Joe Biden and Stacey Abrams on Lawrence tonight at 10 ET

[CousinIT]

To talk about voting and COVID19. I'll be watching.

Link to tweet

[Beaverhausen]

1. Will he announce anything else?

Like that she is his running mate?

[DeminPennswoods]

2. Abrams getting a real time audition

nt

[ecstatic]

3. Kick!

[Celerity]

4. Stream links

https://planetnews.com/live/politics.html

https://www.livenewsmag.com/msnbc-news-live-stream/

[ecstatic]

5. Is the video freezing up for anyone else?

[Celerity]

7. no, it is fine for me, but I am on a net stream

https://planetnews.com/live/politics.html

[ecstatic]

8. Thanks! Nt

[Celerity]

10. yw!

[bdamomma]

6. watching now

[nolabear]

9. He's so good. And I'm actually glad they're bringing up Reade.

He’s comporting himself perfectly.

[backtoblue]

11. He's doing great!

[flibbitygiblets]

14. Me too, and I'm loved his answer: If you don't believe me, you shouldn't vote for me.

The kind of thing an innocent manwith integrity and respect for women says.

Contrast with tRump's response "Not good looking enough for me to sexually assault/I'll sue!"

[ecstatic]

15. Yep. At first I was annoyed and worried it might throw him off his game

But Joe was ready!

[Cha]

23. Good to know, Nola.. what did BIden

say about Reade?

Thank you!

[nolabear]

44. Kept it simple.

He thinks women should always be taken seriously. Accusations should be investigated. He doesn’t remember her. He didn’t do it, period. The idea he’d assault someone in a hallway (mouth hung open)? Sure, investigate. Didn’t do it. Period.

[flibbitygiblets]

12. He just started official VP search 2 weeks ago, so I guess this must be a kind of "focus group"

exercise to see what the public reaction is. (Just think of how differently John McCain's campaign would have gone had he taken Sarah Palin out for a public test drive. Not that Stacy Abrams hasn't already proven herself to be a very smart woman, she certainly has.)

I think back to the initial excitement that Palin brought to the campaign--before she was exposed as an semi-literate loudmouth with those infamous "gotcha" questions about choice of reading material--and I realize that Abrams could bring that kind of excitement and enthusiasm to Biden's campaign. Only this time, with substance, intelligence, and class.

Gives me chills just thinking about it!

[nolabear]

13. Stacey looks like she came to play!

[Lady_Chat]

16. Joe is on his game tonight!

Very impressed!

[tishaLA]

17. Ms Abrams is such an incredible communicator

Whip smart and an excellent advocate. I'd love to see Sen Harris get the VP nod, but I kinda believe Sen Abrams would be a better choice

[nolabear]

18. She's terrific! I haven't heard her so much at length.

I am deeply impressed and delighted.

[Celerity]

26. Abrams would supercharge the AA and overall PoC vote, plus helps with GA, TX, FL, NC, VA,

and the large heavily A-A cities in swing states like Milwaukee, Detroit, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Columbus, St Louis, Atlanta, Charlotte, Richmond, Des Moines, The Quad Cities, Memphis, Nashville, Chicago, Indianapolis, the Hampton Roads metropolitan area, Miami, Tampa, Orlando, Jacksonville, Houston, Dallas, San Antonio, etc. Remember, it is not just the POTUS EC, many of those cities, even if the states go Red, have crucial House seats and Senate seats, at stake.

She has tremendous charisma, is a superb speaker, and looks at things with a big-picture view.

[Demsrule86]

28. I agree, she would be wonderful.

[Celerity]

29. I am pleaseantly surprised to see you say that, hugz

I know we butt heads on occasion, but I never doubt your good intentions overall Demsrule. I can, I fully admit, quite headstrong, lol.

cheers

[elleng]

31. I agree, just the kind of individual we should see in that position,

in particular 'tremendous charisma, is a superb speaker.'

[Celerity]

34. Kemp stealing the GA governorship in 2018 was the most egregious in plain sight election fraud

I have even seen at statewide level in my short lifetime. The Rethugs suppressed hundreds of thousands of potential Democratic votes in an outright raw theft. The fucker OVERSAW the damn election he himself was running in! That is the most blatant of all conflicts of interests I can recall.


'Textbook voter suppression': Georgia's bitter election a battle years in the making

snip

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/nov/10/georgia-election-recount-stacey-abrams-brian-kemp

In the three months leading up to election day, more than 85,000 voters were purged from rolls under Kemp. During 2017, 668,000 voters were purged, according to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

• Of those 2017 numbers, investigative reporter Greg Palast told Salon, 200,000 people left the state, died or moved out their district, making them legitimate cancellations. However, through litigation, he got the entire purge list. “Of the 400,000 who supposedly moved, our experts will tell a court that 340,134 never moved – wrongly purged,” Palast told the Guardian, saying people had been purged for not voting in an election or two.

• Furthermore from 2012 to 2016, 1.5 million voters were purged – more than 10% of all voters – from records, according to a 2018 report from the Brennan Center for Justice. In comparison, 750,000 were purged from 2008 to 2012.

[elleng]

37. Horrendous!

[Celerity]

39. yes, and not a goddamn thing could be done! maddening

[qazplm135]

35. No she wouldn't

We aren't going to be anymore supercharged by her as we would be for Harris or other women of color.

She has no experience. She should run for gov, win, and then run for President. She should have run for the Senate to give us a better shot there than trying to leapfrog to VP.

[Celerity]

38. profoundly disagree

Last edited Fri May 15, 2020, 01:16 AM - Edit history (1)

No experience? She was already the Atlanta Deputy City Attorney by the age of 29. She was the Democratic leader in the GA Assembly for 7 of her ten years in that body, and has now been running the largest, nationwide fair voting organisation since she lost the GA Governorship in a blatantly stolen race.

Also, it is offensive to play 'slot in any black woman' games and just assume their abilities to energise us are interchangeable.

Abrams also answered the question of why she did not run for Senate. She saw the nationwide campaign to try and prevent nationwide voter suppression, election interference, and election fraud as a more urgent calling, one that fit her skill set this go round, and would have an overall greater impact.

Who would you prefer as VP?

[qazplm135]

43. First

That's not remotely enough experience to be one away from the presidency.

Second, slotting any old AA woman is exactly what picking Abrams would be.

Harris has won a statewide race twice. She was a presidential front-runner and she is someone who would be ready to take over as President.

I can name several others with more national experience.

Abrams has the same issue as Buttigieg, smart and talented but way too inexperienced and untested at the highest level.

There's zero evidence Abrams has some special hold or appeal to AA voters. Certainly not this AA voter.

[Celerity]

46. I am unconvinced by your counterpoints, sorry

Abrams, IMHO would have more of an impact than Harris in the southern swing or possible swing states (VA, GA, NC, FL, maybe even TX) as well. I think a case could be made for the large heavily A-A cities in swing and even not so swing states like Milwaukee, Detroit, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Columbus, St Louis, Atlanta, Charlotte, Richmond, Des Moines, The Quad Cities, Memphis, Nashville, Chicago, Indianapolis, the Hampton Roads metropolitan area, Miami, Tampa, Orlando, Jacksonville, Houston, Dallas, San Antonio, etc.

Remember, it is not just the POTUS EC, many of those cities, even if the states go Red, have crucial House seats and Senate seats, at stake. Harris, after her peak, never did poll that well with A-A's, unfortunately.

I think you minimise her experience too much.Being the Democratic Assembly leader for 7 years in a highly diverse, exploding in size state (will be close to over 11 million soon) like Georgia is not something that can be minimised to the point you are. Also, she, like Buttigieg, is trapped in an overall Red state, and she still came close enough to almost win the Governorship despite extraordinary and criminal systemic voter suppression and election fraud by Kemp (who outrageous oversaw the election himself) and the Rethugs. That shows a great cross-over appeal that she got that close against that brutal level of fraud and intimidation.

as I posted before

Textbook voter suppression': Georgia's bitter election a battle years in the making

snip

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/nov/10/georgia-election-recount-stacey-abrams-brian-kemp

In the three months leading up to election day, more than 85,000 voters were purged from rolls under Kemp. During 2017, 668,000 voters were purged, according to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

• Of those 2017 numbers, investigative reporter Greg Palast told Salon, 200,000 people left the state, died or moved out their district, making them legitimate cancellations. However, through litigation, he got the entire purge list. “Of the 400,000 who supposedly moved, our experts will tell a court that 340,134 never moved – wrongly purged,” Palast told the Guardian, saying people had been purged for not voting in an election or two.

• Furthermore from 2012 to 2016, 1.5 million voters were purged – more than 10% of all voters – from records, according to a 2018 report from the Brennan Center for Justice. In comparison, 750,000 were purged from 2008 to 2012.

[qazplm135]

47. Of course you aren't

You don't cite any evidence just your feeling. You ignore any need for national experience and over value the experience she has. How could I can convince through that?

[Celerity]

50. what 'national' experience does a governor have, other than interfacing with the federal government

and perhaps some states, and trade deals at times? State Assembly leaders have to interface with the feds as well. Some Governors do have a national platform (most do not), but that is off their own raw political skills making, or simply being in the right state (NY, CA, FL, for example.)

Abrams is also running a NATIONAL organisation that is massively interfacing with both federal and state apparatuses atm. She gains political ability points (mentioned about governors above) for losing a statewide race yet remaining clearly in the national spotlight AND having an actual impact at a national level. That shows a lot of raw, native political talent and skills.

In terms of federal experience

Obama was a US Senator for 3 years and 10 months when he was elected POTUS. Non leadership Illinois State Senator before that.

Harris has been a US Senator for less than 3 and a half years.

Whitmer has a been a governor for around 17 months.

Val Demings has been member of the U.S. House of Representatives for less than 3 and a half years, and has held no other elected office, including a loss attempting a House run previously.

Susan Rice does have national (and international) experience, but never has run for elected office.

Maggie Hassan has been a US Senator for less than 3 and a half years, Governor for 4 years before that.

Keisha Lance Bottoms has been a mayor for less than 2 and a half years. City council before that.

Catherine Cortez Masto has been a US Senator for less than 3 and a half years. Nevada Attorney General before that.

Tammy Duckworth has been a US Senator for less than 3 and a half years. She also was a US House Rep for 4 years.

Michelle Lujan Grisham has a been a governor for around 17 months. She also was a US House Rep for 6 years.

Sally Yates has held no elected office. she was the Acting United States Attorney General for ten days. (She should have run for GA Senate IMHO.)

Michelle Obama has never held elected office, but we all would go crazy happy if she agreed to be Biden's VP.

Even Warren has been a Senator for 'only' 7 and half years.

Only Klobuchar (13 and a half years as US Senator), and Tammy Baldwin, 7 and a half years as US Senator, 14 years as a US House Rep) have double digit years of Federal elected experience of the top candidates being considered.

My point being is that the lack of a vast amount of Federal elected experience (or any in some cases) has not stopped many from being considered, and indeed did not prevent Obama from winning the POTUS.

[qazplm135]

51. She hasn't won

A statewide race.
She has zero federal experience.


Obama had both.
Everyone else you listed has both.

She doesn't have executive experience which is what a Govenorship would give her.

She's worked in state politics. That's it.
Name the last VP or President who had ONLY worked in state politics. Never Gov, never Senator, not even a Representative?

[Celerity]

53. not buying it, sorry (and you are wrong, not every one I listed has both)

we shall see what happens

[qazplm135]

55. I ignored ridiculous options like Michelle Obama

no, we wouldn't all be happy with that selection. She has zero experience and doesn't want the job.

Of course you aren't buying it, you are equating being in state politics with being a Senator, Governor, Representative...it's patently ridiculous.

[Celerity]

57. Whitmer, Rice (in terms of any elected office), Keisha Lance Bottoms, Sally Yates

have no federal elected experience.

and this

you are equated being in state politics with being a Senator, Governor, Representative...it's patently ridiculous.

Is a patent misrepresentation of my overall points. Some of those listed have very little federal office elected experience overall. Some have none. Raw political ability, big picture thinking and vison, plus charisma, inspirational capabilities, and being a superb communicator are all essential elements of being a POTUS or a VPOTUS. Abrams has all that in spades.

Aslo, you can call Michelle Obama as VP ridiculous, but she certainly would qualify to run despite having zero elected office time on her CV.

[qazplm135]

61. very little is MORE than none

Whitmer was a Governor. Rice at least served in the White House.

Picking Abrams because of "raw political ability or big picture thinking, vision, blah blah" is not based on experience. It's based on your own personal feelings for her.

No one knew who she was until she almost won the governorship. Obama was giving a keynote speeches at a presidential convention as a state senator. There's zero comparison. There are all sorts of people who have "raw political ability" or big picture thinking, or vision or charisma or all the things you listed. Pretty much most of the people you listed have that.

Name the last person who was either President or VP who wasnt a Gov, or had federal experience, or hadn't at least won a statewide office. You can't, because it would be unprecedented.

That's why you are have to resort to making arguments like "raw political ability" which has yet to lead her to actually win a statewide office. She very well may do that, and if she does, GREAT! But hasn't happened yet.

No, Michelle Obama wouldn't qualify to run. She'd be the first one to tell you that.

[Celerity]

63. keep sliding those goalposts and pushing tosh (the Michelle Obama isn't qualified rot)

as for this,

There are all sorts of people who have "raw political ability" or big picture thinking, or vision or charisma or all the things you listed. Pretty much most of the people you listed have that.

No, all those listed do not have (some do, agreed, but some do not, at least at Abram's level, that is just human natural difference) her abilities at certain things. You act like people are completely interchangeable on points you disagree with about Abrams, but then overstate differences on things you are trying to posit to discredit her. Go ahead, hold a speech contest, i damn well guarantee you Abrams will be at or near the top of the entire group listed.

Obama was already basically a US Senator-elect when he gave the 2004 Keynote Address, as he had won the primary and the IL Rethugs did not even have a candidate against him until the insane RWNJ carpetbagger Alan Keyes jumped into the race (and got slaughtered 70% to 27%.) It wasn't like he was some unknown neophyte plucked from the aether.

I also am NOT, as you keep trying to infer, calling Abrams the next Obama, just showing that you have a fetish with trying to push up this mythical vast experience totem as the be-all and end-all.

Finally, Abrams gave the official NATIONAL Democratic Response to Trump's 2019 State of the Union Address (whilst holding no elected office I might add), so give me a break with what certainly faces up in my book as your repeatedly trying to diminish a strong black woman as well as a great politician and human being.

[qazplm135]

66. Lol at speech contest

That's just a silly comment. She's very smart at what she knows. There's no evidence how she would do outside of that because she hasn't been tested.

No Obama wasn't already a Senator elect lol

He absolutely was unknown to the vast majority of Americans.

Oh she was ONE of the people who gave a response? Whitmer did that too. Every year we get a few folks to do it. It's great. It's not remotely a VP resume bullet point.

This is just getting sillier and sillier. She's not qualified. If she gets it, well she's better than Pence for sure, so onward to the election. But I for one hope Joe picks someone with a better resume, and I feel fairly confident he will.

[Celerity]

68. again with the false framing and pure misrepresentation

I said

Obama was already basically a US Senator-elect when he gave the 2004 Keynote Address, as he had won the primary and the IL Rethugs did not even have a candidate against him until the insane RWNJ carpetbagger Alan Keyes jumped into the race (and got slaughtered 70% to 27%.) It wasn't like he was some unknown neophyte plucked from the aether.

Your colloquy with me now is full of bad faith positings on your part.



and I will never buy into this (what you just said)

She's not qualified.

[qazplm135]

69. Of course you won't

You've built her up to a super woman in your mind.

Obama was a state Senator running for the US Senate. The 2004 Dem convention was end of July.

Obama was running against Jack Ryan. Ryan's scandal came out in June. He dropped out mid June and it took six weeks to pick Keyes. Obama was selected officially even before Keyes was the pick I am pretty sure.

Kerry started considering Obama for the speech in APRIL after listening to him speak at a fundraiser.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-2004-07-15-0407150341-story,amp.html

At that point, there's was no Keyes in the race, no scandal, and no guarantee Obama was going to win.

This is the problem when you don't have experience to tout and you have to make tortured associations.

[Celerity]

74. you really have a projection problem

You've built her up to a super woman in your mind.

Is laughable on its face. I just think she would make a damn good VP for Biden, as would some others. Nothing more, nothing less.

Also Obama was not announced as the Keynote speaker until mid-July (per your own article) at which point he was basically the default winner as Ryan had ended his campaign by then (even before the scandal fully broke, Obama was beating him in the polls as well) In April Kerry simply said before that he wanted him to play a role in the convention (again per your article) but never stated then that he would be giving the Keynote Address. (again, er your article.) You are once again trying to retroactively bend things to fit your positings.

You also are trying to pettifog and drag this whole thing off into the weeds by making Obama a singular focus when talking about Abrams and dwelling on points that are not fundamentally germane to the original subject.

[qazplm135]

81. My own article

Says he was considered in April and I'm pretty sure he was picked before the announcement.

Kerry saw him speak. In April. Kerry was impressed. Kerry knew he needed every last AA vote. He didn't pick him because he was "practically a Senator."

He picked him because he saw the once in a generational talent speak and knew he would give an amazing speech at the convention.

You know this as well as I do. For some reason you need it to be because of a blowout of a candidate who wasn't even in the race yet. Ok.

Abrams I suppose could turn out to be amazing. She could also turn out to be in over her head. Don't know because she hasn't put in the work like Harris or heck at least Buttigieg ran a national presidential campaign. He's not really qualified either but that's better than state legislature.

Like I said, I've got the entirety of political history on my side, and you've got "she's really talented." I'm going to leave it there. Feel free to restate the same point again, I'm not seeing much value in continuing so you can have the last word.

[Celerity]

84. again with the false framing and pettifogging and digressions

He didn't pick him because he was "practically a Senator."

There was obviously something already there with Obama, I NEVER stated he was only picked because he was 'almost a Senator.' It certainly did not hurt his chances of getting the coveted Keynote Address in the end.

All this is is trying to deflect from your multiple factual errors, false framings, and the fact that you apparently refuse to accept someone having a different opinion than you do.

Like I said, I've got the entirety of political history on my side

If we are talking about experience at federal elected office level strictly in terms of being vital to the winning or losing of the POTUS/VPOTUS election (something I think Abrams definitely helps Biden with) and also the importance of raw skills and instincts to doing so

no you do not

two words

Donald Trump

Also, if we extend this beyond simply winning the office, and delve into actual performance in the office, you again do not remotely have the 'entirety of political history' on your side. Plenty of vastly experienced POTUS's and VPOTUS's who were shit once elected.

[Celerity]

77. Whitmer gave hers in 2020. Abrams was picked by Schumer as the only official Democratic Response

in 2019 (In English, Xavier Becerra gave the Spanish-language response)

You keep trying to belittle her and downplay all that she has done over and over. It is a bad look.


Stacey Abrams to give Democratic response to State of the Union

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/01/29/stacey-abrams-to-give-democratic-response-to-state-of-the-union-1134068

Stacey Abrams will deliver the Democratic response to President Donald Trump’s State of the Union address next week, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said Tuesday.

Abrams drew national attention as the Democratic nominee for Georgia governor in a contested race against Brian Kemp. Abrams eventually conceded, but blasted Kemp, who was secretary of state, for how he handled the election and said he pushed suppressed voter suppression efforts.

[qazplm135]

78. Lol saying something isn't VP worthy

is not remotely belittling.

There are tons of amazing things that aren't VP worthy.

There are tons of amazing people who aren't VP worthy.

[Celerity]

54. Obama's came from the same thing, 3 year 10 months

as a US Senator. Illinois State Senator is not a statewide position.

[qazplm135]

56. US Senator IS

winning a statewide race IS.

When she does that, she'll be equivalent.

She's also no Obama. Trying to compare her, or just about anyone else to him is a non-starter.

[Celerity]

59. what are you on about? re-read my post

you said (and the everyone else has both part is just factually wrong as well, as I already showed before)



I simply said (referring to Obama's federal AND statewide elected office experience)

[qazplm135]

62. Obama didn't run for President

having only won as a state senator. He ran as a sitting US Senator. You seem to think because it was 4 years it was meaningless.
Ah, what's four years learning how the federal government works, passing legislation, etc? It's all the same as being a state senator or "having raw political talent" right?

The AND is the part that separates him from Abrams (as well as quite frankly political ability, charisma, intelligence, etc...which isn't a knock on Abrams, he had that over EVERYONE).

[Celerity]

65. complete non sequitur

I NEVER stated he ran as having only State Senate experience, and I never said it was meaningless. You really have issues with logical fallacies and false framing attempts.

Also, if you do not think having raw political talent and innate instinctual skills are extremely important (and a difference maker at a multiplicity of levels) then you must not understand how elective politics (and true leadership at the highest levels once you get there), works.

[qazplm135]

67. Name the last person

Who was VP or Pres based only on raw talent and innate skills. Things I don't remotely think she has over any of the other contenders by the way.

I understand elective politics involves winning elections. When she does a little more of that she'll be good. Until then, just like Buttigieg, she ain't there yet.

[Celerity]

70. we are not living in a hidebound past, the Trumpian ascendance has forever changed POTUS/VPOTUS

dynamics.

There have been plenty of vastly experienced VP's who either lost in the general or were shit once elected throughout US history. A tonne of elected experience is no guarantee of anything.

And we will just have to agree to disagree on Abrams' raw talent and skills vis-a-vis some of the other possibles.

[qazplm135]

71. You were one of the big Buttigieg boosters

Weren't you?

Every one of those Presidential and VP candidates, winning and losing, had more experience than Abrams.
You may be enamored with youth, a lot of people value experience instead.

[Celerity]

75. My support of Buttigieg has nothing to do with my liking Abrams for VP. I have stated Abrams

would make a great VP for well over a year.

Weak sauce trying to rehash the 2020 primaries and infer some ulterior motive upon my part.

[qazplm135]

76. I wasn't inferring an ulterior motive

I was inferring that you seem to get very excited about newer candidates and that you routinely seem to eschew experience as a factor.

[Celerity]

80. That IS inferring an ulterior motive

SMDH

And this is just rubbish:

you routinely seem to eschew experience as a factor.

I am not going to allow you to try and beat me about the head over Pete. I think he would (and may well in the future) make a great POTUS. Far better than many of the 29 total who ran for the office in our Party's primaries.

My second choice for POTUS would have been (IF Ohio had a Dem governor he probably would have run and I might have supported him even over Pete) Sherrod Brown, who most assuredly is neither young, nor inexperienced. He is 67 years old (68 when he would have been sworn in) and has has 35 and half years (27 and a half at US Congressional level) of statewide and federal level elected office experience.

I do not think that 'experience' or lack thereof (and my defending a preference of a candidate) in terms of POTUS/VPOTUS has come up other than with Buttigieg in any of my myriad postings overall, other than now with Abrams.

I judge people on what I see and what I think of them as people and what skills and potential they bring to the table. I never auto-default to picking a person to support simply because they are young or old, or if they have decades of experience versus one with less.

[qazplm135]

82. An ulterior motive is concealed

I said nothing of the sort, I in fact said you were very open and obvious about it to me. The fact that I remembered your preference should suggest something to you.

I remembered how vociferously you defended his lack of experience. I also now remember how quickly you take offense. That you might also like other people with experience is great, but you said yourself, you care less about experience. You care about "skills and potential."

And those are great things to have...when added to experience. Particularly when talking about Pres or Veep.

[Celerity]

85. I defended Buttigieg because I thought he was the best candidate, and I only took offense at

the disingenuous attacks, and false framings cast at him, things that were legion when it came to Buttigieg (and not that often about experience at all btw.)

You just made a false accusation about me in a previous post, and I defended myself. You love to make inferences and misframings, and even commit factual errors, all trying to somehow get me to give up. You also play classic 'muddy the waters' games and try and drag a colloquy off into the marsh of tangentiality.

finally this is just a flat out lie and is scurrilous

but you said yourself, you care less about experience

I NEVER once uttered those words, that is simply bullshit and a pure smear that attempts to make me look like a naive fool, which I assure you mightily I am not.

Skills and potential are extremely important in most all of life's endeavours, but I NEVER said or inferred they were the only criteria of judgement that came into the calculus.


bad faith postings upon your part, SMDH

[Sugarcoated]

83. She would be a poor choice

I hope he doesn't take a risk like that...

[scarletlib]

88. Speaking somewhat sarcastically but after Trump

Anyone who can walk and chew gum at the same time would be more than qualified be president. Republicans can no longer cite anyone for lack of qualifications or experience in governing. As for Stacy, she is super smart. She will do a good job in any position.

[tishaLA]

36. ITA. And in addition to the African American vote, she would

do wonders with suburban white women--she's sort of the political Oprah.

[Celerity]

40. minus the 2.6 billion dollar net worth, lolol

[qazplm135]

45. The vast majority of white women

Have no idea who she is. She is in no way the political Oprah.

[qazplm135]

64. Who asked her about why didn't she run for Senate?

It was an AA woman. Did you see the look on her face? She was serious.

We AAs expect people to put in the work. She hasn't. One of the same reasons why Buttigieg got nowhere in the AA community.

Go to daily Kos. Search for Denise Velez. Read her diary on why Abrams isn't qualified. I guarantee you Ms. Velez is an Afro-Latina woman who knows more about the AA community and AA women than you and me times ten.

She also doesn't think Michelle is qualified either. Read that diary and then come back and tell me why she's wrong and you're right.

[elleng]

42. Good to see this. Why do you say she'd be a better choice?

[highplainsdem]

19. They're both very impressive.

[Celerity]

20. great answer by Abrams on why she did not run for the Senate

[Lady_Chat]

49. I didn't hear her answer,what did she say?

[Celerity]

52. She said saw running ithe nationwide campaign to try and prevent nationwide voter suppression,

election interference, and election fraud by the Rethugs as a more urgent calling, one that fit her skillset this go round (as she was a massive victim of it by Kemp and the GA Rethusg in 2018 and thus already has the start of a national platform for it), and that (her leading the fight) would have an overall greater impact.

In the past she also said that people erroneously assume two things:

1. That any other Democratic candidate not named Stacey Abrams is a guaranteed loser or has a far poorer chance in either of the 2 races. She said she does not believe that for a second. (would have been nice if Yates had run against the weak Perdue and the other 3 currently running had all taken a shot at uber scum Doug Collins (who will crush Loeffler in the Rethug primary) <<<< my add)

2. That she herself is a guaranteed lock to win either seat race as well.

[Lady_Chat]

58. Thank you, for responding!

[Celerity]

60. yw!

[Hortensis]

73. GA Abrams voter here. Imo, she refused a call to duty

for personal reasons. That's her old, original official excuse that has never been adequate to me. She could have run and used the national spotlight that would have been on her campaign to further the crusade against election theft.

86,000+ dead and expected to double over the next 6 weeks. That's just a ONE little sample of what Republicans controlling the senate means.

[ecstatic]

21. Hallelujah!

Lock them up!

[Celerity]

22. I am SO glad Biden said he was not going to pardon or shut down any investigations into Rump

[Cha]

24. Well there ya go! A few on here have been saying

they think Biden will say he wants "to look forward".. and wouldn't want to prosecute.

Well they're wrong.

[Demsrule86]

27. Hi, Cha...he answered the question about prosecuting the current bad guys in office very well.

[Cha]

30. Wonderful! I always replied.. they didn't have any

idea what Joe Biden would do.

Mahalo, Dems!

[Demsrule86]

25. Joe is doing great...I really do love the guy. People have been wanting a second "Roosevelt"

Joe may the one. Stacey is also doing a superb job...really like her.

[Celerity]

41. +100000

[nocoincidences]

32. I've been very excited about Stacey Abrams since the first time I saw her.

She is sharp, articulate, focused, and for me, at least, brings up my admiration for Barbara Jordan and what she stood for.

I am ALL in for her to be VP. She has what it takes to be a real President, if something should happen to Joe.

Watching their interaction, he really likes her. I want her. I hope he sees in her what I see.

[TomSlick]

33. They were both very impressive.

[Green Line]

48. They were, Joe needs to get out there more, he's terrific

[TomSlick]

90. I don't know what getting out there means right now but I agree.

[bdjhawk]

72. Most liked and disliked

I thought overall he was sharp and decisive with his responses which was great (and something I worry about).

I know others said they liked his response to the Reade question but I felt disappointed. It was good that he got in the comment that her story kept changing but I really did not like that he said those who believe Reade shouldn’t vote for him. He can get the point across like he did that women need to be heard and that Reade’s story has changed but why not take each time to remind people that Rump has like 60 women who have credible accusations against him, he admitted on tape that he grabs them by their privates and that he just goes in and doesn’t wait for them to give permission!

I LOVED his phrase about Rump “prostituting the office” and think we all need to use that. It describes EXACTLY what Rump and his cronies are doing!!!

[JI7]

79. Too bad Biden can't get 2 VPs. I think Harris and Abrams are both great with him

[Trumpocalypse]

86. Really?

Did Abrams also accuse Biden of being a racist on national television?

[Pompoy]

87. The VP choice is about bringing in the vote

Stacey Adams is very smart, if something were to happen to Biden, she could handle it.
But priority number one should be beating Trump, we need the A-A's to show up in droves.
I think Stacey Abrams can get them more energized than Kamala Harris, I even have a tiny concern about how Harris would behave, I didn't like the face she made when Schumer told her to keep it down or something. You can see it both ways on that exchange, but Schumer was driven to tell her to back off a bit.

Biden was impressed by Abrams years ago, and put her name out as soon as he announced, or even earlier.
Then after the debates were over, he made some noise about picking from the other candidates, so I got excited last night when I saw them together on the show.
It's probably a trial balloon, but it also shows that Biden is very impressed with her and she might be the leading candidate in his mind for VP.

Obama could have been elected President, straight from the Illinois State House, and he would have done the same job as President.

[Baked Potato]

89. In an OP in February, I predicted Stacey,

I’m still predicting Stacey. She is energetic and new. She would get people to sit up and take notice. A Joe/Stacey ticket would be such an exciting thing to see compared to dull-ass Frump and Silver.