Jump to content

[Harris+Walz] The 2024 DNC: TURN DOWN FOR WHAT?!

Bullneck

By Bullneck
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 5.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Creasy Bear
Creasy Bear

If she “wins” it will officially signal the fall of the modern Roman Empire. We had a good run though!

Creasy Bear
Creasy Bear

C’mon man. Kamala? Don’t fear. Don’t respect. She’s garbage. This is all fake. But if she’s elected, this country is done for. Too bad. But maybe that is what we deserve.

Okie State
Okie State

Working with others even if you disagree with them, standing up for the less fortunate, admitting mistakes and learning from them, respecting women, being a positive influence on younger generations,

Posted Images

Sawbonz

Sawbonz 27527

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Firemans4Horn said:

The more that comes out about Josh Shapiro the more some of you sound like pussies. 
 

“he wrote “Have a kick ass summer” in his 7th grade yearbook. OMG”

He’s an ok pick. There are 3 I really like and he’s a distant 4th. You’re going to have to spend time and energy addressing stupid shit he did. He’s going to help you in a state you should win anyway and not really anywhere else

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • immamac changed the title to [Kamala Harris Presumptive Nominee] The 2024 Democratic Candidate Sweepstakes
'stache

'stache 21790

Posted
Posted

I really want Walz, but my bet would be Shapiro because of how important PA is to this race. I really think they can win without him though and Walz can be very effective to rust belt moderates in PA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wildcat09

wildcat09 29338

Posted
Posted

Shapiro doesn't guarantee PA and he really may not even help there as much as Walz might.  He'd be a dumb pick.  

All the reporting very well could be wrong and Beshear could still be in contention, but if he's been ruled out already I'm definitely wondering if they found some literal skeletons in his closet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 85261

Posted
Posted

Julian goes over what being vetted was like in 2016

I went through the VP vetting process in 2016, part of a group of potential running mates considered by Secretary Clinton. Here’s what that experience was like: I got a call from a top Clinton campaign official in mid-June 2016, asking if I would like to participate in the VP vetting process. Expectations were set at the very beginning. Sec. Clinton was vetting about ten candidates and might well select someone else—still, nothing was set in stone, I was told.  It’s a grind of a process. Teams of lawyers and investigators were each assigned 2-3 candidates to vet. Weeks before candidates were contacted, the teams had put together extensive dossiers of each person. Candidates had to answer a 150+ question background questionnaire that delved into political, employment, legal, financial and personal family history.  Once that was turned in, each candidate sat with their vetting team for several hours to answer detailed questions. They were direct and precise, mining for any potential political problem lurking in one’s background. (Memories of the Sarah Palin embarrassment loomed large in this cycle). Some questions were also meant to put the candidate on the spot, “Would you have any problem if I were to take your phone from you right now (pointing at the cell phone) and look through it?” They didn’t actually take it.  A brief follow up interview came a week or so later. Then, about a week after that, Sec. Clinton interviewed perhaps 6-7 candidates. These meetings varied in length but were generally aimed at gauging chemistry, giving each candidate a chance to make their case, and assessing governing and campaigning ability. After at least five weeks of direct candidate vetting, Secretary Clinton made her decision and Senator Kaine was announced as her running mate on July 22.  Generally, presidential nominees have sought to balance the ticket in different ways to gain a perceived political advantage— geographic (Kennedy/LBJ, Dukakis/Bentsen, Gore/Lieberman, Kerry/Edwards), ideological (LBJ/Humphrey, Carter/Mondale), experience (Obama/Biden), old Washington-trailblazer (Mondale/Ferraro, Biden/Harris). As the swing states in contention have shifted, these considerations have become more of less important. As many have said, though, what doesn’t change is the need for the VP to at least do no harm (a rule violated by Palin and probably Vance).  Are running mates chosen specifically to help the ticket win in a home state? For Democrats, not usually. Mondale (‘76), Ferraro (‘84), Lieberman (‘00), Biden (‘08), and Harris (‘20) came from relatively blue states. Gore and Kaine were exceptions, as Tennessee had voted nearly 58% for Bush in ‘88 and Virginia had gone for Obama by only 51-47 in 2012. Bentsen (‘88) was chosen when Texas was still winnable for Democrats and the GOP nominee (H.W. Bush) was a Texan.  In 2016, the speculation was that Clinton might choose a Black or Latino male to balance the ticket. This year, conventional wisdom is that a white male will be chosen. The good news is that VP Harris has several great options. VP Harris has more experience than most previous nominees and has reenergized the Democratic base without alienating moderates. She’s also opened the battleground map back up to include AZ, NV and GA. Trump doubled down on his base with the choice of Vance, making Trump perhaps less competitive with independents than he might have been with a different pick. That gives VP Harris a lot of latitude to select a running mate—a progressive or a moderate— who won’t just help her win an election but with whom she has great chemistry and will help her govern effectively.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 85261

Posted
Posted

The VP is def going to leak out today - it always does.  Either the local media/Xitterati will catch the Secret Service rolling up to someone's house (like Vance) or it will be a coaching search flight broken (Palin's flight to Dayton)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Red Five

Red Five 40826

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Js1 said:

The VP is def going to leak out today - it always does.  Either the local media/Xitterati will catch the Secret Service rolling up to someone's house (like Vance) or it will be a coaching search flight broken (Palin's flight to Dayton)

Is it my imagination or is this the most attention a VP search has ever received? Probably because of the condensed time frame I guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
swraith

swraith 345

Posted
Posted

I'm still on the train of thought of "do no harm" with the VP pick.  Keep the positive vibes going.  Get a positive convention bump.  Walz seems to meet that threshold.  I do not hear any negative oppo about him.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
nbmishoid

nbmishoid 949

Posted
Posted

Walz’ regular guy persona and as said above beguiling manner of persuasion make him unique in this field.  Worth several million votes.
 

Will there be a  VP debate?   CSM teacher state champ coach vs Public Affairs Corporal, Yale Law, tech boi, and hater of the U S.   Talk about contrast

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
RDCanecutter

RDCanecutter 26377

Posted
Posted

Harris is gonna go straight through the Ardennes and pick Trump as VP. The deal is that he gets house arrest during her term so long as he never says shit or appears in the media. Nobody will see it coming. The new GOP compromise ticket of Romney-MTG will collapse like a straw hut in a tsunami.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 3
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dahobbs

Dahobbs 17522

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, RDCanecutter said:

Harris is gonna go straight through the Ardennes and pick Trump as VP. The deal is that he gets house arrest during her term so long as he never says shit or appears in the media. Nobody will see it coming. The new GOP compromise ticket of Romney-MTG will collapse like a straw hut in a tsunami.

Strangely, I'm not as opposed to this crazy idea as I thought I would be... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ted Lange

Ted Lange 16083

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Js1 said:

Julian goes over what being vetted was like in 2016

I went through the VP vetting process in 2016, part of a group of potential running mates considered by Secretary Clinton. Here’s what that experience was like: I got a call from a top Clinton campaign official in mid-June 2016, asking if I would like to participate in the VP vetting process. Expectations were set at the very beginning. Sec. Clinton was vetting about ten candidates and might well select someone else—still, nothing was set in stone, I was told.  It’s a grind of a process. Teams of lawyers and investigators were each assigned 2-3 candidates to vet. Weeks before candidates were contacted, the teams had put together extensive dossiers of each person. Candidates had to answer a 150+ question background questionnaire that delved into political, employment, legal, financial and personal family history.  Once that was turned in, each candidate sat with their vetting team for several hours to answer detailed questions. They were direct and precise, mining for any potential political problem lurking in one’s background. (Memories of the Sarah Palin embarrassment loomed large in this cycle). Some questions were also meant to put the candidate on the spot, “Would you have any problem if I were to take your phone from you right now (pointing at the cell phone) and look through it?” They didn’t actually take it.  A brief follow up interview came a week or so later. Then, about a week after that, Sec. Clinton interviewed perhaps 6-7 candidates. These meetings varied in length but were generally aimed at gauging chemistry, giving each candidate a chance to make their case, and assessing governing and campaigning ability. After at least five weeks of direct candidate vetting, Secretary Clinton made her decision and Senator Kaine was announced as her running mate on July 22.  Generally, presidential nominees have sought to balance the ticket in different ways to gain a perceived political advantage— geographic (Kennedy/LBJ, Dukakis/Bentsen, Gore/Lieberman, Kerry/Edwards), ideological (LBJ/Humphrey, Carter/Mondale), experience (Obama/Biden), old Washington-trailblazer (Mondale/Ferraro, Biden/Harris). As the swing states in contention have shifted, these considerations have become more of less important. As many have said, though, what doesn’t change is the need for the VP to at least do no harm (a rule violated by Palin and probably Vance).  Are running mates chosen specifically to help the ticket win in a home state? For Democrats, not usually. Mondale (‘76), Ferraro (‘84), Lieberman (‘00), Biden (‘08), and Harris (‘20) came from relatively blue states. Gore and Kaine were exceptions, as Tennessee had voted nearly 58% for Bush in ‘88 and Virginia had gone for Obama by only 51-47 in 2012. Bentsen (‘88) was chosen when Texas was still winnable for Democrats and the GOP nominee (H.W. Bush) was a Texan.  In 2016, the speculation was that Clinton might choose a Black or Latino male to balance the ticket. This year, conventional wisdom is that a white male will be chosen. The good news is that VP Harris has several great options. VP Harris has more experience than most previous nominees and has reenergized the Democratic base without alienating moderates. She’s also opened the battleground map back up to include AZ, NV and GA. Trump doubled down on his base with the choice of Vance, making Trump perhaps less competitive with independents than he might have been with a different pick. That gives VP Harris a lot of latitude to select a running mate—a progressive or a moderate— who won’t just help her win an election but with whom she has great chemistry and will help her govern effectively.

 

Good reminder.

My choice at this point would be Waltz, but that is just going by the info that I have, the campaign is going to have a lot more information to make a decision than the average person does.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chips O'Toole

Chips O'Toole 1322

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

There must be some big donor pressure for Shapiro.  

I would bet that it's coming more from some internal strategists that are numbers-driven saying "Fuck vibes, locking up PA = EC victory" or some such.  It's the right call on paper in most elections, but we can see and feel the vibes with the other guy who has an innate ability to connect with normal people and WILL swing votes with his message.  Also, a narrow EC victory for Harris likely ends in violence, so swing for the fences and go with the guy that could potentially start a movement all on his own.

  • Hook 'Em 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 85261

Posted
Posted
19 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

It is going to be Walz. I don't see how you move forward with Shapiro at this point. 

This.  Shapiro is just too many issues.  If your own internals have you up in PA, why risk it? 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mdmost

mdmost 42998

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, Pancho said:

 

VP typically hold press conferences about the economy? We really are in the throwing shit against the wall stage. Economic emergency? It's a fucking market correction to a bad jobs report and the Fed dragging his feet on lowering interest rates. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wildcat09

wildcat09 29338

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, RDCanecutter said:

Harris is gonna go straight through the Ardennes and pick Trump as VP. The deal is that he gets house arrest during her term so long as he never says shit or appears in the media. Nobody will see it coming. The new GOP compromise ticket of Romney-MTG will collapse like a straw hut in a tsunami.

SCOTUS DID just give the President free rein to have their VP killed...

  • Haha 3
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pancho

Pancho 44688

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Js1 said:

This.  Shapiro is just too many issues.  If your own internals have you up in PA, why risk it? 

Another thing—if Republicans are saying Shapiro is what would scare them the most, I wouldn’t trust that at all. I’d do the complete opposite. 

  • Hook 'Em 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WBT

WBT 20561

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Chips O'Toole said:

I would bet that it's coming more from some internal strategists that are numbers-driven saying "Fuck vibes, locking up PA = EC victory"

I think this will prevail and should.  PA is that important.  A 0.5 - 1 pt bump there outweighs everything else.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hank Kingsley

Hank Kingsley 20903

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, WBT said:

I think this will prevail and should.  PA is that important.  A 0.5 - 1 pt bump there outweighs everything else.

I know lot of people agree with this sentiment, but it's absolutely ridiculous. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
fuggled

fuggled 576

Posted
Posted
18 hours ago, Chopper said:

That's a really, really fucked up case but I don't know how anyone can blame the guy who was the AG at the time. The Medical Examiner concluded it was a suicide. <Somehow she managed to stab herself 20 times. Sure thing.> That's what sunk the case - the incompetence or, more likely, deceit of the ME. I believe Shapiro wasn't even an elected official at the time of the murder.

Just a note here...things connect to Shapiro because he was AG a few years ago when his office reviewed the case and decided to keep it classified as suicide and not re-open it.  Not saying that decision was right or wrong.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23367

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Dahobbs said:

why? 

Well, it’s an obvious explanation for one…
 

two, this thread got me wondering…

Not posting the whole thing because it’s way in the weeds but some rigorous research and reporting assuming it all checks out. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chuckie Finster

Chuckie Finster 22692

Posted
Posted (edited)

I love Walz and think he'd be a great pick, but as an American Jew it is really hard to swallow that we are going to pass on an incredibly popular swing state governor purely because his views on Israel, which are essentially shared by every potential VP candidate, have been singled out FOR SOME REASON.

 

 

Edited by Chuckie Finster
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Firemans4Horn

Firemans4Horn 18034

Posted
Posted

From The Bulwark:

 

Quote

1. The Internet Is Not Real Life, Part Eleventy Bajillion

For days there has been chatter on the progressive interwebs about how Josh Shapiro would “divide” the party. Extremely online politicos upset about his views on Israel or school vouchers or his Kosher Obama speaking style have asserted this dispositively. Deep inside the politics internet there has been a spate of retrospective complaints about how bad a “blitz primary” would have been as evinced by the aggressive and deranged online discourse that has supposedly tainted the purity of the “veepstakes.”

If you are involved in these online meme wars, I grant that it might feel as if things are very contentious. You might see yourself as being on one side of a battle that must be won, and that your activism is the tip of the spear that represents a broader coalition behind you out in the world. For example, if you are involved in progressive or anti-Zionist online activism it might seem as if everyone hates Josh and game theory requires him to be passed over. If you fancy yourself a political polling and data nerd, you might have come to the conclusion that anyone except for Josh would be idiocy. If you are a regular resistance activist your feed is exploding with Hot Walz content.

Even the unifying, thoughtful Bulwark Redditorshave exploded in a #war between the Walz-pilled and the Shapiro-stans.

Here’s the problem with all of this.

This “war” that is purportedly happening within the party over the VP selection is all an illusion. It is taking place in a hermetically sealed bubble among political hobbyists who have extremely strong feelings about the ideological trajectory of the Democratic primary . . . and nobody else. They are a fraction of a fraction of the party.

Rank-and-file Democrats are unburdened by the veepstakes discourse. They only have surface-level knowledge about the main contenders, according to polls. And the Democrats who live in each contender’s respective states overwhelmingly love their hometown boys.

The one supposedly “divisive” name being discussed, Shapiro, is viewed favorably by 90 percent of Pennsylvania Democrats. I guess the Keystone State progressives didn’t get the internet’s memo.

The reality is, concerns about whether one of these DEI whites will salt the vibes are based on Twitter-brain alone.

2. The Real Vibes Doctors

You know who has been driving the Coconutmentum both online and out in the real world? A bunch of people who have zero fucks to give about Mark Kelly vs. J.B. Pritzker.

Let’s start with the big names who have engaged in the past month.

Beyoncé donated $4 milly to Kamala over the weekend and let her use “Freedom” as the campaign theme song. Charli XCX declared it Brat Summer. Megan Thee Stallion performed at the campaign rally Georgia.

Do you think any of them is jumping off the bandwagon because of a VP contender’s college essay? Do you think Charli has strong feelings about Andy Beshear Fall?

I do not.

My TikTok feed is littered with random peoplegetting hundreds of thousands of likes for their coconut dance. Do you think any of them are going to limit their future engagement because of the VP pick’s views on the PACT Act?

I do not.

How about the hundreds of thousands of new donors and volunteers who have flocked to the campaign? Do you think more than 3 percent of them will revert to apathy based on the selection?

Hard to imagine.

And if you want some evidence that the choice of a more centrist, white male with a dodgy track record won’t be a wet blanket on the buzzy presidential candidate, let’s head back to 2008, when this exact scenario played out.

Did any of the Obama mojo dissipate because Joe Biden made an offensive joke about 7-Eleven clerks? Did anybody boycott the 2008 convention because of Biden’s past views on abortion or criminal justice or any of his other more conservative views from decades past? No! Because normal people—people who are not reading newsletters such as this—just don’t concern themselves about the VP selection.

This is not to say that it doesn’t matter at all. A VP candidate can give a boost with a certain demographic (Pence) or do serious harm to a ticket by showing a lack of preparedness (Palin). But the latter doesn’t seem to be a concern in this case. All of the medium-bodied whites in this veepstakes read the newspaper and know the basics of American foreign policy.

The online acrimony over the VP choice reflects the same misunderstanding of the Democratic electorate that some influencers and pundits had during the Biden age discourse. Even before the fateful June 27 debate, the vast majority of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents were saying two things to anyone who would listen: (A) that they wanted a candidate who could beat Trump, and (B) that they thought Joe Biden was too old to do the job.

Despite this very clear message being sent in every quantitative and qualitative survey, a bunch of smartypants on cable news panels and election Twitter who all agreed with part A shouted at each other over how to deal with part B. That shouting read to some in the political world as “disarray.”

But then something weird happened. Joe Biden stepped aside. The vast majority of Democrats got what they wanted . . . and overnight, voila, unity! Things were in array!

That’s all it took.

Share

This unity was available the whole time. All the Democrats had to do was provide voters with a ticket that was responsive to their fundamental desires. The anti-Trump coalition may disagree about a LOT, but for everyone who is a part of it the thing they agree on most is that they want to be rid of his fat orange ass once and for all.

So when Kamala Harris makes her selection, as long as that person passes the bar for “presidential believability” and demonstrates the ability to do the #1 job that Democratic voters are looking for (taking on Trump), then come Chicago, the vibes will be immaculate.

Yeah, there will be pockets of disappointment if Harris goes in an ideological direction that some of us would prefer she avoid. Some of those people will complain online about it. The most obnoxious subset of that group will ostentatiously project dissatisfaction or division in order to gain status/attract engagement from other political obsessives in their cohort.

And a small but loud subset of the especially obnoxious might even try to sabotage the campaign over it. But it ain’t gonna work.

When the lights go down in the United Center in August and the Alan Parsons Project or Kim Petras blares over the loudspeakers and the Harris/Chardonnay pairing appear on the big screen, the people who exist in the real Democratic party are going to scream out with such purpose that those little social media squabbles won’t even be audible.

 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
cmontexas

cmontexas 3270

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

I love Walz and think he'd be a great pick, but as an American Jew it is really hard to swallow that we are going to pass on an incredibly popular swing state governor purely because his views on Israel, which are essentially shared by every potential VP candidate, have been singled out FOR SOME REASON.

 

Keeping the Jewish vote from defecting or staying home after after the next 2 months of DEMOCRATS SUPPORT HAMAS is a way bigger asset for Shapiro than a knock

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...