2020 US General Election Thread VI: Covid for VP!

[The Black Forrest]

Telconi uses puppets so assumptions will happen.

Like the above statement.

Is it? I remember you getting in trouble with a mod and your other accounts were mentioned.

[Northern Davincia]

So what you are saying is, "We've come this far, might as well go all the way!"?

You misread me.

I was attacking their argument that the 2nd Amendment was made to aid the people in domestic conflicts or against corrupt government bodies by point out the fact that the US government has never supported, sanctioned, approved of an armed civilian uprising. Why would the 2nd Amendment exist to support those kinds of movement while the US government itself has never been ok with those movements?

Even when the people were legally allowed to hold revolutions against the government, the government always fought back 10x harder and didn't give a shit about the cause or aftermath. It seems odd that the framework of the country would allow for civilian uprising but at no point in history has the country been ok with that.

Having the tools to resist the government means you have a chance, however slim, to succeed. That doesn't mean you are immune to opposition.

[Telconi]

Like the above statement.

Is it? I remember you getting in trouble with a mod and your other accounts were mentioned.

Yes. I'm hardly going to delve into what you claim to remember, but yes, you're wrong.

[Zurkerx]

Voters prioritize experienced VP for Biden over gender, race, according to a poll. The breakdown:

Roughly 8 out of 10 Democrats want Biden's VP to have legislative and executive experience; about half believe he should pick someone young and for him to pick a female. Fewer Democrats said Biden VP should be more liberal (41%), a person of color (36%), or religious (31%).

Among voters overall, two-thirds believe it's important Biden's VP has legislative and executive experience while 29% think it's important to pick a woman; 22% to pick someone of color.

And now some key notes:

Warren (plus-48 percentage points) edges out Harris (44 points) and Klobuchar (38 points) in net favorability among Democrats. The Massachusetts senator also leads the other two in the category among self-identified liberals (plus-53 points to Harris' 46 points and Klobuchar's 40 points); African Americans (plus-29 points to Harris' 20 and Klobuchar's 17); and voters with an unfavorable view of President Donald Trump (plus-38 points to Harris' 34 and Klobuchar's 33).

But Klobuchar enjoys higher net marks in the most categories overall, including several key ones. The Minnesota senator bested her two colleagues among all voters and in every region of the country — the Midwest, Northeast, South and the West. And Klobuchar had a stronger image among white voters, independents, Republicans, moderates and conservatives and those with a favorable view of Trump.

Harris, a California senator, follows closely Warren among Latino voters and trails Klobuchar slightly in the West.

Overall, voters don't care so much for the stylish points (no surprise), but they do value experience given the pandemic transpiring right now and it seems the overall best choice is Klobuchar.

[Cisairse]

Fewer Democrats said Biden VP should be more liberal (41%)

That is eerily close to the percentage of the vote that Bernie won in 2016.

Warren (plus-48 percentage points) edges out Harris (44 points) and Klobuchar (38 points) in net favorability among Democrats.

That's extremely surprising to me. Warren over Klobuchar for favorability? That contradicts previous YouGov polls. Fascinating.

The Massachusetts senator also leads the other two in the category among self-identified liberals (plus-53 points to Harris' 46 points and Klobuchar's 40 points); African Americans (plus-29 points to Harris' 20 and Klobuchar's 17); and voters with an unfavorable view of President Donald Trump (plus-38 points to Harris' 34 and Klobuchar's 33).

But Klobuchar enjoys higher net marks in the most categories overall, including several key ones. The Minnesota senator bested her two colleagues among all voters and in every region of the country — the Midwest, Northeast, South and the West. And Klobuchar had a stronger image among white voters, independents, Republicans, moderates and conservatives and those with a favorable view of Trump.

Harris, a California senator, follows closely Warren among Latino voters and trails Klobuchar slightly in the West.

Overall, voters don't care so much for the stylish points (no surprise), but they do value experience given the pandemic transpiring right now and it seems the overall best choice is Klobuchar.

Warren being the lead choice among African-Americans is an interesting point here.

The poll only asked about these three candidates? That's disappointing.

[Ngelmish]

The basic problem being that Biden still seems to be conflating "who would be a good candidate for shoring up my weaknesses" and, "who do I think would be a good candidate in 2024" over "who would be a great president in 2021, if it comes to that." Warren's a mixed bag, but the other two are a hard pass.

[Cisairse]

The basic problem being that Biden still seems to be conflating "who would be a good candidate for shoring up my weaknesses" and, "who do I think would be a good candidate in 2024" over "who would be a great president in 2021, if it comes to that." Warren's a mixed bag, but the other two are a hard pass.

Actually, Biden has said that his number one priority for assessing a running mate is if they have the capability to govern as president "from day 1."

Ignoring the people who took that quote and ran with it to mean that Biden was going to win and then resign, I believe that Biden's head is in the right place.

[Northern Davincia]

The basic problem being that Biden still seems to be conflating "who would be a good candidate for shoring up my weaknesses" and, "who do I think would be a good candidate in 2024" over "who would be a great president in 2021, if it comes to that." Warren's a mixed bag, but the other two are a hard pass.

Actually, Biden has said that his number one priority for assessing a running mate is if they have the capability to govern as president "from day 1."

Ignoring the people who took that quote and ran with it to mean that Biden was going to win and then resign, I believe that Biden's head is in the right place.

His real priority is to choose someone with XX chromosomes.

[Cisairse]

Actually, Biden has said that his number one priority for assessing a running mate is if they have the capability to govern as president "from day 1."

Ignoring the people who took that quote and ran with it to mean that Biden was going to win and then resign, I believe that Biden's head is in the right place.

His real priority is to choose someone with XX chromosomes.

I wouldn't say that a criteria is a priority; criteria is simultaneously more constricting (it's a yes/no) and less meaningful (you can't rank different qualifying candidates by it).

[Gig em Aggies]

Actually, Biden has said that his number one priority for assessing a running mate is if they have the capability to govern as president "from day 1."

Ignoring the people who took that quote and ran with it to mean that Biden was going to win and then resign, I believe that Biden's head is in the right place.

His real priority is to choose someone with XX chromosomes.

that's probably gonna cost him voters purely because he's choosing based on sex rather then ability to actually be able to handle a job such as VPOTUS

[Cisairse]

His real priority is to choose someone with XX chromosomes.

that's probably gonna cost him voters purely because he's choosing based on sex rather then ability to actually be able to handle a job such as VPOTUS

Why do you assume he's choosing someone who doesn't have the ability to handle being vice president simply because they're a woman?

[Farnhamia]

His real priority is to choose someone with XX chromosomes.

that's probably gonna cost him voters purely because he's choosing based on sex rather then ability to actually be able to handle a job such as VPOTUS

A job described by a great Texan as "not worth a bucket of warm piss"?

[Zurkerx]

Fewer Democrats said Biden VP should be more liberal (41%)

That is eerily close to the percentage of the vote that Bernie won in 2016.

Warren (plus-48 percentage points) edges out Harris (44 points) and Klobuchar (38 points) in net favorability among Democrats.

That's extremely surprising to me. Warren over Klobuchar for favorability? That contradicts previous YouGov polls. Fascinating.

The Massachusetts senator also leads the other two in the category among self-identified liberals (plus-53 points to Harris' 46 points and Klobuchar's 40 points); African Americans (plus-29 points to Harris' 20 and Klobuchar's 17); and voters with an unfavorable view of President Donald Trump (plus-38 points to Harris' 34 and Klobuchar's 33).

But Klobuchar enjoys higher net marks in the most categories overall, including several key ones. The Minnesota senator bested her two colleagues among all voters and in every region of the country — the Midwest, Northeast, South and the West. And Klobuchar had a stronger image among white voters, independents, Republicans, moderates and conservatives and those with a favorable view of Trump.

Harris, a California senator, follows closely Warren among Latino voters and trails Klobuchar slightly in the West.

Overall, voters don't care so much for the stylish points (no surprise), but they do value experience given the pandemic transpiring right now and it seems the overall best choice is Klobuchar.

Warren being the lead choice among African-Americans is an interesting point here.

The poll only asked about these three candidates? That's disappointing.

Indeed though this is 2020, circumstances are different this time around, in some cases anyway. We should keep in mind that this is just one poll and could be an outlier. Not sure how many African-Americans were polled but I found that interesting too. Either way, it's disappointing that there were more stats on these three than others. But if we go off of what Biden has said, it's pretty clear he's looking closely at someone like Klobuchar, Harris, Whitmer, Masto, or KLB; maybe Bladwin, Duckworth, Warren, or Abrams.

[South Ccanda]

So what you are saying is, "We've come this far, might as well go all the way!"?

You misread me.

I was attacking their argument that the 2nd Amendment was made to aid the people in domestic conflicts or against corrupt government bodies by point out the fact that the US government has never supported, sanctioned, approved of an armed civilian uprising. Why would the 2nd Amendment exist to support those kinds of movement while the US government itself has never been ok with those movements?

Even when the people were legally allowed to hold revolutions against the government, the government always fought back 10x harder and didn't give a shit about the cause or aftermath. It seems odd that the framework of the country would allow for a civilian uprising but at no point in history has the country been ok with that.

Legitimate question, when has it ever been legal to revolt against the government? I'm pretty sure that's viewed as treason, even if the revolting party is in the right. The USA does not have to be okay with the fact that the people can revolt at any time. they don't have a choice but to live with that. That's how our forefathers wanted it to be.

[Zurkerx]

The basic problem being that Biden still seems to be conflating "who would be a good candidate for shoring up my weaknesses" and, "who do I think would be a good candidate in 2024" over "who would be a great president in 2021, if it comes to that." Warren's a mixed bag, but the other two are a hard pass.

Warren was never going to be VP anyway; she'll get another cabinet more likely before that. Besides, most potential VPs that express "I would be honored to be so-and-so's VP" usually doesn't get it anyway; several such as Whitmer, Abrams, Warren, and Harris have done just that. That doesn't mean he'll pick one of them, but their chances seem slimmer now since they expressed it. I'm still convinced it'll be either Klobuchar or Whitmer; my dark horse picks are Baldwin, KLB, or Duckworth.

[Cisairse]

That is eerily close to the percentage of the vote that Bernie won in 2016.



That's extremely surprising to me. Warren over Klobuchar for favorability? That contradicts previous YouGov polls. Fascinating.



Warren being the lead choice among African-Americans is an interesting point here.

The poll only asked about these three candidates? That's disappointing.

Indeed though this is 2020, circumstances are different this time around, in some cases anyway. We should keep in mind that this is just one poll and could be an outlier. Not sure how many African-Americans were polled but I found that interesting too. Either way, it's disappointing that there were more stats on these three than others. But if we go off of what Biden has said, it's pretty clear he's looking closely at someone like Klobuchar, Harris, Whitmer, Masto, or KLB; maybe Bladwin, Duckworth, Warren, or Abrams.

If it actually ends up being Warren I'm volunteering for the campaign, hands-down.

[Saturna1ia]

His real priority is to choose someone with XX chromosomes.

One of the priorities, yes. Unconcerning as long as she has government experience (i.e. anyone on the short-list except Abrams if she's even on it). The move will bring America a step closer to the ideals of republicanism.

[Ngelmish]

The basic problem being that Biden still seems to be conflating "who would be a good candidate for shoring up my weaknesses" and, "who do I think would be a good candidate in 2024" over "who would be a great president in 2021, if it comes to that." Warren's a mixed bag, but the other two are a hard pass.

Actually, Biden has said that his number one priority for assessing a running mate is if they have the capability to govern as president "from day 1."

Ignoring the people who took that quote and ran with it to mean that Biden was going to win and then resign, I believe that Biden's head is in the right place.

I'm aware that he's said that (he's also said that it's important for a running mate to shore up one's own shortcomings). The problem is that the names being leaked (mostly) don't inspire confidence. With the exception of Warren, I haven't heard anyone mentioned who has what a different president called "the vision thing." And given that Biden himself is not exactly a vision candidate, that's not a great outlook for the next cycle.

But perhaps I'm allowing my own preferences to lead me to unwarranted conclusions.

The basic problem being that Biden still seems to be conflating "who would be a good candidate for shoring up my weaknesses" and, "who do I think would be a good candidate in 2024" over "who would be a great president in 2021, if it comes to that." Warren's a mixed bag, but the other two are a hard pass.

Warren was never going to be VP anyway; she'll get another cabinet more likely before that. Besides, most potential VPs that express "I would be honored to be so-and-so's VP" usually doesn't get it anyway; several such as Whitmer, Abrams, Warren, and Harris have done just that. That doesn't mean he'll pick one of them, but their chances seem slimmer now since they expressed it. I'm still convinced it'll be either Klobuchar or Whitmer; my dark horse picks are Baldwin, KLB, or Duckworth.

To clarify, I don't expect it to be Warren.

[Northern Davincia]

His real priority is to choose someone with XX chromosomes.

One of the priorities, yes. Unconcerning as long as she has government experience (i.e. anyone on the short-list except Abrams if she's even on it). The move will bring America a step closer to the ideals of republicanism.

I would have admired Biden if he never announced that he was going to choose a woman, but did it anyway. What he did was pure pandering.

[Cisairse]

One of the priorities, yes. Unconcerning as long as she has government experience (i.e. anyone on the short-list except Abrams if she's even on it). The move will bring America a step closer to the ideals of republicanism.

I would have admired Biden if he never announced that he was going to choose a woman, but did it anyway. What he did was pure pandering.

Why shouldn't politicians pander? They're trying to solicit votes.

[Bombadil]

I would have admired Biden if he never announced that he was going to choose a woman, but did it anyway. What he did was pure pandering.

Why shouldn't politicians pander? They're trying to solicit votes.

Pretty sure ND wouldn't have admired Biden at all regardless. Frankly it's high time a female was at least VP anyway.

[Northern Davincia]

I would have admired Biden if he never announced that he was going to choose a woman, but did it anyway. What he did was pure pandering.

Why shouldn't politicians pander? They're trying to solicit votes.

Because it's demeaning.

Why shouldn't politicians pander? They're trying to solicit votes.

Pretty sure ND wouldn't have admired Biden at all regardless. Frankly it's high time a female was at least VP anyway.

I can admire certain actions more than people. I don't buy the argument that it's "her time" or that a woman deserves the position.

[Aureumterra]

Why shouldn't politicians pander? They're trying to solicit votes.

Pretty sure ND wouldn't have admired Biden at all regardless. Frankly it's high time a female was at least VP anyway.

Why does the gender matter at all?

[Bombadil]

Pretty sure ND wouldn't have admired Biden at all regardless. Frankly it's high time a female was at least VP anyway.

Why does the gender matter at all?

it seems to matter given there's never been a female VP. As if only men have been best qualified in the past, that's clearly not the case, VPs are selected to balance the ticket, no better balance to another old white man president than the first female VP.

[Saturna1ia]

Why shouldn't politicians pander? They're trying to solicit votes.

Because it's demeaning.

Actually, it's a good byproduct of democratic governance. Not too far back in human history rulers cared little or at all about making appeals to their subjects. It was accept my divine right to reign over you or be cast out and die peasant.