It’s lower on the list of importance but given the hypothetical of Biden at the top you may benefit by signaling that they matter. Good turn out and optimized turnout are different things and every little bit might matter. It’s a peace offering.
Cater to the extreme but do you lose the middle?
In 2016 Trump finished third in the popular vote, barely behind Clinton at #2, but way behind Didnt_Bother_to_Vote.
I think Didnt_Bother has won every Presidential election in which he was a contender. L.B. Johnson came close to unseating him in the “landslide” of 1964, but still lost 37.8% to 38.1%. FDR came close in 1936, but also lost.
It’s a safe bet that Didnt_Bother will also win the 2020 election, but we can hope that some of his supporters will turn out to vote against Trump.
So you think that the VP choice will be more effective getting Dems to vote than Trump being Trump? Alrighty then.
Again, lower on the list. But also again Biden (hypothetically as having the nom) would appeal to Obama-Trump and Clinton-Romney swingable voters, and is popular with Black voters. I don’t think a moderately progressive VP loses them with him at the top. But not even offering a peace offering VP choice to that wing may keep that element from being … fully enthused.
Having worked for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts under Patrick for 8 years, I would love to hear your definition of “exciting.”
And apparently I’m not the only one who has thought of her being the choice.
She hits the nod to the progressive wing while bringing some identity issues that balance the old white guy identity too and at the same time the same penchant for practical bipartisanship in service of those goals that Biden sells and some rural issues cred. And yeah. Helps that little bit with WI, a key state to win.
And read this about her recent re-election.
She hits all the Sherrod Brown boxes plus more definitely helping get WI and being an other than straight white male identity. And not a sure loss of a D Senate seat (special election in WI).
She’s it! Biden-Baldwin.
Why have I not been hearing more about her? She sounds like she should be on the top of the ticket, at least if those paragraphs are accurate.
We all wish Biden was 10 years younger. But he’s going to be great, and I say, go, Joe, go!!
As for Kasich… not if you want women’s votes. He tries to play it like he’s a moderate Republican, but if he is the face of moderate, then we’ve already moved so far to the right that being “too far left” is a meaningless position.
Baldwin would be a terrific pick.
See, I feel like with Biden, we don’t need someone to help him appeal to white working class rural voters in WI, MI, PA, etc. He hits that mark already, 110%. We need a Latino/a.
These repeated attacks by Trump on immigrants and refugees over the past 2+ years are, to quote Joe Biden hisself, a Big Fucking Deal. The Dems would do well to show that they’re going to address this national catastrophe with someone who has some skin in it, someone who has experienced prejudice because they’re a brown person or because they’re from a family of immigrants or because they’ve got relatives who don’t speak English. I feel like in 2020, it just might be essential to have a Latino/a on the ticket to directly confront these fuckers Trump and Pence over the shit they’ve done. A running mate is an attack dog, someone who can say things and address topics and speak to people the nominee can’t.
I still say the golden ticket is Biden-Solis, for all the reasons I laid out in post 59. If she’s too outside the box, then Julian Castro. Or Catherine Cortez Masto (Harry Reid’s replacement in the Senate). Or Nanette Barragan. I just think there are some good possibilities in the Latino political community, and that’s the balance Joe should be looking for in 2020, should he be the nominee.
A WASP lesbian is about the least “strategic” choice you could possibly have for a minority on the ticket.
That is merely icing on the cake. Baldwin is a strategically sublime option because of her qualifications, crossover appeal, and being from the upper midwest - and might I add, could be a viable frontrunner in 2024 if Biden were a one term president. I would rather a minority on a Biden or Sanders ticket who has qualifications you would want in a president than reach for someone based on demographics.
Kamala Harris would be among my obvious first choices. Sen Tammy Duckworth’s name has been tossed out and I think that’s a definite possibility. Even though some might not think of her as a person of color, she’s half Asian (Thai/Chinese), and she’s female. Plus, she’s a decorated (and wounded) veteran. I’d also point out that being winning a statewide race requires at least some appeal to independents and moderate conservatives. Outside Chicago, most of Illinois is like much of the rest of the US, so that she won (pretty convincingly) in Illinois says something.
As far as identity goes I think a woman being on the ticket matters and at this point gay does not with anyone who is a swingable voter.
More so what Covfefe said.
I’d emphasize the state. Win WI along with MI and PA without any surprising losses and that’s the electoral win. Don’t win WI and a win is much less likely. VP home state impact is modest but non-zero and big enough to matter for a state that in a close election might be on the cusp.
I like Duckworth* and Harris as choices too, very much so, but even if all three were otherwise equally as strong for the position, as qualified to step in and as good for the ticket across the country in general, two or three points in that specific state is a nice little buffer to have in place.
*Duckworth though has a baby who just turned one and may feel that she does not want to be so much on the campaign trail with a toddler in tow. It could sell well, the challenges of working mothers and all, but she may not want to do it.
It seems a lot of the big donors got on the O’Rourke bandwagon early on. Baldwin might have had to pull off a bit of the magic Buttigieg has to become relevant with some of them in this large field. Honestly I don’t know if she was interested regardless.
The thing with Kasich is not that he’s moderate. He’s very conservative. He is, in fact, one of the very few conservatives left in the Republican party. What gets mistaken for moderation is the fact that he actually tries to do what’s best for his constituency. He and I disagree almost 100% on just what that best is, but even the fact that he’s trying sets him above the vast majority of Republicans.
But he definitely doesn’t belong on a ticket with any Democrat. That’d be nothing but a cheap gimmick, and (worse) would look like a cheap gimmick.
Ehh. Disagree. Palin was a cheap gimmick. I think Kasich actually gives a fuck about our country. With Biden, it would show true bi-partisan.
Kasich is a solid conservative and would be a huge F U to large portions of Democrats. He’s not an idiot or self -serving but what he thinks of as best for the country is of little overlap with what most Democrats believe. A worse decision would be hard to make.
Kasich might be fine if he were a woman, or a minority, or a liberal. In the absence of any such quality, he is what he is - an older, male conservative Republican. He would be the anti-choice.
I think this makes a good deal of sense, although I do like the Tam-Tams. Maybe Raul Grijalva?