paulry

Or how about a Clinton Obama double act?

BEVS

Neither are in the running nor have they ever been , so how about you leave the thread to be on topic rather than help to clog it up with the irrelevant.

I am interested to hear from those with boots on USA ground who is considered a good choice for a democratic party VP. A part of a good strong democratic party duo. Strong contenders .

carcajou

Klobuchar should be the choice.

Warren will bring a lot of problems and does not bring on board or solidify any group that isn't already on board.

Ultimately it is the top of the ticket and not the VP pick that will swing an election as civilservant noted. Though the Palin pick is often misunderstood. That pick was made because McCain and his advisors understood he was on a losing trajectory and needed to dramatically shake up the race to have a chance. This is not horseshoes, McCain doesn't get any kind of bonus for losing by 3 points rather than the 7 he ultimately lost by. From a purely electoral politics standpoint the Palin pick was the correct play. The Palin pick itself was botched - but McCain and his team correctly diagnosed the political environment. It is often forgotten about now but there was an initial surge of adrenaline after that for McCain which catapaulted him, albeit briefly, back into the race. The 2008 Election was an oddity in that both sides fought a well-run campaign without most of the customary nastiness, the opposite of 2016, where there were two badly run campaigns, Trump's grossness and creepiness being offered against Hillary's open loathing and contempt for 52, 53% of the country and not possessing the mathematical skill to understand what that would translate to in an election.

Usually the nominees choose someone that addresses a perceived electoral weakness in the nominee. For instance Trump was weak among evangelical Christians and thus chose Pence. Obama was a short-time Senator without a lot of experience, so chose an experienced Beltway insider with Biden.

Someone like Klobuchar fits the profile Biden would be looking to fill. She's a woman, from the Upper Midwest, and is youngish at 60 (well, compared to Biden, Trump, Clinton, Warren etc). Warren does not offer anything needed to the campaign that Biden does not already have sewn up.

scrubbedexpat099

Klobuchar obviously has issues, but the big one is she does not really appeal to the Progressives, at least Warren would.

Steerpike

I would agree that Klobuchar is one of the more likely options. I still personally like Harris, but she's from CA and CA's already in the bag so that is against her.

Speaking of VP picks, why did Clinton pick ... whoever she picked? Does ANYONE remember his name? He seemed to be a total unknown and I don't know what he brought to the table. Just looked it up - Tim Kaine. Seemed like a totally useless choice to me.

Edit - she's a current sitting D senator, though - if she resigns to be VP, does her seat get a safe D replacement?

civilservant

The thought was that he would secure Virginia, and that would give her even more of an electoral college cushion with the 'Blue Wall' in place.

He did indeed deliver VA, but we all know how that turned out.

Cape Blue

Harris gets the minority "points" - quite important to the Dem base.

civilservant

Governor of MN is a D so yes he is likely to appoint another Dem, and she won her last couple races comfortably.

dave_j

Biden.
Where is Biden?
MIA

civilservant

Hardly' He's following the correct guidance for someone of his advanced years.

Former Lancastrian

So he is taking a nap then?

Steerpike

To some degree, Biden just needs to stay alive and out of trouble between now and November. I think 'engaging' with Trump and his policies would be foolish; just let Trump sink on his own. It will be interesting to see just how little he can get away with.

Former Lancastrian

Anybody studied as to what happens if no Election is possible due to the pandemic? If social distancing is still in effect I wonder if voting would take place over several days rather than just one or be heavily reliant on early or absentee voting?

civilservant

There were elections during the Civil War and WW1 and WW2. We'll survive. People will still go to the polls.

Depressed turnout? Most likely, but democracy will go on.

kimilseung

The question is will the election be supported by mail in voting or go to the polls.
Some states have mail in voting only now anyway, so it can (and is) done. Other States have already proceeded with poll station based voting, so that too can be done.
​​​​​​​Republicans seem to be against mail in as it looks like Dems are more likely on average to be supporting social distancing.
Why wouldn't there be voting during those times? Particularly WW1 + WW2