Joe Biden Just Committed to Running A Female VP.

Yeah, it's important to retain the House, take the Senate, and defeat the "Stable Genius".

Clean up the mess, again, as we did in 2008.
 
but amy klobuchar was a more popular candidate and might draw more votes for the dems as a running mate

how would kamala be as ag?


as for bernie not committing, i think they probably need to choose the running mate most likely to help win the election and that whether they are male or female shouldn't be the criteria unless it directly correlates with that. personally, i still like pete.
 
Why not Warren? If Bernie got the nod I would assume that's who he would pick.

I don't think Bernie would pick Warren (the programs can only be "his" regardless that she's the only one of the two who proposed thought-out programs). I think Biden should pick Warren.
 
Biden is old school but that's not his fault. That's all he has ever known.

As gender-identify concepts like "male" and "female" are being (rightfully) eliminated Biden still must court the older block of voters who cannot keep up with post-genital thinking. You can bet that Biden's advisors would like to reflect current terminology but cannot take that chance since every voter - of all the genders - will count.
 
Why not Warren? If Bernie got the nod I would assume that's who he would pick.

Liz Warren would be a terrible VP pick for Bernie. She brings nothing to the ticket that isn't already there.
 
I don't think Bernie would pick Warren (the programs can only be "his" regardless that she's the only one of the two who proposed thought-out programs). I think Biden should pick Warren.

Bernie and Warren are closely tied in there beliefs.
 
Bernie and Warren are closely tied in there beliefs.

Bernie doesn't really accept any beliefs but his own. I think he sees Warren (probably rightly) as a threat more than an ally and that folks are allowing their views of similar (but hardly identical) platforms cloud their observations of the actual personalities.

As I've posted before, I think that a Biden-Warren ticket is about as ideal as it's going to get--steady, experienced helmsman to get over the initial shock of the Trump era, with the promise of moving into progressive programs with a VP who is most likely going to step up in four years, if not sooner.

That said, my picks for president started with Harris and then went to Klobuchar, so I would be happy with one of those as VP--I just don't think it's the ideal teaming.
 
Kamala Harris’ A.G. office tried to keep inmates locked up for cheap labor

Kamala Harris would be the smart pick.

Ordered to reduce the population of California’s overcrowded prisons, lawyers from then-California Attorney General Kamala Harris’s office made the case that some non-violent offenders needed to stay incarcerated or else the prison system would lose a source of cheap labor.

In 2011, the Supreme Court ruled in Brown v. Plata that California’s prisons were so overcrowded that they violated the Constitution’s prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment. Three years later, in early 2014, the state was ordered to allow non-violent, second time offenders who have served half of their sentence to be eligible for parole.

According to court filings, lawyers for the state said California met benchmarks, and argued that if certain potential parolees were given a faster track out of prison, it would negatively impact the prison’s labor program including one that allowed certain inmates to work fighting California’s wildfires for about $2 a day.

The incident is just a small part of Harris’s long career as a prosecutor, which has drawn scrutiny from Democrats and activists who describe her as a late comer to the social justice movement.
Source
 
Bernie doesn't really accept any beliefs but his own. I think he sees Warren (probably rightly) as a threat more than an ally and that folks are allowing their views of similar (but hardly identical) platforms cloud their observations of the actual personalities.

As I've posted before, I think that a Biden-Warren ticket is about as ideal as it's going to get--steady, experienced helmsman to get over the initial shock of the Trump era, with the promise of moving into progressive programs with a VP who is most likely going to step up in four years, if not sooner.

That said, my picks for president started with Harris and then went to Klobuchar, so I would be happy with one of those as VP--I just don't think it's the ideal teaming.

Democrats need to be very careful about raiding a Senate seat for VP pick. Control of the Senate is critical.
 
The governor of Michigan could be a very good pick. Former prosecutor with many years of state government experience, where they actually get things done. Good geographical balance. She’s under fifty. And she handles herself very well. He could do a lot worse.
 
Democrats need to be very careful about raiding a Senate seat for VP pick. Control of the Senate is critical.

I think even more than that they have to be very, very careful for a VP matching with a 77-year-old man.

There are some governor possibilities, but most of the real possibilities are U.S. senators too. I think he's actually heavily considering Stacy Abrams (he mentioned her as a possibility a long time ago), but I don't think she is anywhere close to ready to step into the presidency, which is highly likely in the next four years.

I think the VP slot is much, much more important to watch out for than a U.S. Senate spot, no matter how important they are. As far as U.S. Senate spots, every Republican running in 2020 should be bounced out on his/her ass for not showing up to work for the American people.
 
The governor of Michigan could be a very good pick. Former prosecutor with many years of state government experience, where they actually get things done. Good geographical balance. She’s under fifty. And she handles herself very well. He could do a lot worse.

Yes, but Biden has previously responded that it most likely would be someone who stood on the presidential debate stage (not that he couldn't/wouldn't change his mind).
 
Warren's 'Michael Brown' moment

Why not Warren? If Bernie got the nod I would assume that's who he would pick.

In recognizing the five year anniversary of the death of Michael Brown — a black man who was killed by a Ferguson, Missouri, police officer — Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. Elizabeth Warren (Mass.) claimed the young man had been "murdered."

On Friday, Warren tweeted, "5 years ago Michael Brown was murdered by a white police officer in Ferguson, Missouri. Michael was unarmed yet he was shot 6 times. I stand with activists and organizers who continue the fight for justice for Michael. We must confront systemic racism and police violence head on."

Several people reminded Sen. Warren that Brown was a robbery suspect who was killed after attacking a police officer and that the officer, Darren Wilson, was cleared of wrongdoing in multiple investigations. Others accused Warren of pandering for votes with her message, and several accused her of spreading a falsehood that had already been long debunked. One person wrote, "This is a bald-faced lie."
Source
 
Back
Top