What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Democratic VP candidates - Kamala Harris Is The Choice (1 Viewer)

The electorate is looking for a bit more than "has multiple college degrees", I think.

If Democrats are going to hammer home the contrast between "lifetime of service to their country" vs. "zero government experience", then they ought not to pick someone whose sole political experience is 10 years as a minority member of a state legislature.
How much does the electorate really look at the VP?

She would destroy Pence or Haley in a VP debate.

She would be a well-spoken surrogate on the campaign trail.

She would probably continue her work on expanding voter access a new Voting Rights Bill,  if she were the VP
I don't think that the electorate pays too much attention to the VP.......unless the VP candidate has some red flags. The electorate just wants to know that your VP will be competent enough to hold down the fort if you happen to die. I don't think they care much about winning debates, being a surrogate on the campaign trail, or working on various policy agendas.

And......I don't think that Stacey Abrams makes undecided voters feel confident that she would adequately hold down the fort.

 
How often is the VP candidate somebody who ran against the Presidential candidate? I seriously have no idea. As much as I'd love to see Klobuchar, it seems unlikely that any of those who have dropped out would be considered for VP. 
It's not uncommon.  Off the top of my head:

2008 - Obama picked Biden

2004 - Kerry picked Edwards

1980 - Reagan picked George H.W. Bush

There are probably a bunch of other examples.

 
Seem the GOP VP is pretty easy - Nikki Haley
I think it'll be Pence all the way.

If the coronavirus outbreak is relatively mild, then Pence is hailed as a national hero.

If the coronavirus outbreak is severe, then Trump and his supporters just blame Obama for [failing to create a vaccine/cutting the budget/allowing dirty immigrants to infect the rest of us/insert fake excuse here] and Pence remains on the ticket.

 
And......I don't think that Stacey Abrams makes undecided voters feel confident that she would adequately hold down the fort.
Most of that is down to most people don't know her.  Make her a VP candidate, and a lot more people would get to know her.

Again, I don't think she is my choice - but she is definitely a viable contender.  Those that dismiss her chances are likely people who are either Republican, or don't know her.

 
Doesn't Stacey Abrams still contend she won the Ga. Governor race? 

Can she be VP and Governor at the same time?
She gave a speech in which she acknowledged defeat but refused to call it a "concession" (because she would be admitting that her opponent's victory was "right" and "proper").

That's not quite the same as "contending that she won", but it's still not a good look.

 
Dave Wasserman@Redistrict·1m

Me, standing next to a triumphant Rep. Jim Clyburn in a green room yesterday: "So Biden's got to put you on the ticket now, right?"

Clyburn: "Aw, hell no!"

Cross one off the shortlist.

:lol:

 
She gave a speech in which she acknowledged defeat but refused to call it a "concession" (because she would be admitting that her opponent's victory was "right" and "proper").

That's not quite the same as "contending that she won", but it's still not a good look.
That's a good look for a minority candidate running in a state that has historically not been kind to minorities. If Donald Trump can be revered for his ability to  "fight back," then Stacey Abrams should be able to as well.

 
She gave a speech in which she acknowledged defeat but refused to call it a "concession" (because she would be admitting that her opponent's victory was "right" and "proper").

That's not quite the same as "contending that she won", but it's still not a good look.
That's a good look for a minority candidate running in a state that has historically not been kind to minorities. If Donald Trump can be revered for his ability to  "fight back," then Stacey Abrams should be able to as well.
The problem is that Democrats are expected to follow an ethical code that Republicans themselves are allowed to ignore.

Trump can say "Rigged election!" and not lose a single vote, but if Al Gore or Stacey Abrams fail to follow protocol, it will forever follow them and taint them. That's just the way things work right now.

 
The problem is that Democrats are expected to follow an ethical code that Republicans themselves are allowed to ignore.

Trump can say "Rigged election!" and not lose a single vote, but if Al Gore or Stacey Abrams fail to follow protocol, it will forever follow them and taint them. That's just the way things work right now.
There's no avoiding those kinds of smears anyway. Trump will take any past instance that is even remotely questionable and just beat a Dem candidate to death with it. (I think this is what some of our Trump supporters call his "amazing political instincts," btw). What she did in Georgia was nothing short of amazing and Dem voters will see through the Donald BS -- it's what's fueling the potentially monstrous turnout to begin with, the need of so many to see Trump out -- and recognize that once again he's tarring something admirable because he's not capable of that kind of inner strength himself.

 
Tell me more about her - I really don't know anything.
Career politician who came from a very wealthy family.  Dad was CEO of Blue-Cross Blue Shield Michigan`s biggest health care insurer for 19 years.   Had solid approval ratings first year that has steadily dropped.

Did not get her way putting a huge gas tax through so she vetoed a bunch of other state programs in protest.

 
Was this about infrastructure/roads/bridges improvement, or am I thinking of someplace else?
The pace frustrated some of Whitmer’s supporters and allies, including voters in southeast Michigan who helped propel her to office in 2018. Her signature issue, fixing roads was a debacle and went nowhere when she proposed raising more than $2 billion a year by raising the gas tax by 45 cents per gallon.

“She hasn’t hit any real home runs in a way that has captured the public’s attention,” said Greg Bowens, a southeast Michigan political consultant.

“The thing that tends to stick in people’s mind is that she wants to raise the gas tax 45 cents, and  universally not many people who think that’s a great idea.”

Detroit-area activists hoped Whitmer would be more aggressive, Bowens said. The governor hasn’t pushed to repeal the state’s emergency manager law and rankled black voters when she proposed closing Benton Harbor High School, a plan she dropped after public outcry.

“People were so used to protesting the unfairness of governing by Republicans, particularly as it relates to race, that it was kind of shocking that Whitmer did the same,” Bowens said. 

Budget battle

The lack of progress was embodied by a budget battle between Whitmer and GOP leaders that dragged on for nine months.

Avoiding a government shutdown, Whitmer used an unprecedented flurry of executive power this fall to try to force continued negotiations, issuing $947 million in line-item vetoes and using rare executive powers to transfer $625 million within state departments.\

 The ensuing power struggle jeopardized funding for local sheriffs, county jails,  schools districts and rural hospitals.

Outside of Lansing, some Democrats questioned the governor they’d helped elect.

“She had the right strategy with the line-item veto, but then she messed with autism funding and charter schools” said Steve Hood, a Detroit political consultant and talk radio host. “She caused herself a problem.”

While she later reversed cuts, Whitmer initially vetoed $1 million in funding for an Autism Navigator program that provides online resources and a free call center for parents. She also nixed $35 million for charter schools that are popular in southeast Michigan, temporarily denying a per-pupil funding increase provided to other public schools.

The deal Whitmer and GOP leaders struck in December restored $573.8 in vetoed spending and reversed $82.3 million in transfers. It will require the governor to give notice to the Legislature before executing transfers in future years, but require the Legislature to send a budget to the governor three months ahead of the constitutional deadline. 

Left unresolved: how to spend another $373 million in vetoed funding and what to about crumbling roads, mediocre schools or rising college costs, issues that Whitmer campaigned to fix. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bernie will not take anyone to appease others, like a Klobachar. He'll take someone that aligns with his thinking.
It has to be.  There can't be a revolution if the person second in command/next in line isn't lockstep with the ideology.  Sanders would pick the ghost of Lincoln Steffens before he'd pick Harris/Buttigieg/Kohlbacher et. et.  

 
Just asking...i know the expectation is a female VP choice, but there didn’t seem to be enough support for a female Potus this time. Why would a female be a good VP, especially since Biden has made his age an issue and he won’t run for re-election or is the that the only way a female gets to Potus in the near term?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Just asking...i know the expectation is a female VP choice, but there didn’t seem to be enough support for a female Potus this time. Why would a female be a good VP, especially since Biden has made his age an issue and he won’t run for re-election. 
A couple of reasons - imo.

1. Suburban women carried the Dems to a blue wave in 2018.  It would be smart to build on that.

2.  There is a lot of negativity around the Dems right now for whittling down the candidates to two old white guys, while touting themselves as the party of inclusion.

Bonus - its hard to change people's perceptions of what an ideal candidate looks like, unless you are willing to take a look outside the box.  Even as VP, a woman would be a powerful symbol and role model for voters to see.

 
The thing about Palin is that her credentials were exactly what you look for in a VP candidate. If she would have just kept her mouth shut and acted more like Mike Pence, John McCain might have won in 2008. But Palin decided to go rogue, at which point no amount of Statorama cheerleading could have saved him.
Mostly agree on first sentence (she was very light on experience, having only been governor for two years), but second sentence is absolute BS. McCain was never going to win that race, and his choice of Palin was an absolute desperation move precisely because he recognized that fact.

Palin helped him shore up his base, but cost him support among swing voters. I think I heard somewhere that her net effect on the race was in the realm of negative 2-3 points, which would be at the high end of VP impacts. Given that McCain lost by 8 points, it is completely inconceivable that she even came close to swinging the race.

 
I think there are a lot of misconceptions about VP picks. The biggest one is that the VP has much of an impact at all, positive or negative. The second biggest is that they have a targeted political impact (ie, that they can help lock down their home state). The third is that they have to be someone who ran in the most recent primary.

The largest significance of a VP pick is what it says about the campaign's overall narrative. When Clinton picked Gore, it said he was doubling down on moderate Southerners because he was a new kind of Democrat. When Bush picked Cheney and Obama picked Biden, it was meant as a reassurance that they would surround themselves with experienced Washington types.

I have no idea who Bernie would pick and I don't think he'll get the chance anyway. As for Biden, the main issue for him is that, even if he denies it, a lot of people are going to assume he's a one-termer, so they will evaluate whoever he picks in terms of their plausibility as a president. (We should also think of that person as the potential Democratic nominee in 2024 if the ticket wins). I also agree that it's going to be really hard for him to pick a white male (which is too bad; I think Sherrod Brown, Brian Schatz or Chris Murphy would all be strong choices).

I like Stacey Abrams a lot and think there's a really good chance she will be our first female and first black female president. But I'm really not sure she passes the plausibility threshold, especially given Biden's age. I like Harris and Booker a lot, too, but the fact that they ran such poor campaigns gives me a little pause.

A couple names I'm intrigued by based on their resumes (not knowing a ton about them): Sens. Catherine Cortez-Masto (NV) and Tammy Duckworth (IL). Duckworth in particular is a great story -- Asian-American war-hero amputee who would perfectly underscore Biden's message about "restoring the soul of America". But again, that's all based on superficial qualities. I have no idea about her political skills, managerial abilities, etc.

 
Mostly agree on first sentence (she was very light on experience, having only been governor for two years), but second sentence is absolute BS. McCain was never going to win that race, and his choice of Palin was an absolute desperation move precisely because he recognized that fact.

Palin helped him shore up his base, but cost him support among swing voters. I think I heard somewhere that her net effect on the race was in the realm of negative 2-3 points, which would be at the high end of VP impacts. Given that McCain lost by 8 points, it is completely inconceivable that she even came close to swinging the race.
it's THE reason i didn't vote for him.

like the Tammy Duckworth idea.  Any women that might help him in FL?

 
Pence has been a good soldier.  He stands there behind Trump with his silver hair and approving looks. No way even someone like Trump pulls the carpet from underneath him.

 
Pence has been a good soldier.  He stands there behind Trump with his silver hair and approving looks. No way even someone like Trump pulls the carpet from underneath him.
Yeah, how does that work with narcissists? Are they afraid to associate with anyone who may outshine them by appearing to be smarter and more capable?

Mike Pence, nobody's shining star but ever willing to cast an adoring look Trump's way, might be way more valued by Don than someone who appears to be intelligent and capable like Nikki Haley.

 
Not many people realize that Abraham Lincoln did it also.
Until the last half century or so, VP was almost universally considered a backwater. Prior to Nixon in 1960, I think the last sitting VP to run for president was Martin Van Buren. So it was much more common to swap them in and out depending on various political needs (it was also not necessarily the decision of the presidential candidate)

The problem with doing it now is that it is almost universally seen as an admission of weakness. If Trump were to dump Pence tomorrow, it would send the signal that a) he made a mistake in 2016, and b) he sees himself in trouble this year. Far easier to stick with what you have.

 
Probably a woman, but Buttigieg might help Joe in the younger demographics.  And election-helping aside, he's probably the best choice.

 
Probably a woman, but Buttigieg might help Joe in the younger demographics.  And election-helping aside, he's probably the best choice.
As much as I like Pete, or maybe as an example, Pete did not do well among the younger voters - his wheelhouse was the 40-50ish age bracket.

And, I just think picking a white male creates an unnecessary distraction for the Dems when they should be trying to come together.  There are a lot of highly qualified women who should/will be considered - I think Biden will find the right match.

 
Can't believe nobody has mentioned the obvious choice. She has experience!

I agree with the others, I expect a woman on the Democratic side to be the VP choice. On the Republican side, I think there's a non-zero chance that Trump dumps Pence to go with someone like Haley. I think he's locked up the evangelical vote already and no longer needs Pence to hold it.

 
I think Biden will find the right match.
I mean, he'll find someone.  But people seem to want a relatively young minority woman with experience that convinces people she could step in as President at any time and a dynamic presence that will help the campaign.  There is no such person in my estimation.  He is going to have to decide which of those criteria are most important and dispense with the rest.

 
I mean, he'll find someone.  But people seem to want a relatively young minority woman with experience that convinces people she could step in as President at any time and a dynamic presence that will help the campaign.  There is no such person in my estimation.  He is going to have to decide which of those criteria are most important and dispense with the rest.
This reminds me of a thought I have running through my head:

I think the collective electorate goes through the same process in choosing a president.   Here we are, a year+ since the race began in earnest, and we have chewed up and spit out any number of candidates as not being acceptable, for one reason or another, and we are left with two old white guys - so now everyone is complaining that there is no diversity left.

No ####.  We demand perfection, and slowly crush those that are not perfect one at at time until we are left with what we have.

No candidate was perfect.  No candidate had all the right age/youth and experience.  Nobody checked all the boxes.  We chased off some very good candidates while waiting for perfection to show up - and now we wonder how we got here.

 
I mean, he'll find someone.  But people seem to want a relatively young minority woman with experience that convinces people she could step in as President at any time and a dynamic presence that will help the campaign.  There is no such person in my estimation.  He is going to have to decide which of those criteria are most important and dispense with the rest.
Best piece of wisdom I ever received from my dad:

You can have anything you want. You just can't have everything you want.

It was true when I looked for an apartment in NYC, and it's true when considering potential VP choices.

So yes, there are probably some boxes that Biden needs to check. But ultimately, he should go with someone he likes, trusts and respects, and who he thinks could step up and be a good president if called upon. Everything else is negotiable.

 
How about Catherine Cortez Masto?  long time Nevada attorney General, now freshman senator from Nevada?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Until the last half century or so, VP was almost universally considered a backwater. Prior to Nixon in 1960, I think the last sitting VP to run for president was Martin Van Buren. So it was much more common to swap them in and out depending on various political needs (it was also not necessarily the decision of the presidential candidate)

The problem with doing it now is that it is almost universally seen as an admission of weakness. If Trump were to dump Pence tomorrow, it would send the signal that a) he made a mistake in 2016, and b) he sees himself in trouble this year. Far easier to stick with what you have.
And the VP's use to be voted on separate from the president.  That could have been interesting this year.

 
After Klobuchar and Beto delivered their states, they both have to be on the short list. Who is more useful to the ticket to deliver swing states?  Who will debate Pence better and give a great dnc speech?

i also like kamala and know many pulling for Abrams. 
 

The way biden spoke about Pete though — he has some type of big plans for him. SoS or SoD?  Don’t think VP. 

 
And the VP's use to be voted on separate from the president.  That could have been interesting this year.
Technically they still are. When the Electoral College meets, each elector casts one vote for president and one for vice. Theoretically, if enough of the electors defect they could choose a VP from the losing ticket. Also, if no candidate gets a majority of electoral votes, the House chooses the president while the Senate chooses the VP.

I think what you're referring to is the fact that, prior to the 11th Amendment, the VP was simply the person with the second most electoral votes. That was why the 1800 election ended in a tie between Jefferson and Burr, who was supposed to be his VP candidate but who got the same number of EVs, thereby sending the race to the House.

 
Your VP choice should just cement and bring in additional voters that may be wavering or sitting out.  The obvious answer to me is Abrams.  Female, African American, seems to be moderate and has the right temperament.  She's smart as hell and very inspirational speaker.  I'd absolutely love to see her as the VP and then have them groom her to run in 2024.

 
It seems unlikely that Biden will pick someone before the nomination is sowed by. If true the strategic value of nominating Warren seems minimal and there are a lot of potential downsides. Most indications are Biden is going to try target moderates in the general election. The VP choice will likely help him with this message. I would be shocked if the choice doesn't help him win Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and or North Carolina. 

He will pick someone with a fair amount of experience. I doubt he selects anyone under 50. 

I would also be surprised if he doesn't pick a woman.

 
I would absolutely love Sally Yates, but fear she’d serve as a easy foil for Trump to focus on Mueller and the swamp 

 
It seems unlikely that Biden will pick someone before the nomination is sowed by. If true the strategic value of nominating Warren seems minimal and there are a lot of potential downsides. Most indications are Biden is going to try target moderates in the general election. The VP choice will likely help him with this message. I would be shocked if the choice doesn't help him win Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and or North Carolina. 

He will pick someone with a fair amount of experience. I doubt he selects anyone under 50. 

I would also be surprised if he doesn't pick a woman.
I disagree.  It's Biden's job to deliver on moderates in swing states.  His VP should be a person who drives the Democratic base to the polls in droves come November; and by Democratic base, I specifically mean women and African Americans.  Have to put muscle into both sides of the barbell.  I'll say it again, I think Kamala Harris is the obvious pick for VP.

 
I disagree.  It's Biden's job to deliver on moderates in swing states.  His VP should be a person who drives the Democratic base to the polls in droves come November; and by Democratic base, I specifically mean women and African Americans.  Have to put muscle into both sides of the barbell.  I'll say it again, I think Kamala Harris is the obvious pick for VP.
I don't think a Californian ex-prosecutor is the right call here. There are better options.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top