Thanks for that video. I already liked Mark Kelly for the VP, but watching him poke gentle fun at himself while also quietly highlighting his impressive background makes me like him even more. Such a contrast to the bombastic boasting of the opposition!
That may be, but Aug. 7 seems to be an absolute deadline.
So, let us be patient and give her the 10 days she deserves.
Let’s say that there’s two fighting messages on border security. One message is, “George Soros is funding ISIS to sneak terrorists through the Southern border, to rape our women.” The other message is, “We can improve border security but the larger issues are questions like what to do with people who are illegally here, who brought up their kids as Americans?”
Now, let’s also say that the sort of person who isn’t gung-ho for either party is naturally a bit more skeptical, not devoted to any particular ideology, not willing to bend reality to fit a world view, etc. and is largely just going to choose the person who feels the least crazy.
For that person, are you sure - given the above narratives - that you really need to fight all that hard to get this particular class of voter, when it comes to border policy? They might be looking more at things like inflation and that we’re expecting inflationist policy on both aisles at this moment at time. They might be looking more at things like trying to reduce the amount of craziness in politics, but one side is selling conspiracies and the other side is selling “equity”, rather than moderation and anti-corruption. Normalcy in these regions are probably issues more likely to win them over than border policy. On that one, the Democrats are closer to the right territory already.
The right has already given up on trying to compete for moderates, centrists, and normals in the border policy space. You’ve already won that territory.
What are the other easy wins?
‘These guys are weird’: Gov. Walz blasts Trump-Vance ‘obsession’ with anti-freedom agenda - YouTube
walz on msnbc last night. he states the truth. weird, just seriouly badly weird. not good weird, quirky, bad weird, like disturbed.
“You know there’s something wrong with people when they talk about freedom: freedom to be in your bedroom, freedom to be in your exam room, freedom to tell your kids what they can read. That stuff is weird,” says Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz
I agree with your first sentence, but not the second. Dems are losing on border policy, largely (IMO) due to fabricated GOP nonsense like “migrant invasions” and other divisive rhetoric that has not been effectively challenged (as well as, you know, lots of racism). And given Harris’ earlier widely-reported gaffes on the issue, it’s a real weakness that Kelly could help counter. Here’s a fresh new article from the NY Times about Kelly and his aptitude for border policy (gift link):
It’s a good profile, and Iearned some more about Kelly and the pros and cons of him as a VP choice. Note this in particular about border policy:
Donald Huish, the G.O.P. mayor of Douglas, recounted a phone call with Mr. Kelly two weeks ago, when the two men talked through progress on making the small city an official, expanded port of entry into the United States. The senator has pushed hard for the move, and Mr. Huish has embraced it. Both of them see the plan as a way to inject economic stability into the region and possibly defang the coyotes and cartels prowling the passes.
“What gets me about Senator Kelly is, yes, we’re in touch with staff on the issues, but he personally calls me on a regular basis, and I feel comfortable calling him,” said Mr. Huish, who identifies as a strongly conservative Republican. “I’m sure he’s taken some heat from some of his party concerning the border, but he understands it.”
A Trump supporter, Mr. Huish said he was not a fan of Ms. Harris. “Her heart’s in the right place,” he said. “Her policies are in the wrong place.” But if Mr. Kelly joined the ticket, he said, it would cause him to “struggle a little bit” with this vote.
Not that open. Stevenson left the decision entirely up to the delegates. Harris should limit their choices. I’m thinking three would be enough.
I’m not sure I get what you are saying. Are you saying that the 5 days since Biden dropped out is enough time for her to identify and vet a VP?
I imagine she and her staff woulda been doing some “what if?” scenario spitballing, but that’s a far cry from playing for keepsies. Until I see clear evidence otherwise, I’m assuming she did not have a great deal of lead time that Joe was dropping out. It will take a little beit of time before I’m going to paint her as indecisive.
A couple of weeks would not strike me as excessive. I’d rather she take the time and care to make a good choice (I admit it is unlikely that there is only 1 clearly BEST choice), than a hasty choie she regrets.
The story with Palin as I understand it is:
- McCain knew he was behind in the election and heading towards a loss to Obama.
- Palin was a wild choice. Younger, governor, maybe a big future ahead.
- McCain was afraid of her being very, uh, dumb. He had his staff ask her if she believed in evolution or was she a young Earth creationist type person. She affirmed she wasn’t young Earth and believed in evolution. He accepted it and put her on the ticket.
Thing is, she lied. She is, I think, anti-evolution and believes in at least instantaneous creation and probably a young Earth person.
McCain didn’t bash her in public, but he clearly learned she was a huge idiot. Still, he was losing and he wanted to try something bold.
We now know he would have lived 8 years to do both terms if he was elected to do so, but it really was a huge risk to put someone so dumb that near the oval office. However…she’s probably more capable than Trump, so I guess there are worse things.
I wanted to repeat this point. Harris is secure in her position for the presidential nomination. Trump was always locked, and his choice for Veep is … problematic (and flat out crazy, but see his own thread). Which leaves the news going over all the talented (and a few less so) Democratic contenders. Since there’s little on the immediate political horizon (and probably no debates), this has left all this questioning and enthusiasm for the Democratic VP choice as a direct contrast to Vance.
Which means the speculation on Harris’ VP is sucking the air out of the Republicans, so I’m all for it!
I’ll leave your post, but wasn’t an invite to take this thread back to 2008.
Moderating
No more on Palin everyone.
Do you trust the Republicans in Ohio to give her a couple of weeks?
How to play this- I’m conflicted.
The gambler in me says nominate Walz, MN is quite reliably blue and his replacement will almost certainly be a Democrat. This allows Kelly to keep that AZ seat. Trouble is, I don’t think he adds a lot to the ticket.
The safe bet is to take Kelly, on the basis that it’s more important to win the presidency than to keep the Senate. His immediate replacement would be a Dem appointed by the governor as per AZ law. But what about for the next election? Kelly has the AZ seat as long as he wants it, in my opinion. But is there another AZ Democrat who would win?
In two years? Who the hell knows what will be going on then?
But that’s the thing…if it’s Kelly, and Harris wins partially because it’s Kelly, the Dems also keep the Senate seat right now. If it’s not Kelly, and Harris loses partially because it’s not Kelly, keeping that Senate seat for another 6-8-10 years is an extremely weak consolation prize.
Well, yeah, if your response is “Think of the children” rather than “We support policing the border.” Then, sure, you’ll fall a bit on the messaging but it’s not as ridiculous as what the other side is selling.
The moderate voter that’s of interest is, to be sure, the low information moderate voter. Keeping it simple and straightforward is good. But changing the messaging on that is easy. Low information voters aren’t paying attention to your VP pick and his history. They’re not doing research. They hear general phrases and what direction it seems to be coming from, and that’s it. Promote simple and direct messages and you’re done.
The interest of bringing in someone like Bullock is that he may add more messages, and ones that will sell well.
@sciurophobic : What “clear lack of consensus?” Unless you have info that I haven’t heard, just because a bunch of old farts on SD are pummeling each other with Nerf bats over the VP selection doesn’t mean that Harris & crew don’t have a running mate all dressed up and ready to go. Just like Pres Biden held off announcing his withdrawal from the race until the timing was right, Harris & the Dems will announce the VP pick at the time it sucks the max amount of coverage from Trump.
And, in fact, that’s where the August 7th voice vote date comes from, in an effort to ensure that the DNC meets the as-written Ohio law on ballot name submissions (and a lack of trust in Ohio to stick to the new September 1st law).
I’m talking about how I can find numerous articles from this pundit or another how Whitmer or Kelly or Shapiro or Beshear or somebody else is the absolutely best choice for VP.
Everyone has an opinion, particularly those who make their living publishing their opinions, as well as those of us who spend way too much of our time discussing and dissecting these things online. 
This does not, of course, mean that the people actually making the decision are suffering from any lack of consensus.