# Biden's Running Mate Prediction Thread **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [March 14, 2020, 3:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bidens-running-mate-prediction-thread/849482 "2020-03-14T15:59:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2020, 3:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bidens-running-mate-prediction-thread/849482/121 "2020-03-18T15:02:58Z")
On thinking about it, I think it was still a mistake the way he said it. I’d have said something more like “My top three choices for the position are all women”. That makes it more about those particular individuals, each of whom is individually qualified, and it would if anything have got even more attention, as it’d invite speculation about who those top three are. It’d still lock him into choosing a woman, because after a comment like that, choosing a man would mean that he’s settling for his fourth choice, but that’s no worse than the situation he’s in now. And of course, this doesn’t actually depend at all on what his actual shortlist looks like. Even if he already knows exactly who he wants, he can’t say that yet, or people will ask “Well, who is it?”. And he can’t say a number that’s too high, because if too many of the top picks are women, that makes it obvious that they are being chosen for “identity politics” reasons. Three sounds to me like the right middle ground, there. ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2020, 1:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bidens-running-mate-prediction-thread/849482/122 "2020-03-19T01:09:27Z")
I thought Biden was far better than “just okay” at the debate. And I don’t just say that because I back him: I fully acknowledge that he had some very rough performances (as well as some “just okay” ones) earlier in the campaign. ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2020, 7:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bidens-running-mate-prediction-thread/849482/123 "2020-03-19T07:47:36Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > On thinking about it, I think it was still a mistake the way he said it. I’d have said something more like “My top three choices for the position are all women”. That makes it more about those particular individuals, each of whom is individually qualified, and it would if anything have got even more attention, as it’d invite speculation about who those top three are. It’d still lock him into choosing a woman, because after a comment like that, choosing a man would mean that he’s settling for his fourth choice, but that’s no worse than the situation he’s in now. > > And of course, this doesn’t actually depend at all on what his actual shortlist looks like. Even if he already knows exactly who he wants, he can’t say that yet, or people will ask “Well, who is it?”. And he can’t say a number that’s too high, because if too many of the top picks are women, that makes it obvious that they are being chosen for “identity politics” reasons. Three sounds to me like the right middle ground, there. +++. This is exactly what I’d have posted, had I been smart enough to realize that he’d need a specific number — three is best — for reasons **Chronos** explains. Are Klobuchar, Harris, Abrams the “three”? I still think Tammy Duckworth _might_ be better. ---
**Author:** ![divemaster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/divemaster/32/78_2.png) [@divemaster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/divemaster)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2020, 1:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bidens-running-mate-prediction-thread/849482/124 "2020-03-19T13:28:09Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > On thinking about it, I think it was still a mistake the way he said it. I’d have said something more like “My top three choices for the position are all women”. That makes it more about those particular individuals, each of whom is individually qualified, and it would if anything have got even more attention, as it’d invite speculation about who those top three are. It’d still lock him into choosing a woman, because after a comment like that, choosing a man would mean that he’s settling for his fourth choice, but that’s no worse than the situation he’s in now. > > And of course, this doesn’t actually depend at all on what his actual shortlist looks like. Even if he already knows exactly who he wants, he can’t say that yet, or people will ask “Well, who is it?”. And he can’t say a number that’s too high, because if too many of the top picks are women, that makes it obvious that they are being chosen for “identity politics” reasons. Three sounds to me like the right middle ground, there. Yeah, this is really smart. Not just “well, I picked a woman b/c I pretty much had to or my Party would eat me alive,” but “I’ve done due diligence and my top candidates so far are women.” ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2020, 1:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bidens-running-mate-prediction-thread/849482/125 "2020-03-19T13:32:41Z")
> [@divemaster](#): > > Yeah, this is really smart. Not just “well, I picked a woman b/c I pretty much had to or my Party would eat me alive,” but “I’ve done due diligence and my top candidates so far are women.” But that probably wouldn’t have made headlines in the same way. The reason this was said was to make headlines (and cover for a potentially poor debate performance which didn’t happen). In my estimation, anyway. ---
**Author:** ![Nonsuch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nonsuch/32/2922_2.png) [@Nonsuch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nonsuch)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2020, 2:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bidens-running-mate-prediction-thread/849482/126 "2020-03-19T14:40:47Z")
Has there been any blowback to Biden’s remark anywhere but in this thread? Seriously, I have seen zero think pieces calling Biden out for mishandling the VP “pre-announcement.” I could be wrong but I really don’t think anyone’s troubled by it. ---
**Author:** ![What\_Exit](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/what_exit/32/10652_2.png) [@What\_Exit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/What_Exit)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2020, 2:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bidens-running-mate-prediction-thread/849482/127 "2020-03-19T14:56:31Z")
> [@Nonsuch](#): > > Has there been any blowback to Biden’s remark anywhere but in this thread? Seriously, I have seen zero think pieces calling Biden out for mishandling the VP “pre-announcement.” I could be wrong but I really don’t think anyone’s troubled by it. Maybe on Fox, but that hardly counts. ---
**Author:** ![Nonsuch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nonsuch/32/2922_2.png) [@Nonsuch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nonsuch)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2020, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bidens-running-mate-prediction-thread/849482/128 "2020-03-19T15:43:09Z")
Cool. So maybe people should quit fretting over it? Just a thought. ---
**Author:** ![Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/13edae/32.png) [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stranger_On_A_Train)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2020, 4:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bidens-running-mate-prediction-thread/849482/129 "2020-03-19T16:01:44Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > I feel like Klobuchar is likely, but I hope it’s not her. We’ve already got a boring guy on the top of the ticket, and while boring might be a refreshing change of pace from Trump, it doesn’t have a great track record of winning elections. Klobuchar is also—rightly or not—the butt of a rumor that became a running joke on _VEEP_, and by many accounts of former staffer essentially a real life version of Selina Meyer. And honestly, it is unclear what Klobuchar brings to the table for a presidential ticket; she doesn’t seem to have a particularly strong agenda, wide demographic voter appeal, or even any particularly memorable moments beyond that ridiculous Brett Kavanagh hearing. I’m sure that she’s a fine Congressional member for the state of Minnesota, but that translates to national politics the way a Hungarian prhasebook translates to English. > [@septimus](#): > > Are Klobuchar, Harris, Abrams the “three”? I still think Tammy Duckworth _might_ be better. There. Is no question in my mind that Duckworth would be better (at least than Klobuchar and Harris), and despite the supposed baggage of her heritage and birth on foreign soil (to a U.S. citizen and Army veteran), I don’t think she would have any hesitation to responding to any attempted ‘swiftboating’ with a vigorous use of the word “fuck” in a way that John Kerry was too politely reluctant to do. It is long past time for the Democratic Party to keep falling back to the notion that only the white voters really matter in an election; there is a vast untapped market of typical non-voters (as demonstrated both by Obama and by Trump) looking to be engaged by a candidate who stands out as representing their interests, and a vocal demographic of veterans of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars and their families who feel very betrayed by politicians who have never faced the kind of trauma and hardship they have for no good result. There would certainly be racist dogwhistles and propaganda slurs against her (or Abrams) but those are people who aren’t going to vote for a Democratic ticket regardless. Stranger ---
**Author:** ![Omar\_Little](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/omar_little/32/269_2.png) [@Omar\_Little](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Omar_Little)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2020, 7:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bidens-running-mate-prediction-thread/849482/130 "2020-03-19T19:36:33Z")
I agree with **Win Place Show** ’s assessment and link above…no way Abrahms is in the top 10 of candidates…running for a governorship, doesn’t make you qualified to be VP. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2020, 7:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bidens-running-mate-prediction-thread/849482/131 "2020-03-19T19:41:38Z")
Hey everyone, Stranger Danger. I hadn’t realized you were back. Good to see your phosphors. > [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](#): > > I’m sure that she’s a fine Congressional member for the state of Minnesota, but that translates to national politics the way a Hungarian prhasebook translates to English. But I don’t get this. How does this differ from the experience of Senator Obama? And isn’t it better than the national political experience of Governor Bush II, Governor Clinton, and Governor Reagan? Are you saying that the Vice Presidential experience of Bush I and Nixon and Johnson were game-changers? Nobody is prepared to be President. Some are less prepared than others, true. **cough** trump **cough** But it’s silly to say that a Senator who has been in office for a dozen years knows nothing about national politics. ---
**Author:** ![Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/13edae/32.png) [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stranger_On_A_Train)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2020, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bidens-running-mate-prediction-thread/849482/132 "2020-03-19T20:01:31Z")
> [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#): > > But I don’t get this. How does this differ from the experience of Senator Obama? And isn’t it better than the national political experience of Governor Bush II, Governor Clinton, and Governor Reagan? Are you saying that the Vice Presidential experience of Bush I and Nixon and Johnson were game-changers? > > Nobody is prepared to be President. Some are less prepared than others, true. **cough** trump **cough** But it’s silly to say that a Senator who has been in office for a dozen years knows nothing about national politics. I’m not saying that Klobuchar doesn’t know anything about national politics or couldn’t handle the role of President; alleged temper aside, she seems at least as competent as any other senator (and definitely better than some) and she does seem to be well-regarded by her constituents based on being handily reelected to a second term. But virtually no one outside of Minnesota had heard of her prior to the last presidential election, and based on her performance in this primary cycle she didn’t have much support outside of her base despite some media efforts to primp her as the “centrist female candidate”. So, in other words, she doesn’t bring votes or any particularly appealing ideas to an already milquetoast ticket _other than_ being a woman, and the field is ripe with acceptable female candidates that could broaden the appeal and bring out potential voters who would normally abstain. Stranger ---
**Author:** ![Bijou\_Drains](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bijou_drains/32/2814_2.png) [@Bijou\_Drains](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bijou_Drains)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2020, 8:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bidens-running-mate-prediction-thread/849482/133 "2020-03-19T20:17:09Z")
> [@Omar\_Little](#): > > I agree with **Win Place Show** ’s assessment and link above…no way Abrahms is in the top 10 of candidates…running for a governorship, doesn’t make you qualified to be VP. She may be in the top 10 but she’s probably #10. She would be higher if she held statewide office or served in Congress. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2020, 9:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bidens-running-mate-prediction-thread/849482/134 "2020-03-19T21:43:31Z")
Yeah, a senator is a perfectly respectable position to choose a VP from. But there are dozens of Democratic senators. What makes her any better than any of the other senators out there, many of whom do have something that makes them stand out? ---
**Author:** ![erysichthon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/d07c76/32.png) [@erysichthon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erysichthon)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2020, 10:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bidens-running-mate-prediction-thread/849482/135 "2020-03-19T22:06:44Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > But that probably wouldn’t have made headlines in the same way. The reason this was said was to make headlines (and cover for a potentially poor debate performance which didn’t happen). In my estimation, anyway. This is, I think, the third time you’ve claimed that the announcement was concocted to distract people from Biden’s allegedly-poor debating skills. Do you have even a particle of evidence for this theory? I know you’re a sincere guy, but honestly, this is starting to sound like petulant snark from a disappointed Sanders supporter. ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2020, 10:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bidens-running-mate-prediction-thread/849482/136 "2020-03-19T22:50:29Z")
> [@Nonsuch](#): > > Has there been any blowback to Biden’s remark anywhere but in this thread? Seriously, I have seen zero think pieces calling Biden out for mishandling the VP “pre-announcement.” I could be wrong but I really don’t think anyone’s troubled by it. Sam Harris threw a fit about it on his podcast (which has millions of listeners, probably more than say your average MSNBC show). I tweeted at him something similar to what I said here, that while I understand where he’s coming from, there’s a difference between this and the other thing he likened it to–Elizabeth Warren promising that a transgender teen would have the opportunity to vet any candidate she might consider for Secretary of Education. This is really a different case because no woman has ever been a president or vice president. Once that glass ceiling is broken even once, candidates should no longer make promises like this. > [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](#): > > And honestly, it is unclear what Klobuchar brings to the table for a presidential ticket; she doesn’t seem to have a particularly strong agenda, wide demographic voter appeal, or even any particularly memorable moments beyond that ridiculous Brett Kavanagh hearing. I’m sure that she’s a fine Congressional member for the state of Minnesota, but that translates to national politics the way a Hungarian prhasebook translates to English. You don’t think a Minnesota senator who consistently wins millions of votes from people in the Upper Midwest who otherwise often vote Republican has some relevancy to an election that will be decided in Wisconsin and Michigan? And as sad as it is to say, it’s just not true that people who have racist or xenophobic attitudes are impossible to get to vote for “all-American” Democrats. There is political science backing this up. Are we just going to scorn the votes of such people on principle when the stakes are so high? > [@Chronos](#): > > Yeah, a senator is a perfectly respectable position to choose a VP from. But there are dozens of Democratic senators. What makes her any better than any of the other senators out there, many of whom do have something that makes them stand out? How many of the others did well enough by the DNC’s objective standards to qualify for every single debate held until it was down to just Bernie and Joe? ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2020, 11:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bidens-running-mate-prediction-thread/849482/137 "2020-03-19T23:00:43Z")
Who cares who matched up to some arbitrary debate qualifying standards? They were made up on the fly for each debate, for the first time ever this year. And that is now some meaningful test for a veep slot? ---
**Author:** ![split\_p\_j](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e19b73/32.png) [@split\_p\_j](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/split_p_j)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2020, 12:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bidens-running-mate-prediction-thread/849482/138 "2020-03-20T00:15:30Z")
I just don’t get this its gotta be a woman thing, I don’t understand who he is aiming for with this. Like I said, white women don’t care, we know they voted for Trump, that is a fact. Black men will not vote for a woman as VP, especially a black woman. I’d have to go really deep to explain why but I won’t and will just say that black men will just not vote if that is the ticket. White men, come on you’re joking right. I consider latinos to me white, for reasons I’ve said before, so they are a non factor. I can’t stand Trump, but he is sure to win if Biden stays on this course. ---
**Author:** ![split\_p\_j](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e19b73/32.png) [@split\_p\_j](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/split_p_j)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2020, 12:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bidens-running-mate-prediction-thread/849482/139 "2020-03-20T00:16:31Z")
I just don’t get this its gotta be a woman thing, I don’t understand who he is aiming for with this. Like I said, white women don’t care, we know they voted for Trump, that is a fact. Black men will not vote for a woman as VP, especially a black woman. I’d have to go really deep to explain why but I won’t and will just say that black men will just not vote if that is the ticket. White men, come on you’re joking right. I consider latinos to me white, for reasons I’ve said before, so they are a non factor. I can’t stand Trump, but he is sure to win if Biden stays on this course. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2020, 12:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bidens-running-mate-prediction-thread/849482/140 "2020-03-20T00:21:54Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > Who cares who matched up to some arbitrary debate qualifying standards? They were made up on the fly for each debate, for the first time ever this year. And that is now some meaningful test for a veep slot? Not by itself. But her presence meant that she became a familiar name and face to millions of potential voters. Never underestimate the power of pure name recognition. And it also meant that she was examined by the national press for months without any scandals or secrets coming out. If Geraldine Ferraro had that scrutiny she would have disqualified for the selection before it happened and not embarrassingly after, as reality had it. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bidens-running-mate-prediction-thread/849482.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bidens-running-mate-prediction-thread/849482.md?page=8)