Poll Dem VP Pic: your choice?

[Toni]

What is an "HRC Gay"?

Common gay slang for "His Royal Cock", I'm surprised you don't know that.

HMMM. I saw Hillary Rodham Clinton, and figured it was a slight that he wasn't progressive. Swing and a miss.

Ah, basic political literacy. I was beginning to doubt the voting credentials of everyone in this thread, not recognizing the name of their own presidential pick 7 years ago, whose name is also helpfully reprinted in the poll above.

Oh, I was right?

Thing is, to straight liberals, "progressivism" is a mask they can take on or off depending on who they need to impress at the moment. A trans person is stuck in their "progressive" trans body whether it is popular or not, and their civil rights are either upheld or denied. Someone like Pete, who is openly gay but otherwise not obviously "queer" nor especially commited to the cause of defending minority rights against Trump's assaults as near as anyone can tell, is especially palatable to a straight white liberal who wants cred for supporting gays but isn't ready for the challenge of accepting a lifestyle radically different from their own. For the most part the queer community cheers Peye on when good things happen to him, but trust is a bigger ask, for a community that has been stabbed in the back almost more often than the front for the last two centuries. That goes double for queer people who aren't white Christisn men in stable marriages, and thus have no hope of following his particular path to social legitimacy. I'm sure we'd all vote for him if his name was on the ticket, people are just kind of wary of his concession-first approach to politics.

You make a point. Despite the fact that he’s intelligent, well educated, well spoken, it seems as though he’s there to fill the openly gay spot. He’s also not the most progressive person around. Neither is Harris-I know ( very liberal) public defenders who detest her.

I’d like to someone the public sees as ‘safe’ but who has some very progressive cred.

OTOH: AOC really tickles me as a choice.

 

[Toni]

On paper, Pete is great. Extremely intelligent, well spoken but with little to no personal charisma. I also think, as horrible as it is to type this—being gay is just a step to far for mainstream America with a woman of color leading the ticket.

Whitmer is great but again: two women might be a bridge too far, as distressing as it is to type that.

As I noted before, I think owning the female ticket works better than the female lead on the ticket. The idea we need to balance the ticket via gender reinforces the misogyny. We are in a unique situation, historically. And Trump just trashes general political rules and decorum. So, this to me is a perfect time for a Harris-Whitmer candidacy. Shoring up Michigan, I think helps Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, while as shoring Pennsylvania just shores up Pennsylvania.

Mark Kelly gives the old white guy vibe to south fears.

My only concern with Kelly is that I think of Lloyd Bentsen. He completely and utterly pwned Quayle... to absolutely no effect.

I will because disappointed if Katie Porter isn’t scooped up for a prominent role

She is definitely not VP material yet.

Not suggesting Porter as VP but she needs to be in a prominent position.

Whitmer joining the ticket almost assures MI will have a GOP governor when that ejection cycle comes around ( too lazy to look it up now).

If you want to blow some minds, how about AOC? Very very smart, articulate, east coast, working class. Let’s own the female/POC thing!

I think AOC is running for Schumer's job when he retires.

Whitmer is term limited, so I don't see the risk.

Ah, I did not realize Whitmer was term limited.

 

[Politesse]

Neither is Harris-I know ( very liberal) public defenders who detest her.

It's only the truth, though I will say for Harris that although on paper her policies are nearly identical to Biden's, I think she shares something important with his predecessor, Barack Obama: genuine, empathetic, uncynical interest in the concerns of minority voters. She may not always do as she's asked by "progressive" bodies, but she will listen, and genuinely give a shit. It won't go underappreciated, in practice. The news would have you believe that progressives are all "shrill" harridans who accept no compromise, but the real record of progressive politics in this country is much more nuanced. We do work across the aisle, for people who are willing to likewise reach across said aisle. It's people who see us as cardboard villains or discardable props that earn our ire. I have plenty of connections in the local progressive political world, and although pretty much everyone has some lingering objections from Harris' term as DA in our state, my social media is flooded with enthusiastic endorsements of her campaign this week. An open door is better than a closed gate.

 

[Toni]

Neither is Harris-I know ( very liberal) public defenders who detest her.

It's only the truth, though I will say for Harris that although on paper her policies are nearly identical to Biden's, I think she shares something important with his predecessor, Barack Obama: genuine, empathetic, uncynical interest in the concerns of minority voters. She may not always do as she's asked by "progressive" bodies, but she will listen, and genuinely give a shit. It won't go underappreciated, in practice. The news would have you believe that progressives are all "shrill" harridans who accept no compromise, but the real record of progressive politics in this country is much more nuanced. We do work across the aisle, for people who are willing to likewise reach across said aisle. It's people who see us as cardboard villains or discardable props that earn our ire. I have plenty of connections in the local progressive political world, and although pretty much everyone has some lingering objections from Harris' term as DA in our state, my social media is flooded with enthusiastic endorsements of her campaign this week. An open door is better than a closed gate.

I’m a fan of Harris. She was in my top picks for 2020. I just mentioned the fact that some pretty progressive people have some issues with her time as a prosecutor. But they aren’t going to vote for Trump. They’ll go third party. Unfortunately this is the same as voting for Trump in terms of effect.

 

[Terrell]

Whichever option will help her the most.

 

[Copernicus]

My two favorites are Gretchen Whitmer and Josh Shapiro. I am leaning towards Shapiro because Pennsylvania is a must-win state for Democrats. He is a popular governor, although he has only been in that office for about 18 months. He has never lost a statewide election there, and he tends to have some appeal with moderate voters in both parties. As a former prosecutor who knows Kamala Harris well, they would project a good image against the scofflaw challenger.

Whitmer has better name recognition than Shapiro and has more experience as a popular governor. I have a feeling that she would be a better campaigner on the national stage, but she would lose the misogyny voters that are struggling with Harris but willing to give one woman with a male running mate a try. Donald Trump has most of the nation's misogyny vote sewn up anyway. She would likely be more popular with the Democratic base than Shapiro, who is perhaps a little more centrist in his politics.

 

[Elixir]

Donald Trump has most of the nation's misogyny vote sewn up anyway.

That’s one of many truths that I hope will float to the top. No point in chasing the deplorables; they are impervious to facts. All that can be done is to drive turnout among those who know a con when they see one.

 

[Toni]

My two favorites are Gretchen Whitmer and Josh Shapiro. I am leaning towards Shapiro because Pennsylvania is a must-win state for Democrats. He is a popular governor, although he has only been in that office for about 18 months. He has never lost a statewide election there, and he tends to have some appeal with moderate voters in both parties. As a former prosecutor who knows Kamala Harris well, they would project a good image against the scofflaw challenger.

Whitmer has better name recognition than Shapiro and has more experience as a popular governor. I have a feeling that she would be a better campaigner on the national stage, but she would lose the misogyny voters that are struggling with Harris but willing to give one woman with a male running mate a try. Donald Trump has most of the nation's misogyny vote sewn up anyway. She would likely be more popular with the Democratic base than Shapiro, who is perhaps a little more centrist in his politics.

Sigh. Never, ever underestimate the quite, polite, hidden misogyny. Just as never underestimate the quiet polite, hidden racism.

See the Clinton-Obama match for examples. I was for Obama but it was as impossible for me to miss the misogyny directed at Hillary as it was to ignore the racism directed at Obama.

 

[Gospel]

Unapologetic Black President.

Posting for those in the hood who aren't on IIDB: "Kamala Harris is Black, but she isn't an immediate descendant of American slavery". To them she's Barak Obama black not Cory Booker black.

 

[Toni]

Unapologetic Black President.

Posting for those in the hood who aren't on IIDB: "Kamala Harris is Black, but she isn't an immediate descendant of American slavery". To them she's Barak Obama black not Cory Booker black.

Thank you for writing that.

When Obama was elected, I knew people who were all ‘he’s half white so…’. And I live in a state that has proudly welcomed —and elected immigrants from
African nations and is very proud of being all liberal. They ain’t quite so happy when a black person whose great grandpa and great grandma were born here moves in next door. Unless maybe they are some kind of sports star….