This message was self-deleted by its author

[left-of-center2012]

This message was self-deleted by its author (left-of-center2012) on Tue Jul 28, 2020, 02:06 AM. When the original post in a discussion thread is self-deleted, the entire discussion thread is automatically locked so new replies cannot be posted.

[Hekate]

1. No one will be 100% pure. Ever. Just pick who you can work with, Joe...

...someone who could also step in as POTUS if need be.

[Hortensis]

66. The selection seems to be heating up. Sen. Dodd is on Biden's vetting

committee, one of four co-chairs but an old friend of Biden's. Is a faction trying to take out Harris, or is this possibly a more principled move designed to adjust public expectations and supply a reason if Harris isn't chosen?

Or? I've never learned the game, much less been allowed to sit in.

As for Politico and the rest, I remember reading that Dodd's selection was good for Harris and bad for Warren. But then the same kind of people have also been claiming for years that Warren and Biden were ideological oil and water, nonsense only "purist" zealots could believe. Plus, if even we knew Biden staffers reported that he'd wanted her for his VP if he ran in 2015, they certainly did and served up Kool-Aid anyway.

Political games.

[question everything]

118. Interesting. I have been thinking that the VP has to be at a lockstep with him

so that she will be able to step in if needed.

This is why I object to Warren, who has strong ideas of her own. And I was thinking that since Harris had such a bad campaign, it meant that she is an empty vessel into which ideas and opinions can be poured.

Maybe

[JonLP24]

170. Warren objected to his worst policies

Did you support Biden's bankruptcy bill? (I hope not)

Even Biden adopted Warren's plan to fix his bankruptcy bill

[Demsrule86]

156. And that is good advice...How are you?

[Hekate]

167. I'm doing okay, thanks. I needed yesterday to sit with it, and all of you helped.

I’m doing okay, thanks. I needed yesterday to sit with it, and all of you helped.

I got to talk to our sis today (New York state, I’m in SoCal) and we agreed the hardest part is not being able to be together until God knows when. When the day comes, I think just the three of us remaining sibs and our spouses will fly to Oregon to lift a glass and scatter his ashes, along with his lifelong friends.

The death wasn’t unexpected, as he got within a hair of dying last November, but it is still sad — and a break in the link to our shared past.

I better go post this or similar in that endearing long thread from yesterday.

[Sherman A1]

2. Harris would not be my choice

but, it isn't up to me.

[HotTeaBag]

3. I remember watching that debate and thinking that she punched herself in the face

if she had hopes to be Biden's VP pick - at the time I just assumed that Biden would be the nominee as at the beginning of the race it seemed like his to lose, and I thought that she would have made a good VP choice.

Still think she'd be a good choice but she'll have to address the things she said about and to Biden in every single interview she does if she's selected.

[Aristus]

4. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama butted heads in the 2008 primary.

And then became a famously effective team after Obama's win.

That's politics...

[Talitha]

27. Yes, I remember how they went after one another. Kamala is absolutely right - it's politics.

[Trumpocalypse]

33. Yes But he didn't put her on the ticket

[helpisontheway]

131. However, he did not pick her as his vp. He picked someone

with experience AND someone that he could trust to be loyal to him.

[Dyedinthewoolliberal]

5. Assuming Joe wins

I think Harris should be the Atty General.

[LizBeth]

11. I had a thought last week, and I am liking Harris in Sec of State role. More power and visibility.

An opportunity for success and show us if she has it to run in 2024.

[demmiblue]

6. Why is Biden even relying on Dodd's opinion?!

Link to tweet

[left-of-center2012]

12. Isn't Ana Navarro-Crdenas a Republican?

Not sure Biden needs GOP input on his VP choice ?

“Ana Navarro-Cárdenas is an American Republican strategist and political commentator ...”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ana_Navarro

[demmiblue]

15. Meh, I agree with her on this.

[Mike 03]

109. So do I. nt

[obamanut2012]

73. I trust Navarro's opinion of this more than Dodd's

And, she is right.

She also voted for Hillary and Andrew Gillum, and has been an LGBT ally for years.

She isn't a Dem, but she is a Never Trumper and a never DeathSantis. And, her husband is no more of a wingnut than Dodd's wife.

I will take what support and help we can get now.

[JI7]

76. She voted for Hillary and has been going after Trump. Dodd is going after Harris

[obamanut2012]

80. This in a nutshell

[maximusveritas]

164. Yep, she's trying to stir chaos among Democrats by pushing this divisive racial/sexist angle

And apparently it is now its ok to discriminate and spew racist hate speech against someone for their age, race, and gender, so long as they are an old white male?

[Demsrule86]

14. Part of the vetting process. I would not choose Harris either...she gives us no states...

and wouldn't trust her either to support Biden as Biden supported Obama.

[rusty fender]

105. I agree with Navarro

Harris prosecuted Dodd’s friends for mortgage fraud; he sexually assaulted a waitress in a restaurant, and he was so unpopular as senator, because he always championed the interests of Wall Street, that he had to retire rather than run for re-election.

He should be no where near a vp election committee.

Oh, and he is a thoroughly despicable human being.

[RhodeIslandOne]

166. Ugh Chris Dodd

Dodd and Biden cancelled each other out by being the same guy in 2008. Joe should stay far away from him.

[Doodley]

7. Susan Rice checks every box. I believe she will be the one.

[left-of-center2012]

13. agreed

[Demsrule86]

18. No- She has no political experience and why bring Benghazi back? Sure it was not her fault but it

is not wise to give the GOP stuff they can use...I say Duckworth or Demmings.

[Yeehah]

43. Benghazi? Give me a break.

A pretend scandal invented by republicans should not be a strike against Rice.

[SlogginThroughIt]

49. It doesn't matter they will use it.

[Fiendish Thingy]

52. Pretend scandals worked for the GOP in 2016 nt

[Yeehah]

65. So Democrats should make policy decisions factoring in fake scandals?

OK

[Arazi]

119. This is a VP decision and yes, absolutely past scandals, real or not, are part of it

Rice will ensure Benghazi comes back with a vengeance. Republicans are prepared to rev up the Burisma bullshit with disinfo provided by Russia. Dealing with that bullshit is going to be hard enough.

Dems need to be untouchable about scandals this year. Voters are desperate for competent, calm adults making rational decisions on our behalf. We can't afford Rice and the fake Benghazi shit.

Don't get me wrong, she's fantastic but we simply must have a candidate with no baggage.

Duckworth's untouchable. She should be the pick. Plus she's a WOC

Warren has the stupid Pocahontas and "socialist" shit. Plus the banksters will actually help Russia steal the election if its her.

Harris has problems with her past prosecutions that will be revived mercilessly.

Gotta be Duckworth imo

[Demsrule86]

139. Duckworth is my choice also. She could take over if need be and would be an asset

during the election and the young kids are great for candidates...everyone loves babies and toddlers.

[Fiendish Thingy]

133. Not policy decisions, just election strategy

VP’s main job is to help the ticket win, not reduce chances of winning or make policy.

If the choice was between Susan Rice and Joe Manchin and Zell Miller, I’d say pick Rice.

Fortunately we have a number excellently qualified women who can help bring the ticket to victory in November.

[Demsrule86]

138. Exactly right. One always has to consider the election part.

[Bettie]

110. It was against Clinton

and if he chooses Rice, this election will turn and be about Clinton again.

Sec of State for Rice? Yes.

But I don't want to watch as the whole Benghazi dog and pony show gets pulled out for another round.

[Demsrule86]

140. And that is exactly what would happen.

[Bettie]

151. Yep, Biden would be lost in the avalanche

of Hillary hate and the constant cry of Benghazi.

Republicans would latch on to that so fast, because it is something they know how to spin and make last forever because they worked for years to make many people automatically associate the name Clinton with dishonesty. None of it was true, but the association is there because, well, marketing works.

[Demsrule86]

136. A pretend scandal that was used to bring Hillary down...and there is no reason to risk it...

Also, she has no election experience.

[2naSalit]

74. I'm willing to bet that

not many will give the Benghazi bs a second thought. It's vote for Joe and ? no matter what. I think Rice would be the best suited to step in if Joe weren't able to finish his term and certainly run in 2024.

[Awsi Dooger]

124. I have to laugh at anyone who cares about Benghazi or her son's politics

Talk about whiffing the big picture in favor of trivial pursuit. That is the type of person who doesn't need to speculate on anything throughout their lifespan. Don't wager 5 bucks on anything. It's like they imagine Biden's numbers tumbling, that swing voters are going to be in horror and that somehow Susan Rice never gets to say anything herself.

Meanwhile Benghazi is already a tired topic. Sure they'd attempt it but it would come across as typical GOP desperation, like trying to pin the emails on someone else when you already told us it was all Hillary.

Susan Rice is so superb she would stand out as a superstar within a week or two of the public getting to know her. She would parry Trump with ease.

More than anything, Susan Rice is just the type who swing voters would respect and vote for on her own in 2024. She is tough but likable. Kind of like a Democratic version of Condi Rice in terms of how she would be viewed.

Kamala Harris would fail that type of test. I would basically give up if Kamala were atop the ticket in 2024.

[Demsrule86]

141. The GOP want her...Behghazi and the son giver them an opening which is stupid...I like her

but not worth risk..

[Demsrule86]

137. Republicans will give plenty of thought to Behghazi in fact a Rice VP is what they want.

They have nothing else. She is impressive but not for the VP slot.

[Drunken Irishman]

148. In 2014, I would have agreed.

I laughed at the Benghazi nonsense and how little impact it actually had on Obama. It just seemed like a controversy that no one cared about.

2014 me would absolutely agree.

2020 me after watching what the right did to Hillary and how effective it was with her? I'm not sure at all that it wouldn't be an issue.

Hillary left State with the best approval polls of any major US politician. In 2013, she was even more popular than Obama.

In May, 2015, a majority supported Hillary's message on Benghazi. But in October, after weeks of the GOP hitting her on it, 54% disapproved of her handling according to a Washington Post/ABC News poll. That number rose to 60% for Independents.

I do believe the e-mail scandal hit Hillary harder but this was tough for her as well. And I think it could pose a challenge, especially since in those initial days, Rice was the face of the response.

[Doodley]

157. agreed, but I also think Hillary was in part responsible for letting the GOP/Trump

define her. I don't see that happening with Susan Rice.

[Drunken Irishman]

162. I don't blame Hillary as much for Benghazi as I do her e-mail server...

That just frustrates me. It was pure hubris on her part. I don't care that Colin Powell had a similar server. Hillary should have been smart enough to know, after 20+ years of right-wing attacks, that this would be a line of attack on her if she ever decided to run for president. I don't get why she did what she did. It frustrates me because I think that issue is the biggest reason she's not president today.

[Doodley]

165. She took the punches well, but I only blame her for not punching back as hard.

[Doodley]

97. How many died in Benghazi? 4. How many from Covid USA? 150k (officially counted only) and rising.

How many Benghazi investigations? 10. How many Covid investigations? 0. Who reduced funding for US embassy security? GOP. Who decimated the pandemic response team? Trump/GOP. Who left a detailed pandemic response playbook that was ignored? Obama.

If they want to talk Benghazi, bring it on and let them look like they want to talk about anything but their Covid response?

[Demsrule86]

143. It give them a chance to change the subject...and no doubt there would be hearing in the Senate.

No to Susan Rice...big mistake.

[Drunken Irishman]

40. She doesn't check every box.

Your assumption is that there are just two boxes:

Black
Female

But I doubt it. There are plenty of other boxes a vetting committee will look at. Like...

Elected office (she's never been elected)
Governing experience (she has none)
Swing state appeal (she's not from one)
Name recognition (likely pretty low, even with her time in the Obama administration)
Experience (absolutely has foreign policy experience - but the Veep is the head of the Senate, how much success does she have there? Zero. How effective would she be at getting votes on important White House bills, something that's often left to the Veep? That's a big, big unknown since she's never been in a situation like that)

There's no doubt she brings a wealth of foreign policy experience to the table, but to be honest, that's likely the least important factor for the next VP because of what Biden brings with him in that regard.

[Demsrule86]

144. +1000 Very good synopsis.

[Fiendish Thingy]

50. She will be a target for GOP attacks on Benghazi nt

[redstateblues]

59. Isn't her son a hard core Republican?

Would he be campaigning against his mom? Not a good look. I'm all in for Harris. She is presidential-not so sure about the others if Joe decides to run for one term. Rice is good but her family baggage is pretty weighty.

[SKKY]

69. Yep. That's who we need right now.

[chia]

8. Crap article. "She had no remorse" is a misogynistic dog whistle

[unblock]

22. is it misogyny? or is it white fragility?

so hard to decide sometimes....

[tonedevil]

30. To quote Zoidberg...

why not both?

[phylny]

36. Thanks for saying this.

When they ask men these questions, I might start paying attention to them.

[chia]

60. Exactly! His was a classic misogynist response to a strong woman.

If she'd been a man the question of "remorse" wouldn't even have come up.

[Happy Hoosier]

58. I agree.

Would anyone say that if she were a man? I doubt it. They'd say he is tough.

It wasn't personal. And by all accounts they are personally cordial.

[chia]

61. Appreciate it. I agree with everything you say here

[gollygee]

86. Agreed. I thought it sounded off too. n/t

[honest.abe]

9. Nonsense.

Primaries are usually very contentious and often the candidates fighting the most end up working together effectively after the election.

[Trumpocalypse]

37. True but

in most cases a nominee doesn’t put a former primary opponent on the ticket.

[mcar]

63. Barack Obama did

He named another primary opponent Sec. of State.

This is a stupid Politico hit piece. Dodd should never have been on that team.

[Trumpocalypse]

67. Yes he did

But Trump didn’t
W didn’t
Clinton didn’t
Bush I didn’t
Reagan did
Carter didn’t
Nixon didn’t
JFK didn’t
Eisenhower didn’t

And were just the winners. The fact is most of the time nominees don’t pick a former primary opponent as their running mate.

[mcar]

68. Worked out pretty well for him

[Trumpocalypse]

82. And it worked out well for

Trump, W, Clinton, Bush I, Carter, Nixon, JFK too.

[ms liberty]

83. Obama picked as his VP the one primary opponent who

HELPED and ENCOURAGED him to be more vocal and outspoken in the primary debates. Joe saw from the beginning that Obama was the one. Joe had his back when there were eight of them on stage, and he had Obama's back when there was only one other primary opponent on stage. That is the difference.

[honest.abe]

72. True but

that wasnt the issue the article was referring too.

I would be happy with most any of the choices being floated right now for VP. I am not happy with people trying to influence the process with bogus arguments.

[Trumpocalypse]

84. Agreed

Harris has other issues such as her history as a prosecutor which may alienate some progressives and African Americans.

[honest.abe]

85. No one is a perfect candidate.

One could make a list of negatives for all those currently being suggested as VP.

I dont think that serves any good purpose at this point. I am sure the Biden team is well aware of any past issues or weaknesses any of them have.

[Trumpocalypse]

87. Very true

All will have positives and negatives. The trick is to find someone who’s positives outweigh their negatives.

[honest.abe]

107. Agreed.

[LizBeth]

10. Harris and Booker had every right and obligation to have this conversation. What I saw in this

primary was a demand and kid gloves toward Biden and anyone dare not toe that line were attack by supporters to the extent I saw Bernie Bros. But then I see the same with people that go after Warren all outraged about her tactics and blaming the attacks on Harris as horrid. Not, Harris threw out a great come back to Warren and not seeing people all hurt about that.

I thought for the most part, our Democrats stayed true in their non combative manner in the primary and all of this is silliness.

Harris is right, it was a debate. I really dislike and think less of people going after two POC for bring up conversation about Biden's 70 behavior with blacks. A different time, a different thinking and Biden's to make that clear.

[Demsrule86]

20. And Biden has the right to not choose her. I predict it will not be Harris as she angered

Jill Biden. Biden helped elect Harris, he campaigned for her. She stabbed him in the back during the first debate and thus is not to be trusted.

[tonedevil]

31. White fragility...

is always a wonder to behold.

[harumph]

75. Isn't that the truth?

[Celerity]

173. +100000

[BannonsLiver]

120. Aren't we all Biden supporters at this point?

[oasis]

101. Jill Biden's input will weigh heavily on Joe's VP choice. Kamala's out.

Harris should set her sights on Atty. Gen. or a nomination to SCOTUS.

[Bettie]

112. I agree with all of this

especially the kid gloves treatment for Biden.

It seemed like people got outraged if he was challenged in any way whatsoever. Even the mildest of criticism met with vitriol.

[LizBeth]

116. It was something.

[helpisontheway]

130. It was a gimmick. She had shirts printed BEFORE the debate..

She left a bad taste in my mouth after that debate. It was made worse by the fact that she knows Biden is not a racist. And it was worse because she was friends with his son. Cut throat..I want Biden to have someone as loyal as he was to Barack. She would throw Biden under to bus to advance her own career.

[JonLP24]

172. Keep in mind Bernie Bros are a myth

Bernie Sanders won young women.

There is hard data that shows "Bernie Bros" are a myth

https://www.salon.com/2020/03/09/there-is-hard-data-that-shows-bernie-bros-are-a-myth/

This board bans "disrespectful nicknames" and group attacks. Could we please avoid using Bernie Bros on a Democratic message board?

[hlthe2b]

16. I didn't like it, but I strongly believe Biden does not hold these things agaainst her or others.

[DarthDem]

17. Sounds Like Politico's Getting Started On . . . .

Tearing down who is probably the best-qualified VP candidate. Politico gonna Politico!

[Lars39]

21. Yes, indeed, that's Politico's MO.

[Demsrule86]

23. I suggest you read up about Harris's time as AG and DA...it matters especially with the

BLM movement.

[Trumpocalypse]

42. I agree

That is a much bigger issue especially her policy of jailing the parents of truants. That heavily impacted the poor and people of color.

[mcar]

111. Link to where she jailed the parents of truants?

[Trumpocalypse]

122. Here

https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2019/2/7/18202084/kamala-harris-truancy-prosecutor-president-2020

[mcar]

126. It clearly says that she didn't jail anyone for truancy

At most, 20 parents have been prosecuted in a typical year, Miller said, and none have been jailed. The charge used by the San Francisco District Attorney’s Office doesn’t even carry the potential for jail time; instead, it’s a lower-level infraction that can at worst result in a fine. (The fine is typically $100 per child in San Francisco, but fines can go up to thousands of dollars under state law.)

[mcar]

127. Still don't see a problem

Harris’s supporters argue that the threat of prosecution was used only in extreme truancy cases, involving weeks or months of missed class, and only after the parents had been offered help with health care and transportation by the school district and other social service agencies. They point to statistics showing that school attendance rates rose in San Francisco after the program went into place, though it’s unclear if the program itself is to credit for the change....

With these statistics in hand, Harris moved to do something about truancy with a new initiative, which remains in place in San Francisco today. The goal was not to threaten all truant kids’ parents with prosecution; Katy Miller, who helped implement the program as a prosecutor under Harris, said that it’s meant to use a step-by-step process of escalating intervention and consequences to push parents to get their kids to school.

And the cases that get to prosecution are extreme — typically parents whose kids have missed more than 30, 60, or 80 days out of a 180-day school year. Miller had one case in court in which a child missed 178 days....

Harris herself made this argument in a memoir published in January, The Truths We Hold: “Even today, others don’t appreciate the intention behind my approach; they assume that my motivation was to lock up parents, when of course that was never the goal. Our effort was designed to connect parents to resources that could help them get their kids back into school, where they belonged. We were trying to support parents, not punish them — and in the vast majority of cases, we succeeded.”

[Trumpocalypse]

128. Yes but others might

That’s the point

[mcar]

132. And you think "others" wouldn't have a problem

with any of the other VP candidates?

Val Demings (who I love, BTW) was an actual cop. Susan Rice has Benghazi (right or wrong, "others" might have a problem) and a Republican son, Elizabeth Warren, etc. all have something in their records that some might have a problem with.

But, over and over, here and elsewhere on SM, I see that only Kamala Harris has these "problems." I really wonder why that is.

[Trumpocalypse]

134. Yes they all have positives and negatives

The trick is to pick someone who’s positives outweigh their negatives.

[Demsrule86]

146. That is exactly the point.

The first rule of an VP pick is the prospective VP must do no harm.

[Trumpocalypse]

155. John McCain learned that the hard way.

[Demsrule86]

145. It is my opinion that her time As DA and AG ...won't discuss why...look it up is a problem for a

Biden Harris ticket and why she did much worse than expected in the primary given her talents...she brings little to the ticket. She brings no states...and don't see how Joe could ever trust her...what if there was a disagreement between her and Joe...would she have his back or would she do what she wanted -what was in her best interest and shrug and say ...'just politics'. I see downsides to her as VP and not much upside. She has a great winning personality and is a great Senator but no to Harris as VP.

[womanofthehills]

117. The truants were 600,000 elementary school kids whose parents

were very lax about school - some kids missing 80 days. She said the program was to threaten parents into compliance and it worked. A third of those kids started attending school. I think one or two parents were jailed but the program got 200,000 kids back to school. Everything’s not black and white. When I first bought my land a “survivalist family”was living down the road - about 10 kids - no school and no home schooling. Their ages were from 3 to 12 and not one could read. They weren’t even this woman’s kids - she was raising friends kids and her grandkids.

[Trumpocalypse]

123. Read the article I posted above

Fair or unfair the policy is a problem for Harris.

[Demsrule86]

147. Do you understand how hard it is to be poor and working ...as a teacher I saw families who

had older kids staying home to care for other siblings...sometimes when I worked I couldn't get the kids to school on time...and it was a big deal. People will care. They cared during the primary.

[DarthDem]

163. Familiar

I know her record well.

[unblock]

19. history is littered with presidential candidates picking veeps who have done much worse.

in fact, a fairly standard tactic is for the presidential nominee to choose one of the main rivals for the nomination to "unite the party".

reagan and poppy pretty much hated each other, at least after the nomination battle in 1980. maybe they got over it, maybe they just hid it.

kamala is right, though, "that's politics", and it's a pretty silly basis on which to base veep selection on.

especially because having a former rival sign up for the ticket is usually seen as an important endorsement. having someone who has always been on your side or who would be expected to join up isn't as compelling. in some ways, the more bruising the hits during the nomination battle, the better it is when they team up.

[Demsrule86]

24. Kamala is a great Senator and I would vote for her if I lived in California happily. However,

as a VP pick, I just don't see it. She brings us no states and was one of the first candidates to leave the race.

[unblock]

26. i've never overly cared about veep selection.

as long as we're sure we're not giving up a critical senate seat, i think any of the candidates talked about would be fine.

your reasons for not being keen on harris make sense.
the one expressed in the article does not.

my main concern is simply winning the election, that matters far, far more than who the veep choice is.

[Mike 03]

38. I used to not care too, until Clinton picked Gore.

That totally changed my mind about how exciting a VP pick can be.

[Trumpocalypse]

45. No it's not

Most nominees don’t pick a former primary opponent.

Obama did, but
Trump didn’t
W didn’t
Clinton didn’t
Bush I didn’t
Reagan did
Carter didn’t
Nixon didn’t
LBJ didn’t
JFK didn’t
Eisenhower didn’t

and those are just the winning tickets.

[Demsrule86]

149. The party is united so there is no need of that...and if one was willing to do that...a

Sanders or Warren pick would make more sense. We need a VP that Biden trusts and can work with the Senate and who can get elected in four years or eight years. Thus I believe Tammy Duckworth is the best candidate for VP.

[unblock]

25. in fact, veeps are often chosen based on their ability to deliver the stinging attacks

a good general election strategy is to have the veep candidate make the nastier and direct attacks against the opposing ticket's presidential candidate, leaving your own presidential candidate free to appear "above the fray".

so someone who displays those skills in the primary can be a good choice.

[greenjar_01]

28. Good grief

Can we fucking not?

[Bettie]

29. Wow an old white guy doesn't like

that a black woman criticized another old white man. Shocking!

[LizBeth]

48. Right.

[in2herbs]

32. She had no remorse," Dodd told a longtime Biden supporter and donor, who relayed the exchange to

POLITICO on condition of anonymity."

Guess POLITICO doesn't believe in confidential sources?

[former9thward]

161. The confidential source was the "longtime Biden supporter"

Who talked to the Politico on the condition of anonymity. Politico did not reveal that person's name. They owed no duty to Dodd who did not speak to them.

[beachbumbob]

34. Harris been my first choice for VP as she is the strongest one

If we want a woman vp. Lots of attacks on her as the opposition sees it the same way.

[Mike 03]

35. Kamala is probably my second favorite pick, but it's up to Joe.

He needs to pick someone he's comfortable with.

[Baltimike]

39. "Nevertheless, she persisted" nt

[Hortensis]

41. I think those behind this remorseless hit should be ashamed of it.

I saw both behaviors discussed and strongly disapproved of this particular desperation move against Biden though I understood Harris's need to break out. It wasn't the biggest thing that moved her down my rankings, though accusing Biden and through him older Dems in general of racism did not go over well with me..

But all candidates in almost all elections would have been taken out if all it took was malicious interpretation and augmentation of a comment that backfired. Of course, precisely that has been used to destroy many.

Which would make this a useful tactic to use against one of the many corrupt and habitually dishonest Republican candidates on a site where their voters congregate. The only challenges for Politico's malicious hitter might be finding an adequately innocuous comment to weaponize into a chemical weapon. And, of course, the will to redirect remorseless behaviors.

[Docreed2003]

98. +1

[jcgoldie]

44. What was she supposed to say "Oh gee I'm so sorry"?

Dumb.

[Demsrule86]

150. Yes that is exactly what she should have said; it was a cold calculated attack after she agreed not

to attack at the beginning of the primary...all candidates pledged this. It was complete with t-shirts and pics of her as a child. And what makes it worse is Biden supported her Senate run and was there for her. I don't see how he could trust her. We need a VP who can help a great deal...the country is in terrible shape.This will require Trump and a VP who can forge the same sort of relationship as Obama and Biden had...and I don't see that happening with Harris.

[jcgoldie]

159. It was the primaries

They are over. Now is the time we come together. Biden knows that... you dont?

[pattyloutwo]

47. Elizabeth Warren

Still has the upper hand in polls, especially in midwestern swing states. She has great plans which are much needed.

[MoonlitKnight]

93. One way or another

Warren is going to be heavily involved in fixing the mess Trump has left. I think she is by far the best choice.

But it’s up to Joe and there are a lot of excellent candidates for him to choose from. Most of which would be at the top of the list even if men were included. I’m not sure I could name a male who would be in the top three.

[flamingdem]

96. +1

[PTWB]

51. Kamala Harris is my VP choice. I think she'd also make a great AG.

[Trumpocalypse]

53. Harris has other issues

Coming from California so she doesn’t help in any swing states. And her history as a prosecutor won’t help with progressives and African Americans.

[LexVegas]

54. 'She had no remorse' I like her even more than I already did. nt

[Fiendish Thingy]

55. Well, hopefully we will know by this Saturday nt

[Happy Hoosier]

56. She was playing for keeps. But it wasn't personal

And that's what we need in this election, IMO. We need someone who is playing to win. Is she perfect? Nope. But she is great, IMHO.

[Zorro]

57. Harris has high visibility

but from a "that's politics" perspective I think there are better candidates for Biden to pick as his running mate, like the governors of either Michigan or New Mexico.

If Biden picks one of those two, be prepared for Trump to send in the goons to either Detroit or Albuquerque pretty quickly. I think that's why those two cities are on his threatened hit list; he wants to manufacture an incident to promote his "law and order" platform and attack the Democratic VP candidate that way.

[MFGsunny]

115. My own "spidey" senses are the same as yours, AND reports say that ...

... both Detroit and Albuquerque are next for MF45-Goons-Gong show.

https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/detroit-city/2020/07/23/white-house-deploy-federal-law-enforcement-detroit/5493114002/

https://www.santafenewmexican.com/news/local_news/trump-announces-deployment-of-federal-agents-to-albuquerque/article_e80a12d6-cc34-11ea-9ab0-5b1cd8827f75.html

[mcar]

62. Chris Dodd is a lobbyist for the movie industry

Harris prosecuted, or oversaw the prosecution of, several of his clients.

This is a hit piece, pure and simple. Dodd should not be on Biden's VP vetting team. We do not need members of the team leaking nonsense and giving the media cause to do their "dems in disarray" schtick.

[JI7]

78. Exactly, Dodd needs to go . This is so fucking unprofessional

[obamanut2012]

81. THIS

[MrsCoffee]

64. BIDEN/HARRIS 2020!

Fired Up!
Ready to Go!

[JI7]

70. So they decided to write an article based in what people who don't want her to be vp say ?

[harumph]

71. She's correct - it is just politics.

I want a team player for Biden and the party - but don't require a "yes" man or "yes" woman.
Harris is a strong candidate. Dodd is from a prior generation of Democratic centrists and
old enough to be my father (and I'm not young). While I'll listen to what Dodd has to say,
his purity test is a bit much.

[jayfish]

77. Seems Petty. -NT-

[obamanut2012]

79. Still hoping for Tammy Duckworth

WOC

Vet

Wounded/Disabled Vet

Midwestern

Solid on political positions

Will support Biden

Only 52

One of the few in Congress with a doctorate-level degree that isn't a JD, but rather a Ph.D. in Human Services

[BusyBeingBest]

129. I'd prefer her as well.

[Demsrule86]

152. She is my pic too...I love Tammy.

[lanlady]

88. Kamala's attack on Joe was ill-advised

I was a young teenager in the 70s when busing was an issue. As soon as Kamala tossed that out during the debate, I groaned. It was a grossly unfair attack, a cheap shot if ever there was one. I haven't been a fan of hers since then. BUT I'd love to see Biden appoint her has AG and let her train those attack dog instincts on the entire Trump cabal, while sweeping the Justice Department clean of the stench of Bill Barr.

[BComplex]

89. ELIZABETH WARREN***ELIZABETH WARREN***ELIZABETH WARREN***ELIZABETH WARREN

She's the best, smartest, most energetic, big picture, hardest fighting, least baggage.... She's so far and away the very best choice for VP at this critical time in our nation's history.

Plus, she will be an AWESOME first woman president of the USA!!!!

[LizBeth]

92. Hands and away the best choice. Harris as Sec of State.

[flamingdem]

95. Agree! Biden/Warren

She's brilliant and should be the next Potus.

[Bettie]

114. I agree

but, there are a whole lot of people around here who absolutely hate her.

But I think she'd be great and the bonus is that Wall Street and the excessively rich are terrified of her.

[mcar]

90. Misogyny

Link to tweet

?s=20

Note it’s the fact that she LAUGHED that put Dodd over the edge. What’s the line? Women are afraid men will kill them; men are afraid women will laugh at them?

[crickets]

99. +1

It occurs to me that if Dodd is so concerned about her that he sqawks in public, Harris must at the top of the list. Sure, he's on the VP search committee, but this isn't an official message by any means. He's politicking in public, which likely indicates he must be getting his little feefees tromped on in private. Boo hoo.

Joe has a deep well of talent to choose from. I have my preferences (e.g. young enough to take the reins after him) but the VP he picks will be fine with me, regardless.

[mcar]

113. Agreed

[mcar]

91. Misogyny, part II

Link to tweet

?s=20

Please also note that when a woman practices what she correctly calls politics, ie landing a blow on a competitor during a presidential debate, Chris Dodd thinks it’s a “gimmick.” Monday morning, you have already been a long week.

[Docreed2003]

100. 👆truth

[SharonAnn]

94. Her statements were true. Bused for a better education. Biden was against busing.

[Demsrule86]

153. The problem was that Harris is also against busing as she was forced to admit. It was a failed

policy.

[Martin Eden]

102. That ambush immediately turned me off to Kamala Harris

I understand that for others to have a chance in a crowded field, undermining Joe Biden was necessary politically -- but it was an unfair and unwarranted attack. Whether Senator Harris shows "remorse" by admitting it was a low blow matters not a whit to me.

I'm looking for two things in the VP selection:

1) Help win (or do no harm) in the general election & down ticket races (compared to the other VP candidates).

2) Qualified to be Commander In Chief if (God forbid) something happens to Joe.

I think Susan Rice is easily the best choice for #2.

Hard to say for #1.

I think BENGHAZI is a big fat nothingburger for swing voters. They would be much more wary of Harris in the Oval Office. However, the Senator might be better at getting out the vote.

[ucrdem]

103. I wouldn't object but I don't see what it would add.

She introduced herself to America with a gotcha that will forever be her tagline, like Lloyd Bentsen's "no Jack Kennedy." But Bentsen's line meant something and Harris' line was just a prosecutor's trick, as she seems to be admitting. It was also a blunder.

[tishaLA]

104. Why TF is Chris Dodd, a lobbyist with a sordid reputation on gender equality

even on the committee? This is absurd. And Dodd is also buddies with too many of the people Sen Harris prosecuted in the wake of the financial crisis and he's looking for any reason to undermine her.

[oasis]

106. "Gimmick"? Post debate sales of, "I was that little girl" t-shirts became

immediately available.

A case can be made that such a campaign move definitely falls into gimmick territory.

[jcgoldie]

108. I believe Harris will be the pick and...

...I can't wait to see her cut Pence into pieces in a way that Tim Kaine was probably a little too nice to do.

[Demsrule86]

154. I hope not because the GOP will use her time as AG and DA to cut her to pieces...

we should give them no opportunity. Tammy Duckworth is my choice.

[jcgoldie]

158. Dont think thats a winning issue for GOP no matter who the candidate is

I've not seen Harris cut to pieces period.

[Awsi Dooger]

121. Swing voters would detect same thing and spit out Kamala Harris without second thought

I have emphasized that since the Kavanaugh hearings. Harris' questioning style should have been an automatic disqualifier. I was in absolute disbelief when so many here were praising it. Klobuchar stood out in those hearings as the only female who had the ideal combo of pointed questions plus thoughtfulness and likability. I emphasized that immediately.

I hosted debate watching parties for 8 years, and it didn't require more than 2 years to identify that swing voters are misogynistic as hell and can't stand an aggressive female who comes across as remorseless.

Our vice president always attempts the presidency later. There is a related thread here today. We cannot afford for that hoisted person to be someone with as many negative traits as Kamala Harris. She might be great for 2020 but given Biden age realities we have to consider 2024 almost in equal measure.

[hamsterjill]

125. It's going to be Susan Rice.

I’m betting a coke on it. And I am absolutely fine with that choice.

[DeminPennswoods]

160. Nope, Rs will beat her and Biden over the head with "Benghazi"

and "unmasking Flynn". Susan Rice would be a disaster.

[DFW]

135. Even if you know for a stone cold fact who Biden's pick is, don't post it here. It's not worth it.

On the morning of the day in 2008 that Obama was to announce his choice of Biden in the late afternoon, through a foolish error on the part of two of Biden's staff, I found out early that morning about Obama's VP choice.

Silly me, I posted it on DU, and got unmercifully trashed. LINK?!?!?!?!?!?!?

No, I had no link, and I couldn't very well say at the time that I found out through a close relative who was there when Biden's two staffers let the cat out of the bag, thinking he had no idea what they were talking about. SO, I said that I couldn't say how I knew, and then got trashed a hundred times more because of it.

"How do YOU know?"
"What makes YOU so special?"
"Is that you Barack?"
"Don't be ridiculous. That's so stupid. He'd never pick Biden. It's going to be....(whoever was on the menu that day)"
etc., etc.

After Biden was announced, exactly ONE DU poster came back to apologize.

Joe Biden could call me the night before, tell me his choice and ask for my blessing, and I still wouldn't post it here.

[aikoaiko]

142. Meh, so says an anonymous donor and Biden supporter. Fuck them for smearing Harris anonymously

I would think Biden and his team would be grateful she took her foot off the gas on attacking Biden.

[radius777]

168. Remorse? She was exactly correct

in attacking Bidens/Dems past coziness with Dixiecrats.. which Booker and Castro also went into.

Kamala has the traits you want in a VP - qualified, attractive, tough - like a black female RFK.

Her campaign faltered, but it was/is a strange campaign season, and lest we forget Biden himself was a perennial loser before Obama picked him.

This 'movement against Kamala' is just yet another attempt to knock down a successful (black) woman, just like these types tried to take down Pelosi.

[Iggo]

169. Thought we might avoid the shit show this cycle.

[JonLP24]

171. This primary was odd

Anyone that went after Joe Biden their stock fell. He was not our best candidate.