Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,971
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,971
Likes: 29

The last few days, I initially heard that Biden would select a running mate by May 1st. Now I'm hearing that they'll begin a V.P. selection-committee to begin the process on May 1st or early May.

The V.P. in this case is far more important than usual, given Biden's age, and both Biden's mental and physical fragility. The likelihood that Biden would die in office, and the V.P. would actually become president (in the hypothetical possibility that Biden could actually be elected) is quite high.

Biden has made clear he wants to select a woman, and I don't recall the exact words, but has implied he leans toward selecting a woman of color.

Two early suggestions :

One is Michigan governor Gretchen Whitmer.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gretchen_Whitmer
Although with her arbitrary, illogical, authoritarian, and outright partisan bullying of Michigan citizens with coronavirus sheltering laws, I hope she has eliminated herself as a choice. But from a Democrat point of view, she governs a swing state, and selecting her could help Biden to win Michigan in Nov 2020. That Trump won in 2016.

Another is Stacy Abrams.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stacey_Abrams
Who I see as a vicious radical leftist idealogue, highly controversial, and prone toward race baiting. As I recall, Biden never suggested her as a possibility, but Abrams in a televised interview offered herself (in all modesty) as a "highly qualified" candidate for V.P., and implied that Biden is a racist if he doesn't pick her. Yeah, that should help her chances.... She is a poisonous leftist radical, whose first impulse at every turn is to accuse any who run against her as racist, and any who defeat her of winning by unlawful and racist means.


I think Democrats remain orgasmic at the possibility of selecting Michelle Obama as V.P., or even as Presidential candidate, if she even wanted the job.

I'd consider a good candidate to be one who
1) has executive experience, and proven accomplishments in a role as executive
2) has a unifying national message, and is not a poisonous demagogue
3) Comes from a key battleground state, and therefore brings a greater possibility of winning her home state and other states in the region.

While Michelle Obama is just as ideologically poisonous as husband Barack Obama or Stacy Abrams, she is perceived (through lack of media coverage of her public comments and radical history since college) as moderate and is very liked in the polls, and has name reccognition as the former first lady. First ladies all tend to be more popular than their husbands.


Amy Klobuchar is a midwestern former 2020 candidate, who has executive experience.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amy_Klobuchar
And while having some red meat partisan rhetoric, is less prone to partisanship than others in her party. And seems faairly accomplished as a former executive leader. I'd consider her, but the Democrats likely would not, because she is white.


Tulsi Gabbard is another I consider, while left-leaning, less extreme in her rhetoric, more of an independent thinker, and as a Major in the National Guard, more able to step in as commander in chief to replace Biden. And as a pacific-islander, fits the "woman of color" checkbox.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulsi_Gabbard
But as the Democrat party and liberal media tried so desperately to destroy her as a 2020 candidate, she is not likely to be selected as V.P., despite that she is among the least extreme and most palatable V.P. choices.
While I like her on some levels, she lost me at amnesty for illegals, de-criminalizing illegal immigration, and taxpayer-funded healthcare for illegals. Her hand went up with all the other 2020 Democrat candidates at the debates to this question.

So who would anyone else choose ideally as a V.P. for Biden?

And more realistically, who do you think Biden (or the behind-the-scenes hand-wringers who make Biden's decisions for him) will choose?
The window will likely close on this speculation within a week or two at most.





Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,971
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,971
Likes: 29



Another reason this V.P. selection is so crucial is because, through either mential or physical infirmity prohibiting his going on till November, or because of the more recent sexual/rape allegations by Tara Reade (which by the way are far more credible and documented than those of the Democrat-celebrated Christine Blasey Ford, but are selectively omitted from coverage or discussion by either the Democrat leadership or the liberal media). Or Biden's extensive corruption in Ukraine, China, or domestically, where his sons and brothers have reaped enormous fortunes by selling Joseph Biden's office.

It's entirely possible Biden could end his campaign for any of these reasons, and his V.P. choice could run the rest of the distance till November as the new Democrat nominee.

Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
When Trump rambles on about ingesting Lysol it’s funny to see you push partisan crap like this. I am looking forward to Biden’s VP announcement. While I would love to see Michelle Obama I think she’s made it clear she was done after 8 years with her husband in office. There are plenty of good picks out there so have no idea who it would be. Amy from my state is probably in the running and she did well in the debates.


Fair play!
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,971
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,971
Likes: 29

?!?

All I did was speculate about possible running mates for Biden, and in some cited possibilities, why I think they might or might not be chosen, and ask what others thought were some possibilities.

While I bashed quite a few, I praised Amy Klobuchar and Tulsi Gabbard. With a few caveats.

Some other Democrats I've liked over the years include former Virginia Senator Jim Webb, Tim Ryan, and John Delaney, who are proven and moderate leaders, too moderate to be selected by a Demcorat party that has lurched insane-far-Left.

Another from the 1980's who would have made a good president is Sen Sam. Nunn. Last I saw, he was part of a think tank for nuclear arms reduction. And the late Zell Miller of Georgia.

Miller in particular was reminiscent in style to Republican Sen John Kennedy of Mississippi, with his common-sense and often very funny folksy metaphors and witticisms, referencing events in current politics.
The last I saw Zell Miller was when he was interviewed by Tim Russert, if I recall about the Howard Dean campaign and some idiot thing Dean had said stereotyping all southerners as having gun racks in their trucks. That Miller rightly speculated had already cost Dean the southern vote, and his party's nomination.


At one time I thought Kamala Harris was a good pick in the primaries. But just like Elizabeth Warren, both despite fawning and endless praise by the liberal media, shot themselves in the foot multiple times until they finally lost support in spite of the fawning media, who finally were forced to report their campaign errors.

At one point, I heard it speculated that Elizabeth Warren was the favored successor of Barack Obama himself, to carry on his legacy. That has certainly changed.


Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951
Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit"
15000+ posts
Offline
Officially "too old for this shit"
15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951
Likes: 6
 Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man
I would love to see Michelle Obama I think she’s made it clear she was done after 8 years with her husband in office.


Other than being roughly as unqualified as Trump to be President what, exactly, has she done that qualifies her to be VP?

Being a nice person or married to a president is no more qualification that assuming my ex-wife could practice law.

Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951
Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit"
15000+ posts
Offline
Officially "too old for this shit"
15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951
Likes: 6
 Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man
Amy from my state is probably in the running and she did well in the debates.


I suspect Klobacher is the frontrunner if not the presumptive favorite. She got out of the race so quickly one thinks a deal might have been cut, There's also the fact that she brings in some potential appeal to the midwest.

Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
 Originally Posted By: the G-man
 Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man
Amy from my state is probably in the running and she did well in the debates.


I suspect Klobacher is the frontrunner if not the presumptive favorite. She got out of the race so quickly one thinks a deal might have been cut, There's also the fact that she brings in some potential appeal to the midwest.


I tend to be wrong on my guesses but I could see her being up there. I think she comes across well. On the other hand there is an issue during her time as a prosecutor that might make her a bad pick.


Fair play!
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951
Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit"
15000+ posts
Offline
Officially "too old for this shit"
15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951
Likes: 6
 Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man
 Originally Posted By: the G-man
 Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man
Amy from my state is probably in the running and she did well in the debates.


I suspect Klobacher is the frontrunner if not the presumptive favorite. She got out of the race so quickly one thinks a deal might have been cut, There's also the fact that she brings in some potential appeal to the midwest.


I tend to be wrong on my guesses but I could see her being up there. I think she comes across well. On the other hand there is an issue during her time as a prosecutor that might make her a bad pick.

That would knock out Harris too. Interesting

Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Again I’m not a good guesser but yes I would think that would be on the con side. I like Klobachar and I think she probably was heavily auditioning very much for VP with her run to begin with but she’s not flawless.


Fair play!
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,971
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,971
Likes: 29
 Originally Posted By: the G-man
 Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man
I would love to see Michelle Obama I think she’s made it clear she was done after 8 years with her husband in office.


Other than being roughly as unqualified as Trump to be President what, exactly, has she done that qualifies her to be VP?

Being a nice person or married to a president is no more qualification that assuming my ex-wife could practice law.



People asked that about Donald Trump in 2016.

I would argue that Trump ran a 5 billion-dollar company that does business in 20 nations worldwide, and therefore has experience at least equivalent to that of the governor of a large state. Trump has executive experience.

Trump also has been friends with Congressmen, Senators and presidents for over 40 years. Through that he has gained an understanding of national politics and the presidency itself, over decades. Trump was particularly close to both the Reagans and the Clintons. And the fact that Trump has been a fundraiser, campaign contributor and close associate of members of both parties, been an insider of both parties. That gives him a level of experience that no one else in a century has had. That makes him able to understand and negotiate with both sides.

The point being... Micheelle Obama has none of this experience. She was a lawyer in Chicago and the protege of Valerie Jarrett (it was Jarret who introduced Barack and Michelle, by the way.) Jarret being a cultural marxist radical. As are Barack and Michelle.

Neither Barack or Michelle has any executive experience. Obama as president relied on his advisors, as he had no knowledge or experience of his own. Michelle offers the same blank slate, except that she has never even held any office, and certainly no executive experience. Even lower than Obama, she has never been an Illinois state senator, or been a U.S. senator for less than one year before announcing his candidacy for president, or voted "present" over 100 times when called on to vote in legislation. Their only political capital is that their skin is black, and that they are far-left cultural marxists, which alone guarantees them a large slice of the Democrat vote, based on absolutely no skills. Identity politics and hating America gets you a long way in the DNC, but I think not far enough this time.


Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,971
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,971
Likes: 29
 Originally Posted By: the G-man
 Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man
Amy from my state is probably in the running and she did well in the debates.


I suspect Klobacher is the frontrunner if not the presumptive favorite. She got out of the race so quickly one thinks a deal might have been cut, There's also the fact that she brings in some potential appeal to the midwest.


My thoughts exactly. Except that she's the wrong skin-color to be chosen by the current radicalized race-obsessed DNC.
She's demonstrated executive ability, and can draw the midwestern vote (something Elizabeth Warren has shown she clearly cannot).

But as far as making a contract with the devil to get out of the race quickly, quite a few of them did that, very oddly not even sstaying in till Super Tuesday. All handing the nomination over to Biden, the weakest DNC candidate. Biden is, if not a radical leftist himself, someone who has sold out and negotiated concessions (if elected) to every radical element in his party. Or if not Biden himself, promised by the handlers who are doing all Biden's thinking for him. He may have made promises to Klobuchar, but he's also made promises to many others. Including Beto O'Rourke, who he's promized to make his czar for seizing guns and taking away everyone's second amendment rights.

On Laura Ingraham last night, historian Victor Davis Hanson was talking about how the Democrat party leadership knew FDR was on the edge of death when he ran for a fourth term and won in 1944. They knew it just a matter of time till Truman became president. It turned out to be just 90 days after FDR was inaugurated for his fourth term. Hanson saw that as a parallel to what the Dems are trying to do with the re-animated corpse of Biden right now. He is just a place-holder, to get them over the finish line.


 Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man
Again I’m not a good guesser but yes I would think that would be on the con side. I like Klobachar and I think she probably was heavily auditioning very much for VP with her run to begin with but she’s not flawless.



That I can agree with too. She's among the more likeable and less extreme Democrats, and among the most capable. But again, I think the party itself, and Biden as well from his rhetoric, are set on someone more, shall we say... colorful.



Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
I don’t think it needs to be a woman of color but I could see that as definitely being a big plus for a VP. Or maybe not, like I said I’m not good at guessing. I have to say I was thrilled with seeing a gay guy do so well in the primary. If he wasn’t gay I’m sure my enthusiasm would have been much less. Even though Mayor Pete and I probably would have never gone to the same schools or parties I can’t say I’m immune to identity politics myself.


Fair play!
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,971
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,971
Likes: 29


Well, for me it just pisses me off that the Democrats (or the Republicans if they were to do it) bypassed more qualified people to appoint someone just because they were a black, hispanic, gay, a woman or so forth. To me that's an insulting level of pandering and tokenism.

I wonder if you hold the same level of gay identity pride for conservative Republicans like Tammy Bruce, Richard Grennell, or Guy Benson. Tammy Bruce in particular is an articulate independent thinker who was part of the Left for many years, the former head of NOW in their California branch.
Or say, hispanic former attorney general Alberto Gonzalez, black secretary of state Colin Powell, or black woman national security advisor and secretary of state Condoleezza Rice.

I think for Republicans, it's more about appointing highly qualified people, who happen to be a minority of some kind, rather than making a big show of someone being a minority, and supporting them just because they're a minority.
That's one of the Democrats' major offenses for me, that they are not Americans first and foremost, but instead seem to have all kinds of first loyalties to things other than the country itself. It offends me that gays have their own flag, with a first loyalty to that over the nation itself.



Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Well I’m not going to try to speak for my whole party but I don’t have an issue with Biden picking whoever he thinks will give him the best chance at beating Trump. As you know I don’t see Trump as actually being fit for the office, you obviously feel much differently WB.


Fair play!
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
I also don’t know of anyone that feels the pride flag is their first loyalty. (Or second, third or fourth). It’s a bizarre accusation to be honest. I think you would be surprised WB that most of the time people are people.


Fair play!
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,971
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,971
Likes: 29
 Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man
Well I’m not going to try to speak for my whole party but I don’t have an issue with Biden picking whoever he thinks will give him the best chance at beating Trump. As you know I don’t see Trump as actually being fit for the office, you obviously feel much differently WB.



No, not qualified at all. Just the most quantifiably accomplished president in 50 years.

https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_...ingly_long_list

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/herit...ter-than-reagan



Before that I would have said Ronald Reagan is the most accomplisshed president of my lifetime. Trump doesn't have blind loyalty from his supporters, he has earned it. Like no president in four decades, he came along at just the right time, and brought this country back from the edge of the abyss. Supercharging our economy with pro-groth policy and slashing smothering regulation. Securing our borders. Sensible immigration policy. Building a wall. ENDING "catch-and release of illegals. Re-building our dangerously depleted military. Re-negotiating trade agreements with Europe, Japan, South Korea, Canada, Mexico, and central and south America. Things I has given up hope could ever be done, Trump accomplished mostly in his first year.

If Obama, Hillary, Biden, or even Rubio or Cruz were president, all of these are too mainstream and would never have taken the bold steps that trump has to put our country back on the right path. And we would be on our way to economic slavery to China, or wors.
And overwhelmed with millions of illegal immigrants that Trump stopped.

Why you demonize Trump, I'll never understand. For whatever personality quirks or insulting Twitter posts (always in response to those who fired the first shot and slandered him) Trump has unquestionably, QUANTIFIABLY delivered the goods, for the entire nation. So far as I can see, much of the Democrat anger toward him is because they know they can't offer better than the accomplishments Trump has delivered. And as I've said repeatedly, they would treat not just Trump, but ANY Republican with the same evil and vitriol, as "racist", "white supremacist", "KKK", "Nazi", on and on. And as proof of that, I offer Democrat/media treatment of Cruz, Romney, McCain, and W. Bush, all the way back to Reagan, Ford and Nixon. This venomous labelling is not unique to Trump, but given to any Republican who dares to even run for president.

Whereas the Democrats are the proven radicals, who are absolutely ruthless and have no ethical standards in what they say and do. Even beyond slander, weaponizing the IRS, FBI and DOJ and FISA court against their political opponents. Democrat worship Marxist dictators like Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Castro, Hugo Chaves and the Sandinistas, among other marxist dictatorships, and see Constitutional rule of law as something that can be set aside if it gets in the way of their power. I've cited many times the praise of Marxist dictators and Marxist ideology, and contempt for our capitalist system by Obama and Hillary officials, as can plainly be read in any of their listings at Discoverthenetworks .org:

http://www.discoverthenetworks.com/summary.asp?object=Persons&category=

Barack Obama, Michelle Obama, Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton, Valerie Jarrett, Huma Abedin, Anita Dunn, Van Jones, Mark Lloyd, Cass Sunstein, Ron Bloom, Frank Marshall Davis, Bill Ayers, Jeff Jones, the Apollo Alliance, on and on.
It is not the slightest exaggeration to call these people Bolsheviks and Marxist revolutionaries. They clearly are committed revolutionaries, deeply anti-capitalist and radical to the core. And yet you support them with blind loyalty.

Democrats will promise one thing, say ANYTHING to get elected, and then pursue their true hidden agenda if and when elected. The Clintons and the Obamas are just the latest two examples of this. And as in the examples of Travelgate, Scooter Libby, Lois Lerner, George Pappadapoulos, Roger Stone and Michael Flynn, to name just a few, Democrats have absolutely no reservations about destroying innocent people just to advance their agenda. These people are evil, and yet you unwaveringly support them. I will never understand that.

it doesn't matter who Biden selects, or Biden himself. Everything on the Democrat side is about image and lying narrative, in pursuit of a Bolshevik revolution. His V.P. chosen will be about image and lying narrative. Their campaign platform will be about image and lying narrative. To advance a hidden revolutionary and anti-American agenda.


Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
I think everyone knows how you and I feel differently about Trump and how you feel about any outside entity not devoted to Trump. Just to be clear though, I said that Trump was unfit for the office not unqualified. I do think he isn’t qualified either but he was able to convince enough voters to work the electoral college to win. Obviously what people consider as qualified vary hugely.


Fair play!
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,971
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,971
Likes: 29


It's a moot point now, but I saw Michelle Obama as a possible and formidable V P pick. But I think she's enjoying the easy gig she has right now, too much to throw it away for the questionable honor of being Biden's V P pick.

And if she were to be V P, a lot of that easy popularity would be swept away, and her radicalism fully vetted, that would hurt her in any other venture, even after the VP venture went south in a humiliating defeat. She would be vetted in a way she was not as first lady, and her vile radicalism would be on full display.
https://dailycaller.com/2019/10/30/michelle-obama-white-folks-fleeing-non-whites/
And many who like the image she is allowed to have now, would be repelled by her radicalism if she were fully vetted.

And

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-bad-company-of-barack-obama/

For such an entitled and well-moneyed black woman, who's had a relatively easy path and coasted into lucrative jobs thanks to friends in high places like Valerie Jarrett, she really is a sadly angry woman, who gropes for things to be mad about.





Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5