The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

Harris isn't my personal favorite choice of the names floated, but I still like her OK and I think that she is the best fit, in terms of party machine, pissing the fewest people off, etc.  I donated to her campaign when Biden dropped.  She will be less able to distance herself from the Biden administration than others would have been able, but the positives on her are just too big.  I feel pretty invigorated and hopeful with her as the choice.

I originally thought that Biden dropping the presidency and allowing Harris to run as an incumbent would be the smoothest path, but I want to backtrack that.  I like the idea of her not having day to day responsibilities and being able to just campaign day and night for the next 4 months.  It doesn't seem like there will be any credible threat to her moving ahead.

The only person I saw throw his hat in the ring was Independent Joe Manchin.  I welcome that.  I think that a little pushback from someone like Manchin would help her.  He sucks, would get his ass whooped, and it would take any stink of "anointment" off of her.  But I think he's just bloviating and not serious anyway.  For a multitude of reasons, I don't think any viable people want a shot at Harris.  Firstly, they can't beat her, and even if they could give her a run, they'd probably want to save their political capital for a more favorable time.

As for VP choices, there are a lot and I get excited by many.

I question the strategy of this kind of stuff, politically, because I don't really know what works anymore.  I think the idea of grabbing someone to shore up a specific state might be an outdated idea.  It might be more helpful to ideologically or demographically balance things.

Here's people I think are interesting choices:

Mark Kelly - Astronaut, moderate white dude from Arizona.  Has experience with MAGA weirdos.  I think that Trump has given up on McCain conservatives and Kelly is an olive branch for lapsed Republicans.  He is still progressive, but he won't freak them out.  Also, he helps offset the political violence stuff, as his wife got shot in the face.  Lastly, he's just cool.

Josh Shapiro - This is the State one.  You need Pennsylvania.  He's popular there.

Pete Buttigieg - I don't think this will happen, but he's my personal favorite choice (but also not very electable).  He's a great surrogate.  He's great on the stump.  He's great on the shows.  He's also a gay egg-head to be paired with a black woman, so I that might be a bridge too far.  I also don't know if it's a positive or a negative, but he's already in that Biden team circle.  I also think that modern politics in won and lost on Tik Tok, so Pete is good at sound clips that get passed around.

Andy Beshear - Governor of Kentucky, so there's no chance he helps you win the State, as it's out of play.  But it might be a signal to more rural voters that this is a safe pick.  It would be a bold choice if there was more time until the election, but in crunch time, I don't know.  You really need messaging over everything else.

Buttigieg would also be my personal favorite VP Pick to go along with Harris. I think that's actually a pretty strong ticket. I tell you what, Buttigieg would make Vance look like an idiot in a debate.

Didn't you post a few days ago you thought there was a sizable portion of the electorate that won't vote for a female.  I can guarantee you the "won't vote for a homosexual" group is significantly larger.  Lets shatter one glass ceiling at a time. 

It can't be Mark Kelly.  His Senate seat in AZ is too important.

I did, but Pete would be the VP, not the President. I don't think Pete has a shot at President...at least not yet, but that's coming soon too. And wasn't it you that thought a female would be president before a black man? Maybe after 4 years of Pete as VP they'll be ready for him to be the President. All those people that "won't vote for a homosexual" are getting older by the year. My kids age (mid 30's) it's starting to fall the other way.

As an AZ voter, this is 100% truth... He's one of two candidates that I made a small contribution to their campaign...Ruben Gallego is the other.

I think most would make Vance look like an idiot in a debate.

I think you need a traditional candidate like Manchin to shore up the ticket, he's got National name recognition.  He's also an Independent, so he would have to switch to Democrat, and there are a lot of people like myself that are in the middle between the far left and far right that want a middle of the road politician.  But the Democratic machine probably won't let this happen.

A big nope to a Manchin.  He sucks.

I think naming someone like Manchin (or a Republican like Kinzinger, as Hoodie suggested) appeals primarily to Trump voters, who will still vote for Trump.

Also, I thought we don't like ancient candidates?

I am not a Manchin fan.  But no Kinzinger does not appeal to Trump supporters. Trump supporters HATE him. He appeals to conservatives that don't like Trump.   Kinzinger would not convince a single person to vote for Harris that would have otherwise voted for Trump.  But Kinzinger could convince millions of conservatives and moderates that would have otherwise stayed home or voted for Chase Oliver or RFK Jr. to vote for Harris instead. The risk is Kinzinger on the ticket could cost Harris some votes to Jill Stein. 

I didn't say Trump supporters, I said Trump voters.

There are a whole lot of Nikki Haley/Ron DeSantis/etc conservatives who are very troubled about Donald Trump and would Totally Vote for someone else in the primary... but who pulled the lever for Trump in 2016, in 2020, and will pull the lever for him again in 2024.

Adam Kinzinger as the Democratic nominee for VP "appeals" to those kinds of voters, but they will vote for Trump regardless.

Not talking about them.  Talking about the people who voted for Garry Johnson or Evan McMullin in 2016 and stayed home in 2020. 

And Kinzinger could sway a decent number of Haley voters to vote for Harris.

I agree with Spider about Kinzinger.  I would be happy for him to be on the team in some role where there is ideological overlap.  VP isn’t the right fit for him.

There are lots of good VP choices available.  At this point I don’t know whether a safe choice or a bold choice is smarter.

Beshear. You get a real hillbilly to counter trumps fake hillbilly.

could be Beto

While I like Beto personally, guys like him and Stacy Abrams scare me because they haven't actually won.  They are fighting the good fight against impossible odds and they're important messengers, but I think the big stage would be a bad fit until they can work their way up.

Also, Beto pretty much said the quiet part out loud about guns and I think that will scare a lot of voters.  For some reasons, gun issues really drum up a lot of people.

I'll just leave this here. Seems like good analysis.

Kamala Harris ought to ignore pundits conventional wisdom on VP picks (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/kamala-harris-ought-to-ignore-pundits-conventional-wisdom-on-vp-picks/ar-BB1qOuFi?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=d6535b71e9944084b502b86bf8610b46&ei=1543)

Seems like dumb analysis.  Don't pick the candidate that gives you a tiny edge (in an election that will likely be won or loss based on a tiny edge in a few states) Pick someone that you would like see be the candidate in 2032.

This is my dream pick, but I just like Mayor Pete.

He's just really smart, good on the issues, good at talking, young, energizes me -- no surprises, no scandals, no vetting needed.

Everyone I talk to loves him but is afraid that "the other guy" isn't going to vote for him.  I'm done being afraid.  Pete is the best.

I'm not entirely sure that was the entire point of the article though, at least that's not what I took from it. I think the point was more to pick someone you see as a good representative of the party. That makes sense to me, make it a stronger ticket as that will get more overall votes rather than picking someone from a particular swing state. That might net you more votes in that one state, but unless the VP is helping you across all the swing states, that doesn't seem like a great idea.

I don't know how you watch this and don't think he should be the VP.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jli0_oKMG-0

I'm convinced this is the best chance we might have for a while to break that glass ceiling. When the right guy comes along, it's just time to do it. Obama was the right guy, this is the right guy too.

Hulk Hogan or not!

That was a great segment... I hadn't seen too much of his media appearances up to this point, just because I avoid watching politics on TV in general.

He would probably make a great VP.   Not entirely sure that ticket would fly, but I'm in the anti-Trump camp, so I'll full-on support whoever Harris chooses.

As the dust settles, I'm cooling on Mark Kelly.

He's not old, but he's old enough where you don't envision him being a relevant presidential candidate in 8 years.  It kind of undercuts the forward-looking exuberance and youth bump you got.  And Arizona, if you're picking states, is important, but not AS IMPORTANT as some others.  He isn't GREAT on the stump.  But you lose a senator in a reddish-purple State that you really need.  This would essentially be where Kelly's career goes to die and I think he's more useful than that.

With her pick it Harris is going to Waltz to victory. 

I like the Walz pick.

I think he keeps up the excitement.  He will steal the spotlight this week.  I think that Shapiro was "chalk" and he would not be all that interesting, but more of a safe choice.

Walz is good on the stump, he's got America's Dad vibes, and he's pretty liberal, but it's "kitchen table liberalism". ...school lunches and family leave type of stuff.