummeted when she actually ran for President. Why? It's the Catch-22 of being a woman politician.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2020 15:42:24 GMT -5
Warren would be my pick too, although I'd hate to see her out of the Senate. (My guess is she'd be up for a cabinet post anyhow. Which is another concern, true for all Dem Senators.)
|
|
|
Post by mervinswerved on Aug 2, 2020 15:44:29 GMT -5
Warren doesn't bring anything to the table at this point, plus she's also in her 70s. She certainly doesn't deliver any voters to a Biden coalition who weren't already in it.
|
|