• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Veep Bets

funinspace said:
Elixir said:
The greatest chance for a woman president in my lifetime is probably Biden picking a female VP, then obligingly croaking.

Just sayin' ...
Click to expand...

Or just having Biden say he would never run for re-election in 4 years; and would be endorsing his VP select for 2024...
Click to expand...

I was under the impression that Biden had said he was running for only one term?
 
Derec said:
The post said "no to Warren", and not "no to any woman".

70, not 50, but thanks for playing. Kamala Harris would be a strong choice for Veep and she is in her 50s.

I mean it’s one thing to have doddering old white guys with well documented and serious health problems but we certainly must not consider an older woman!
Click to expand...
Biden is a presumptive nominee. Pairing him with a running mate who is also over 70 would be a big mistake.
Click to expand...

The post said no boomer. It specifically mentioned Warren who has the temerity to be over 45 but both Harris and Klobuchar are boomers. No objection to the pre-boomer white guys running.

Of course I understand the practical reasons to shy away from having an older VP. I’ve expressed concerns about the ages of Biden, Sanders and Warren—and pointed out that Warren is significantly younger than Trump, Biden or Sanders and without any of their histories of medical problems or cognitive decline. She’s whip smart, dedicated and hard working—and I think that’s the issue. She’s smart and does her homework. I know how well that plays in real life.

I cannot shake the feeling that in the end, the Dems will figure out that really they need Buttigieg so that they can check off their progressive box without having to do anything so radical as electing a woman.
 
Buttigieg isn't progressive... not even remotely. Putting Buttigieg on the ticket would be a terrible idea!

Meanwhile, Ohio is definitely a swing state and while she hasn't been around very long, her favorable ratings are through the roof!

Fiona The Hippo

?url=https%3A%2F%2Fewscripps.brightspotcdn.com%2Fa7%2Fe8%2F9eed82934cea97b454b222be13a4%2Ffiona-.PNG

I'm not certain Pence's take on being alone in a room with a female hippo.

 
Jimmy Higgins said:
Buttigieg isn't progressive... not even remotely. Putting Buttigieg on the ticket would be a terrible idea!

Meanwhile, Ohio is definitely a swing state and while she hasn't been around very long, her favorable ratings are through the roof!

Fiona The Hippo

View attachment 27073

I'm not certain Pence's take on being alone in a room with a female hippo.

Click to expand...

Of course Buttigieg isn’t progressive. But he is a white male (safe choice) and gay (ta da! Progressive cred!) fake progressive cred, sure. But beats a woman. And yeah, I heard that.

Hey, but thanks for suggesting that a female hippo would be better than any of the well qualified women who are making any informed short list.
Really uncalled for and honestly, I thought better of you than that.
 
Last edited:
Toni said:
Elixir said:
The greatest chance for a woman president in my lifetime is probably Biden picking a female VP, then obligingly croaking.

Just sayin' ...
Click to expand...

No shit.

Mine, too. Why do you think women are angry?
Click to expand...

Because for the first time in the History of America, they can show their anger without feeling like they're isolating themselves. Women have been rightfully angry for centuries (well, 2 of them) as evidenced by some of the writings of early America. But suppression was complete and enforced for almost all of those two centuries. Maybe, just MAYBE the fact (well, my opinion) that the most eloquent and capable advocates of the progressive political agenda serving in elected positions are women, is evidence that they ARE getting a foothold in the world of power players. Between Katie Porter and Michelle Grisham alone, there is more and better articulation of issues at hand than is forthcoming from any male, including Sanders - who was the first person of either gender to express progressive and still maintain a position in Congress. There are even some "true progressives" like AOC and Ilhan Omar who have not yet been assassinated or lynched.
It's different from how it was when I was growing up, I can tell you with confidence.
 
Elixir said:
Toni said:
Elixir said:
The greatest chance for a woman president in my lifetime is probably Biden picking a female VP, then obligingly croaking.

Just sayin' ...
Click to expand...

No shit.

Mine, too. Why do you think women are angry?
Click to expand...

Because for the first time in the History of America, they can show their anger without feeling like they're isolating themselves. Women have been rightfully angry for centuries (well, 2 of them) as evidenced by some of the writings of early America. But suppression was complete and enforced for almost all of those two centuries. Maybe, just MAYBE the fact (well, my opinion) that the most eloquent and capable advocates of the progressive political agenda serving in elected positions are women, is evidence that they ARE getting a foothold in the world of power players. Between Katie Porter and Michelle Grisham alone, there is more and better articulation of issues at hand than is forthcoming from any male, including Sanders - who was the first person of either gender to express progressive and still maintain a position in Congress. There are even some "true progressives" like AOC and Ilhan Omar who have not yet been assassinated or lynched.
It's different from how it was when I was growing up, I can tell you with confidence.
Click to expand...

Yeah, definitely a change from when I was growing up. But in my lifetime, I will not only never see a woman PZoTUS, but I will have to endure more years of nice men telling me all the reasons that it’s not yet time to have a woman as POTUS and that I should just be happy with the progress that has allowed Warren and a Klobuchar and Harris and Porter to hold office. I mean now women are allowed to hold jobs and have actual careers! And you men have been so nice to allow us to have abortions if you don’t want to pay for a kid. Bonus: we can wear shoes and not be pregnant while we cook for y’all.
 
Toni said:
Derec said:
The post said "no to Warren", and not "no to any woman".

70, not 50, but thanks for playing. Kamala Harris would be a strong choice for Veep and she is in her 50s.

I mean it’s one thing to have doddering old white guys with well documented and serious health problems but we certainly must not consider an older woman!
Click to expand...
Biden is a presumptive nominee. Pairing him with a running mate who is also over 70 would be a big mistake.
Click to expand...

The post said no boomer. It specifically mentioned Warren who has the temerity to be over 45 but both Harris and Klobuchar are boomers. No objection to the pre-boomer white guys running.

Of course I understand the practical reasons to shy away from having an older VP. I’ve expressed concerns about the ages of Biden, Sanders and Warren—and pointed out that Warren is significantly younger than Trump, Biden or Sanders and without any of their histories of medical problems or cognitive decline. She’s whip smart, dedicated and hard working—and I think that’s the issue. She’s smart and does her homework. I know how well that plays in real life.

I cannot shake the feeling that in the end, the Dems will figure out that really they need Buttigieg so that they can check off their progressive box without having to do anything so radical as electing a woman.
Click to expand...

Nominating Buttigieg as an appeal to the progressive wing would be dumb. Warren would be the best for that.
 
J842P said:
Toni said:
The post said no boomer. It specifically mentioned Warren who has the temerity to be over 45 but both Harris and Klobuchar are boomers. No objection to the pre-boomer white guys running.

Of course I understand the practical reasons to shy away from having an older VP. I’ve expressed concerns about the ages of Biden, Sanders and Warren—and pointed out that Warren is significantly younger than Trump, Biden or Sanders and without any of their histories of medical problems or cognitive decline. She’s whip smart, dedicated and hard working—and I think that’s the issue. She’s smart and does her homework. I know how well that plays in real life.

I cannot shake the feeling that in the end, the Dems will figure out that really they need Buttigieg so that they can check off their progressive box without having to do anything so radical as electing a woman.
Click to expand...

Nominating Buttigieg as an appeal to the progressive wing would be dumb. Warren would be the best for that.
Click to expand...

Warren still can't decide who to support for the nomination!
 
lpetrich said:
Koy's OP link titled: Joe Biden's 11 most logical options for vice president | The Independent

11. Susan Rice
10. Michelle Lujan Grisham
9. Stacey Abrams
8. Tammy Duckworth
7. Val Demings
6. Catherine Cortez Masto
5. Tammy Baldwin
4. Elizabeth Warren
3. Gretchen Whitmer
2. Amy Klobuchar
1. Kamala Harris
Click to expand...

I'd prefer Amy or Stacey. Klobuchar could deliver an important state. But I think that it will be Harris. Biden and Harris seem to get along very well and are like minded.
 
Jimmy Higgins said:
OFFS, no Warren! It is bad enough the main candidate is older than a Boomer! We don't need a Boomer on the ticket for any balance. While Warren excites some demographics, I don't think it is enough. But I've been disappointed with most things in 2020, so it'll likely be Warren.
Click to expand...

Who are you trying to excite? The old centrist people who already went for Biden? I don't understand your reasoning at all.
 
J842P said:
Jimmy Higgins said:
OFFS, no Warren! It is bad enough the main candidate is older than a Boomer! We don't need a Boomer on the ticket for any balance. While Warren excites some demographics, I don't think it is enough. But I've been disappointed with most things in 2020, so it'll likely be Warren.
Click to expand...

Who are you trying to excite? The old centrist people who already went for Biden? I don't understand your reasoning at all.
Click to expand...

I promise you that it won't be Warren. I have some insider info that Warren and Biden don't like each other personally. Warren isn't on the bus.
 
Who's who:

11. Susan Rice - "She served on the National Security Council and in a high-ranking State Department role in the Clinton administration, and she was United Nations ambassador and national security adviser in the Obama administration."

10. Michelle Lujan Grisham - Gov NM

9. Stacey Abrams - ran for Gov GA

8. Tammy Duckworth - Iraq vet who lost both legs, Rep IL, Sen IL

7. Val Demings - Police Chief Orlando FL, Rep FL

6. Catherine Cortez Masto - Atty Gen NV, Sen NV

5. Tammy Baldwin - Sen WI

4. Elizabeth Warren - Professor, Sen MA

3. Gretchen Whitmer - Gov MI

2. Amy Klobuchar - Sen MN

1. Kamala Harris - District Atty San Francisco, Atty Gnrl CA, Sen CA
 
J842P said:
Toni said:
The post said no boomer. It specifically mentioned Warren who has the temerity to be over 45 but both Harris and Klobuchar are boomers. No objection to the pre-boomer white guys running.

Of course I understand the practical reasons to shy away from having an older VP. I’ve expressed concerns about the ages of Biden, Sanders and Warren—and pointed out that Warren is significantly younger than Trump, Biden or Sanders and without any of their histories of medical problems or cognitive decline. She’s whip smart, dedicated and hard working—and I think that’s the issue. She’s smart and does her homework. I know how well that plays in real life.

I cannot shake the feeling that in the end, the Dems will figure out that really they need Buttigieg so that they can check off their progressive box without having to do anything so radical as electing a woman.
Click to expand...

Nominating Buttigieg as an appeal to the progressive wing would be dumb. Warren would be the best for that.
Click to expand...
Of course Warren is much more progressive.

You aren’t getting what I was trying to say. A lot of people like to think of themselves as progressive. It doesn’t stop them
from having some not very progressive and usually unacknowledged attitudes. A candidate like Buttigieg would allow certain people to support Buttigieg because he is a gay man (regardless and for some, unconsciously because he is centrist) while still supporting him as a gay man—and thereby allowing them to hide their unacknowledhed misogyny (someday there will be a woman perfect enough to suppport but surely not any of these very well qualified, intelligent, articulate, accomplished women we have before us! Too old/too boring/not trustworthy because she had sex with a guy once).

I get it. People like to think well of themselves. I’ve just listened to a lot of smart, well informed men make all sorts of apologies for some pretty mediocre white men—and even make fun of less than savory aspects of their past/present—and then become positively eloquent about some minor or imagined fault in female candidates that they would praise in a man.

Honestly I understand the stakes in this election fully as well as anyone on this board. I understand the practicality , the reasons that an old white guy is the ‘safe’ choice. Those reasons are exactly the racism and misogyny that allow them to think of Biden as the safe bet. I honestly get it. I accept that I will never see a woman as POTUS—and I’m not even Medicare eligible!

I just wish people had more courage.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom