2020 Presidential Election -- Biden v Trump: Sleepy Joe vs Dopey Don [Results begin on page 409]

[Snake Diggity 4614]

54 minutes ago, Red Five said:

He already said he’s picking a woman.

I think that makes it highly likely he picks a woman, but I don’t think it makes it a guarantee.

[Snake Diggity 4614]

53 minutes ago, Pancho said:

He’s already said it will be a woman, and there’s no reason to believe that he will go back on his word.  So all males on this list should be taken off.

Someone yesterday (CNN???) reported the Biden camp said they won’t even start the vetting until July, which we all know vetting has essentially already started. 

It could probably be one of the following:

Warren

Klo

Kamala

Whitmer

Abrams

Demmings

Cortez-Masto 

Lujan-Grisham

Given Biden’s age, I just don’t see him picking someone short on experience, not just on governance but also on winning elections.  To me that makes Abrams, Demmings, or Lujan-Grisham tough sells.  Whitmer and Masto could also be put in that category.  I also think it’s unlikely he picks another septuagenarian, which takes out Warren, not to mention their policies are pretty far apart.

Kamala Harris is to me the obvious choice.  She’s female, black, super smart, and her policies line up pretty well with Biden.  Only detraction from her merit is that she’s not from a swing state.  But being African American will probably make a bigger difference in places like Michigan (Detroit), so it’s pretty easy to overlook.  Add in that she ran a pretty solid primary and she seems the most “ready to be president” of the ladies on the short list.  Klobuchar is another obvious choice but she doesn’t move the needle much when it comes to the delegate count, since she’s not going to do much to draw out the black voters and she isn’t going to be the difference in any purple areas.

I know he said he will pick a woman, and there would be tremendous blowback if he went back on that, but I can envision a scenario where he get thru significant vetting and changes his mind.  I think Brown or Booker would be fine VP candidates.

[Pancho 44486]

Yeah, he's not going to all of a sudden NOT pick a woman after stating it on national tv during a debate.  There would be nothing that could justify this and allow him to get away with it. 

[Red Five 40665]

Yeah he’d get fucking hammered, deservedly. He’s locked in to it now.

[bad_teammate 13132]

Who he picks makes no difference to me with regard to my vote, but committing to identity signifiers is a stupid thing for any candidate to do.

[Message Board User 12389]

17 minutes ago, Snake Diggity said:

I think that makes it highly likely he picks a woman, but I don’t think it makes it a guarantee.

It is as guaranteed as anything in politics - Biden picks a woman.  Not even worth debating. 

[henrygandorf 29177]

4 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Who he picks makes no difference to me with regard to my vote, but committing to identity signifiers is a stupid thing for any candidate to do.

agreed, in theory.  but this doesn't fall under "signifier" category.  this falls under "if you make a declarative statement on national tv and then do the opposite, you will get clobbered in politics" category.  i mean, if you're a democrat.

he's an old, white man who beat out another old, white man to get the nomination.  if polling is any indicator, women will be the reason biden wins in november.  this would be a slap in the face, especially considering the amount of qualified female candidates.

[Hank Kingsley 20707]

I hope it's Kamala, mainly to watch the #KHive go to war with MAGA Twitter. 

 

[gmr548 16516]

I voted Warren but she's a bad VP pick. Old, Republican governor picks her successor, objectively terrible political instincts.

I don't really care who the running mate is ad long as they were born 1970 or later. If I had to guess it's Whitmer or Abrams - Biden seems the type to buy that running mates help you in their states even though that's patently false. I do think someone with more experience than Abrams would be ideal, but her selection would mean he's actually serious about listening to the black community and to progressives, which is something.

[bad_teammate 13132]

Quote

Abrams ... progressives

what?

Abrams is not a progressive Democrat.

 

[Snake Diggity 4614]

11 minutes ago, gmr548 said:

I voted Warren but she's a bad VP pick. Old, Republican governor picks her successor, objectively terrible political instincts.

I don't really care who the running mate is ad long as they were born 1970 or later. If I had to guess it's Whitmer or Abrams - Biden seems the type to buy that running mates help you in their states even though that's patently false. I do think someone with more experience than Abrams would be ideal, but her selection would mean he's actually serious about listening to the black community and to progressives, which is something.

I get that Abrams is black, female, highly educated, and from a potential swing state.  But she has never held office above State Rep.  How is she qualified to be VP, especially considering Biden is old as fuck?  

[gmr548 16516]

Abrams ... progressives

what?
Abrams is not a progressive Democrat.
 
She's not Bernie but she's more progressive than Whitmer, Demmings, etc. and a hell of a lot more so than Biden. Giving a the nod to a younger black candidate who isn't also a third way Democrat opposed to Medicare for all would be better than, well, going with such a person.

No one's voting or not voting based on VP anyway.

I get that Abrams is black, female, highly educated, and from a potential swing state.  But she has never held office above State Rep.  How is she qualified to be VP, especially considering Biden is old as fuck?  

The American electorate doesn't care. No vote is swinging because Abrams doesn't have the right experience to be VP.

[thepop 4409]

11 minutes ago, Snake Diggity said:

I get that Abrams is black, female, highly educated, and from a potential swing state.  But she has never held office above State Rep.  How is she qualified to be VP, especially considering Biden is old as fuck?  

She’s not, but being qualified seems to matter little these days.

[bad_teammate 13132]

5 minutes ago, gmr548 said:

She's not Bernie but she's more progressive than Whitmer, Demmings, etc. and a hell of a lot more so than Biden.

Based on what? Genuinely curious. From what I've read about her record she's a bog-standard centrist Democrat with the kind of identifiers that make white liberals very excited.

[David Dennison 18659]

Reminder kids: it's a binary choice no matter what.

[LCHorn 2585]

15 minutes ago, gmr548 said:

what?
Abrams is not a progressive Democrat.
 
She's not Bernie but she's more progressive than Whitmer, Demmings, etc. and a hell of a lot more so than Biden. Giving a the nod to a younger black candidate who isn't also a third way Democrat opposed to Medicare for all would be better than, well, going with such a person.

No one's voting or not voting based on VP anyway.
The American electorate doesn't care. No vote is swinging because Abrams doesn't have the right experience to be VP.

I actually disagree-I think there’s going to be a not insignificant contingent of “hold your nose and vote for Biden” swing voters that will very easily jump off if they are scared of his running mate.  Might not be such an issue if Biden wasn’t so fucking old.

[henrygandorf 29177]

is julia louis-dreyfus completely off the table?

[gmr548 16516]

Based on what? Genuinely curious. From what I've read about her record she's a bog-standard centrist Democrat with the kind of identifiers that make white liberals very excited.

I don't really want to get in a pissing match over this to be honest. Based on a quick Google, her efforts surrounding voting rights are as or more progressive as anything in the record of any other prominent VP candidate, except Warren I guess, but I'd be surprised if he went that route. Whitmer is on record as being anti MFA. Demmings is a career cop and is in the New Democrat caucus. Fudge intervened for the abuser in a pretty harsh domestic violence case.

 

Ultimately I don't think it matters at all either way. So with that said, I apologize and concede you're correct. Edit: I can't edit my post now but consider the word "progressives" removed.

 

 

 

 

 

[Biff Tannen 45497]

3 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

is julia louis-dreyfus completely off the table?

She would be on the table for me.  In various positions.  I'll be in my bunk.

[gmr548 16516]

I actually disagree-I think there’s going to be a not insignificant contingent of “hold your nose and vote for Biden” swing voters that will very easily jump off if they are scared of his running mate.  Might not be such an issue if Biden wasn’t so fucking old.

That'd be the first time a VP candidate swung any meaningful portion of the vote in modern history. Will the number be literally zero? No, probably not, it's a big country. But overall the environment is so partisan, and Trump is so polarizing, that the only thing Biden could to to fuck up the VP slot is nominate Don Jr.

And the hypothetical voter you referenced isn't scared off. If Stacey Abrams or whoever as VP is their reason to vote for Trump they were looking for any reason to vote Trump. 95 plus percent of them will find some reason so I just count them as Trump voters already.

[henrygandorf 29177]

23 minutes ago, gmr548 said:

And the hypothetical voter you referenced isn't scared off. If Stacey Abrams or whoever as VP is their reason to vote for Trump they were looking for any reason to vote Trump. 95 plus percent of them will find some reason so I just count them as Trump voters already.

this.  if someone claims the vp choice made them decide against voting biden, they were never going to anyway.

[Snake Diggity 4614]

40 minutes ago, LCHorn said:

I actually disagree-I think there’s going to be a not insignificant contingent of “hold your nose and vote for Biden” swing voters that will very easily jump off if they are scared of his running mate.  Might not be such an issue if Biden wasn’t so fucking old.

This this this.  The VP isn’t going to make a difference in any voter choosing Biden vs Trump, but I believe the VP could absolutely make a meaningful difference in certain people voting vs not voting.

Edited April 24, 2020 by Snake Diggity

[henrygandorf 29177]

1 minute ago, Snake Diggity said:

This this this.  The VP isn’t going to make a difference in any voter choosing Biden vs Trump, but I believe the VP could absolutely make a meaningful difference in certain people voting vs not voting.

so who is that polarizing person?

[Patrick Bateman 3903]

1 hour ago, Snake Diggity said:

I get that Abrams is black, female, highly educated, and from a potential swing state.  But she has never held office above State Rep.  How is she qualified to be VP, especially considering Biden is old as fuck?  

It's her biggest drawback.  It could actually backfire on Biden if he takes Abrams as there are already questions about his health and she's fairly unqualified on a national scene.  It's why Demmings, if you want an African American from a swing state makes more sense and she has law enforcement experience.  

Harris make sense on a lot of levels except for helping anywhere although we've already been over how little a VP choice helps overall.  Duckworth and Cortez-Masto makes sense as well.  I think if it weren't a Governor appointed replacement, Warren would be the pick, but with the Senate in play, they probably don't want to give up her seat.  Perhaps Senate Majority leader if they do take it because Chuck is meh.

 

Edited April 24, 2020 by Patrick Bateman

[Hank Kingsley 20707]

52 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

so who is that polarizing person?

Klobuchar. 

 

Look, Kamala is the right answer here for VP. 

- She's qualified for the position

- She's qualified to take over if something happens health-wise to Biden

- She has an aggressive and excitable online base that can hold their own vs. MAGA Twitter/Facebook 

- Further displays the Dem consolidation and rallying together after Kamala vs. Joe drama in 1st debate

- I think most black voters and women will be happy enough with her as the VP pick

- She has high name recognition

- She can hold her own in debates with Pence

 

 

Edited April 24, 2020 by Hank Kingsley

[Fudge Nuggets 19151]

2 hours ago, Snake Diggity said:

But she has never held office above State Rep.  How is she qualified to be VP, especially considering Biden is old as fuck?  

You are aware of who currently resides in the White House, right?

[gmr548 16516]

This this this.  The VP isn’t going to make a difference in any voter choosing Biden vs Trump, but I believe the VP could absolutely make a meaningful difference in certain people voting vs not voting.

Based on what?

[Fudge Nuggets 19151]

1 hour ago, bad_teammate said:

Based on what? Genuinely curious. From what I've read about her record she's a bog-standard centrist Democrat with the kind of identifiers that make white liberals very excited.

One of these days you are going to wake up and realize America is not a progressive country.  I mean, sure it would be great if it was, but it isn’t and probably won’t be for a long time.

[gmr548 16516]

Klobuchar. 

 

Look, Kamala is the right answer here for VP. 

- She's qualified for the position

- She's qualified to take over if something happens health-wise to Biden

- She has an aggressive and excitable online base that can hold their own vs. MAGA Twitter/Facebook 

- Further displays the Dem consolidation and rallying together after Kamala vs. Joe drama in 1st debate

- I think most black voters and women will be happy enough with her as the VP pick

- She has high name recognition

- She can hold her own in debates with Pence

 

 

I'm surprised she isn't getting more traction to get honest. She doesn't have a significant weakness as a VP pick. For whatever reason dems seem to want to go elsewhere.

 

[Fudge Nuggets 19151]

1 hour ago, gmr548 said:

Fudge intervened for the abuser in a pretty harsh domestic violence case.

 

 

I did no such thing, wait what were we discussing?

[Biff Tannen 45497]

2 minutes ago, gmr548 said:

I'm surprised she isn't getting more traction to get honest. She doesn't have a significant weakness as a VP pick. For whatever reason dems seem to want to go elsewhere.

 

Her significant weakness is she is unlikeable as fuck. She’s a D version of a Karen. 

[Fudge Nuggets 19151]

1 hour ago, gmr548 said:

That'd be the first time a VP candidate swung any meaningful portion of the vote in modern history. Will the number be literally zero? No, probably not, it's a big country. But overall the environment is so partisan, and Trump is so polarizing, that the only thing Biden could to to fuck up the VP slot is nominate Don Jr.

And the hypothetical voter you referenced isn't scared off. If Stacey Abrams or whoever as VP is their reason to vote for Trump they were looking for any reason to vote Trump. 95 plus percent of them will find some reason so I just count them as Trump voters already.

I think Caribou Barbie definitely swung some voters to Obama.  I also think he was going to win any way, but I remember the discussions about having that lunatic “one heartbeat away”.

[Bama Chick 28596]

[bad_teammate 13132]

27 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

One of these days you are going to wake up and realize America is not a progressive country.  I mean, sure it would be great if it was, but it isn’t and probably won’t be for a long time.

I have no idea what you're responding to or trying to say here.

Are you saying that people should only have personal beliefs that match the prevailing cultural ideology?

Do you even know what you're saying or why you say it?

wut?

[Fudge Nuggets 19151]

1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

I have no idea what you're responding to or trying to say here.

Are you saying that people should only have personal beliefs that match the prevailing cultural ideology?

Do you even know what you're saying or why you say it?

wut?

I just find it strange that you get so fired up when things break the way that most Dems that aren’t on the lunatic fringe prefer.  Those of us in the Warren camp may not be thrilled with Biden, but ffs we aren’t going out of our way to shit on the presumptive nominee 24/7.

Pick your moment, bro.  And this election ain’t the time for that shit.

[tantric superman 4667]

I laugh at all of you, how your absolutely silly and asinine ignorance is laid bare for all to witness.

I despise you.  My contempt knows no bounds.

[bad_teammate 13132]

6 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

I just find it strange that you get so fired up when things break the way that most Dems that aren’t on the lunatic fringe prefer.  

Is what you're responding to an example of me being "fired up"? Doesn't seem very fired up to me.

Quote

Those of us in the Warren camp may not be thrilled with Biden, but ffs we aren’t going out of our way to shit on the presumptive nominee 24/7.

At this point, what is "the Warren camp"? Serious question. What does that even mean?

Quote

Pick your moment, bro.  And this election ain’t the time for that shit.

Is any election?

[gmr548 16516]

I think Caribou Barbie definitely swung some voters to Obama.  I also think he was going to win any way, but I remember the discussions about having that lunatic “one heartbeat away”.

1.) Posrep for Caribou Barbie. Palin didn't change the outcome of that election at all. Not in any state, and not nationally. A shit for brains evangelical like her is VP right now. America doesn't and didn't care about that. Obama was cruising to a win. You remember those conversations because you associate with people with IQs over 80 that weren't voting R after eight years of Bush.

 

2.) Politics have changed. There's no one Biden could put up and people would say "Gee I don't know if we could risk this potentially unqualified person inheriting the presidency" and follow that up with voting for Donald Trump.

 

[Fudge Nuggets 19151]

6 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Is what you're responding to an example of me being "fired up"? Doesn't seem very fired up to me.

No, it’s your entire body of work.

6 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

At this point, what is "the Warren camp"? Serious question. What does that even mean?

Those of us that voted for or otherwise supported Warren in the primary, don’t be stupid.

7 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Is any election?

Yes, after the GOP is basically blackballed from mainstream society.

[bad_teammate 13132]

35 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

No, it’s your entire body of work.

lol ok so you're just trolling based on past hurt feelings

cool

Quote

Those of us that voted for or otherwise supported Warren in the primary, don’t be stupid.

Yes, there was a Warren camp, but I'm asking what it means to be that now? What relevance does that have to anything happening right now?

Quote

Yes, after the GOP is basically blackballed from mainstream society.

This is a child's thinking.

 

[Fudge Nuggets 19151]

7 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

lol ok so you're just trolling based on past hurt feelings

cool

 

No hurt feelings here because as long as dotard is removed from office I don’t care.  You seem to have other thoughts so, yeah... cool.

 

7 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Yes, there was a Warren camp, but I'm asking what it means to be that now? What relevance does that have to anything happening right now?

It means we sucked it up when our preferred candidate lost.  Something the Bernie Bros could learn from, but I won’t hold my breath. 

Guess I could have been more specific by saying those of those that were in the Warren camp. But I will bet you anything that Warren has more influence in a Biden admin than Bernie ever will.

Edited April 25, 2020 by Fudge Nuggets

[Snake Diggity 4614]

2 hours ago, henrygandorf said:

so who is that polarizing person?

 

1 hour ago, gmr548 said:

Based on what?

I am guessing at what will cause action from people who ordinarily don’t vote (but would lean left if they did).  These are mostly blacks, but also apathetic young people and jaded centrists.  Any African American VP candidate has a chance to bring out extra black voters.  I’m not sure if there is a viable VP candidate who could excite those other 2 groups enough.  I wonder how an AOC VP pick would be received.  Would definitely piss off the Trump base, possibly enough to be dangerous.

[Fudge Nuggets 19151]

7 minutes ago, Snake Diggity said:

 

I am guessing at what will cause action from people who ordinarily don’t vote (but would lean left if they did).  These are mostly blacks, but also apathetic young people and jaded centrists.  Any African American VP candidate has a chance to bring out extra black voters.  I’m not sure if there is a viable VP candidate who could excite those other 2 groups enough.  I wonder how an AOC VP pick would be received.  Would definitely piss off the Trump base, possibly enough to be dangerous.

AOC is not eligible to run as VP.

[gmr548 16516]

I am guessing at what will cause action from people who ordinarily don’t vote (but would lean left if they did).  These are mostly blacks, but also apathetic young people and jaded centrists.  Any African American VP candidate has a chance to bring out extra black voters.  I’m not sure if there is a viable VP candidate who could excite those other 2 groups enough.  I wonder how an AOC VP pick would be received.  Would definitely piss off the Trump base, possibly enough to be dangerous.

Well I can't really argue an unsupported guess, so, yeah.

Voter enthusiasm is at all time highs already so low hanging fruit has already been picked. We've never tested that theory on a black VP candidate so I suppose it's possible. With the contrast between Trump and Biden I'd think any bump is pretty muted. A VP, something no one cares about, is not going to motivate apathetic - which means they don't care - young voters. We know that in general VP candidates have very little impact on voter preference, and we know the electorate is already very engaged, so I'm pretty confident there aren't a bunch of independent, young, or blck voters waiting for Biden to make his VP pick of all things to decide whether or not they'll vote. It just doesn't check out that a significant chunk of the 40 percent or so of the country that's remained blissfully apolitical since 2016 is going to be moved by... Joe Biden's running mate? Most people that aren't decided by now don't even pay attention til labor day.

AOC is not old enough to be VP. I mean that literally, she's under 35.

[Larry T. Spider 1741]

The biggest problem for kamala is having to walk back calling Biden a racist. In every other way she is the right pick. AND it’s not like her comments about racism are going to shift people to trump. I say go with her because nobody else will check as many boxes.

[Spankytoes 1736]

2 hours ago, gmr548 said:

I'm surprised she isn't getting more traction to get honest. She doesn't have a significant weakness as a VP pick. For whatever reason dems seem to want to go elsewhere.

 

Biden should totally pick her. She’s a slam dunk choice. Definitely the right call. Do it

[Spankytoes 1736]

3 hours ago, henrygandorf said:

this.  if someone claims the vp choice made them decide against voting biden, they were never going to anyway.

It’s like Sarah Palin and the “she’s one heartbeat away from the Presidency” arguments never happened.
 

Edit: Someone else made this argument. Should have scrolled down 

Edited April 25, 2020 by Spankytoes

[Ghost of LL 15492]

1 hour ago, Spankytoes said:

It’s like Sarah Palin and the “she’s one heartbeat away from the Presidency” arguments never happened.
 

Edit: Someone else made this argument. Should have scrolled down 

Man, what are you doing on a Friday night in here shitposting?  Go get yourself some bourbon and chase it with a shot of bleach to kill the 'Rona.  I mean, get the weekend started off right.

[Bateshorn 9905]

If the elections of 1840 and 1864 tell us anything:  pick a Vice President who is capable of doing the job, and most importantly:  WILL CARRY ON YOUR VISION OF GOVERNANCE.

Edited April 25, 2020 by Bateshorn

[Larry T. Spider 1741]

1 hour ago, Bateshorn said:

If the elections of 1840 and 1864 tell us anything:  pick a Vice President who is capable of doing the job, and most importantly:  WILL CARRY ON YOUR VISION OF GOVERNANCE.

I thought I was reading an army brat post there for a sec