2020-05-06, 20:08 | Link #425 |
Carbon
Join Date: Nov 2003
|
I'm trying to be realistic. This is the Democrat party Democratic we are talking about.
They promised a woman VP, and we already know who they won't ever pick. Abrams is the best out of all that remains. She's a compromise. //
__________________
Last edited by Key Board; 2020-05-06 at 21:22. |
2020-05-06, 22:49 | Link #428 |
Seishu's Ace
Author
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Kobe, Japan
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democrat_Party_(epithet)
Back on topic, put me down as thinking Warren would be by far the best actual VP. And Biden supposedly wanted to choose her if he ran in 2016. But because of her age and the fact that Charlie Baker would appoint her replacement (albeit only for a few months till a special election) and I think it's very unlikely Biden goes that route.
__________________
|
2020-05-07, 17:01 | Link #431 |
Carbon
Join Date: Nov 2003
|
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/30/dono...ren-as-vp.html
She does need to hold her senate post, though. The Republican governor will replace her with an interim Republican senator otherwise, and there's no laws to prevent this. ONE MORE WAY THE US DEMOCRACY IS BROKEN //
__________________
|
2020-05-07, 17:18 | Link #432 |
Bittersweet Distractor
Join Date: Nov 2007
Age: 32
|
The reason to worry about Warren's senate seat is not Charlie Baker. In fact, the MA congress could pass with veto proof majority a bill to force Baker to choose an interim Senator until the next special election from a shortlist provided by Warren herself ensuring the seat stays Democratic even through the next months before it.
The risk is picking her and having to win the special election. We went through that with Scott Brown which effectively destroyed the Democrat's ability to override the filibuster when Ted Kennedy died. Have to run a reliable candidate for the Senate to win that seat and not just push anyone. Warren is the best pick to shore up the Democratic coalition. Biden is making a choice between that and moderate swing state appeal. I'm not sure which is the better argument.
__________________
|
2020-05-07, 17:28 | Link #433 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2006
|
Quote:
To cite the article Enzo posted "Pollster Frank Luntz tested the phrase with a focus group in 2001, and concluded that the only people who really disliked the epithet were highly partisan Democrats." |
|
2020-05-07, 19:28 | Link #434 | |
Seishu's Ace
Author
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Kobe, Japan
|
Quote:
Passing a bill tying Baker's hands is easier than it sounds. There's a reason very few states have such laws - vero-proof majorities, rare as they are, are hard to hold together in practice.
__________________
|
|
2020-05-07, 19:32 | Link #435 | ||
Carbon
Join Date: Nov 2003
|
Quote:
Don't bother trying to gaslight this. Quote:
//
__________________
|
||
2020-05-07, 19:51 | Link #436 |
Seishu's Ace
Author
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Kobe, Japan
|
The governor appoints one. According to MA law there has to be a special election within 160 days of that appointment. My point is that there's no way MA would elect a R in that special election if control of the Senate was at stake. Right now, there's nothing preventing Baker from appointing a R as the interim for those 160 days.
__________________
|
2020-05-08, 10:10 | Link #437 |
AS Oji-kun
Join Date: Nov 2006
Age: 74
|
Warren was considered as a VP candidate in 2016, and all the scenarios were examined in this article from the Boston Globe.
https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/pol...K7J/story.html If Warren resigns her Senate seat, Baker can then appoint an interim replacement, but there would need to be a special election held to fill the seat within 145 to 160 days. If Warren resigns right after the November election, the appointee would only be in the Senate for a couple of months.
__________________
|
2020-05-08, 19:39 | Link #439 |
Carbon
Join Date: Nov 2003
|
Your history on this board says otherwise.
Were you hoping for people to just conveniently forget who you are? Perhaps seeing Trump successfully pulling that off many times with his base made you think you could do the same. But no. That won't happen. //
__________________
|
2020-05-09, 03:45 | Link #440 | |
(ノಠ益ಠ)ノ彡┻━┻
Moderator
Join Date: Mar 2006
|
Quote:
So Biden is the safe pick, because he represents a time when things didn't appear to suck as much. He benefits greatly from being Obama's VP, because people REALLY miss Obama. Heck I'll admit it: even I miss Obama sometimes. Hearing him speak these days is like someone giving me a scalp massage. It's so soothing to hear a person who doesn't speak like a mentally disabled five year old. Is Biden full of problems? Yup, absolutely. He's made a lot of bad votes, he's suspect with women, he's very much part of the establishment that got us to this point, and he's clearly got some cognitive decline. But compared to Trump, he looks good enough. I know his staff will help him and his picks will be solid. He's got my vote. And I really wanted Bernie. But I'm a realistic person. It just isn't the time for a candidate like him. He's on the right side of history, his policy ideas will definitely outlive him, and he'll go down in history as a big needle shifter in American politics, but he's clearly not going to live to see the world his movement will create. A shame, truly. People not choosing to vote for Biden because of the flawed system or just not getting the candidate they want are really missing the point, though. Trump isn't just another bad politician. The amount of corruption Trump is enabling is literally unprecedented. If the cost of cleaning that house is another decade of establishment Dems, that's the price that must be paid. The alternative is four more years of Trump and the GOP rotting whatever is left of the rule of law in the country. If Trump wins in November, he's basically being given a national pass to remake the country as he sees fit. A terrifying thought that has planetary consequences.
__________________
|
|
|
|