VP picks

Should be on the short list for whoever is the nominee. Might help bring a Florida win.

We need Florida and Florida will be a 1% race - regardless of whom we nominate

If we win Florida, and we can, game over.

He was haunted by the FBI investigation, copped to a state ethics law violation and paid a $5,000 fine to make it go away. He also ended his campaign with over $3 million in donation money unspent. He is now using a portion of those funds for a voter registration drive that is long on publicity but short on results. His campaign organization was extraordinarily incompetent. Florida had a late primary (August 28), but his campaign went a full month without putting paid field organizers on the ground.

No. Just no.

Gillum only lost by 60,000 votes and Nelson only lost by 10,000 votes ...Had he spent the money he would have probably won his race and definitely would have pulled Nelson over the top ...He is a helluva campaigner but that is a disqualifier in my book … Thanks for the information ..We might not regain the Senate next year on account of that stunt ...

Do you have a link with more detail? Truly unbelievable.

https://www.tallahassee.com/story/news/local/fbi/2019/04/24/andrew-gillum-ethics-hearing-delayed-until-11-a-m/3538733002/
https://news.wjct.org/post/andrew-gillum-john-morgan-reignite-feud-over-unspent-campaign-money
https://floridapolitics.com/archives/283728-did-andrew-gillum-leave-millions-of-dollars-in-the-bank-on-election-day

That's pretty enraging.

And Hizzoner Mayor Pete!

Really. it worked with an inferior Dan Quale!

Certainly Hizzoner Mayor Pete is much smarter etc than that idiot Quayle!

But Biden would need to disavow any homophobic persons endorsement or I’d not vote for him in the primaries (Oliver Davis I’m looking at you...).

then I believe that ideally, the VP should be a woman of color. If, however, the nominee is a white woman, then the VP could be either a man or woman, but I believe that that person should also be a person of color. If the nominee is a male of color, like Cory Booker, than I believe that the VP nominee should be a female and could be of any color. If the nominee is a woman of color, like say Kamala Harris, then the VP could be a male or female of any color. In a lot of Presidential races, where it was always going to be two white males, where in the U.S. the VP was from mattered a lot. In this race, where I think diversity matters a great deal to make sure that the Democratic pick gets enough votes from both women and people of color, I believe that it is super important that the ticket has both a woman and a person of color on the ballot.

Democrats currently have a big advantage with women. We should not blow that buy not having a woman on the ticket. Hillary struggled because she did not do nearly as well as Barack Obama did with the black vote. A person of color on the ballot could help change that.

In short, in this Presidential election, I believe that diversity matters more than the geographic origin of the VP candidate.

I think she did slightly better than Kerry in 2004 in states that have not instituted voter suppression methods since then.

I don't think any Democrat was going to do as well as Obama did. It isn't reasonable for the media to take Obama's extraordinary turnout numbers and use them as a benchmark to bash Hillary with.

Yes, diversity does matter. We should consider strongly consider African-American and Latino candidates for VP, as well as LGBT, Asian and Jewish candidates for VP.

Right now I am leaning towards Pete Buttigieg for president and Hilda Solis, Obama's first labor secretary, for VP. That would give us our first openly gay president and our first Hispanic vice-president.

I also would not be surprised if she did slightly better than Kerry in states that had not instituted voter suppression methods since then.
However, I am not entirely sure that I know what you mean when you said, "I don't think any Democrat was going to do as well as Obama did.". Granted, voter suppression would have had some impact, no matter who ran, but when one sees how much of an increase in Black voter turnout there was from Kerry in 2004 to Obama in 2008, how the increase in Black voters was mostly maintained in 2012, and then dropped off to roughly Kerry (Pre-Obama) levels in 2016, we realize that, amazingly enough, Black voters were energized by a Black candidate. Also, unsurprisingly, women in 2018 were energized by women candidates.

Put these two ideas together, and we get the following theory: that the 2020 Democratic ticket really should have at least one woman and one person of color on the ticket. In fact, I think that that should be the standard for the Democratic Party for at least, say, the next 200 years.

You couldn't expect Hillary, or Bernie, or O'Malley, or Biden or Warren to do as well with black voters as Obama did. The media acts like there was no reason they couldn't.

I don't think a running-mate who was black would have enabled one of them to do as well as Obama either.

I think Hillary was concerned about being the first female candidate, and trying to be the first woman president, while not having a white male on the ticket. She did give serious consideration to Corey Booker and Tom Perez. She also took a serious look at Elizabeth Warren and Xavier Becerra. Ultimately she went with Kaine. I thought she should have gone with Tom Vilsack.

I don't think it would have mattered. 2016 was all about the fake email scandal and James Comey's antics.

I do agree that we need diversity on the ticket. Somewhere on there we should have a candidate, or two, who is black, Latino, Asian, Jewish, LGBT or a woman.

Hillary wasn't wrong about the incredible sexism she faced, in both 2016 and before that in 2008. It was that sexism that led people to conclude that there was somehow a scandal about an email server. That enabled the FBI to essentially enter the race on the GOP's behalf.
.

Some of them among the actual presidential candidates.

Now leaning Biden/Klobuchar.

ny

Then yes, probably.
Age, will be an underlying factor and a understudy will be an important reassurance. Amy fits that perfectly.

If it is more like 2008 then Stacy Abrams will be the pick.
It that case he will need a party unifying pick that would excite the base.

My only requirement will be who do I sincerely believe would be best to carry out the duties of office that will be of the greatest benefit to our country. This should be the most important consideration for everyone.

I'd say the vice presidential nominee has to meet two absolute criteria:

(1) Has the necessary experience/background to be seen as ready to take over on Day 1. Biden will be 78 by Inauguration Day; his running mate can't be young or inexperienced, no matter how promising they might seem. A governor, a US senator, a Cabinet secretary, a general -- something like that.

(2) A woman. No men need apply. The days when a Democratic national ticket could be made up of two men -- of whatever color or sexual orientation -- are past.

Ideally, the running mate would also meet a third criterion:

(3) African-American or Latino. To be successful, a Democratic nominee needs one or both communities to turn out in good numbers.

So, looking at the possibilities, I'd say the ideal running mate is Kamala Harris. Catherine Cortez Masto also deserves a look. And, if we're willing to let #3 slide a bit, Amy Klobuchar.

I don't he will choose anyone from the debate stage. I could see Abrams or Gillum given a win in FL or GA and game over.

Neither has held a statewide or national office, and Gillum is a man.

we just need someone to gin up the base if it's Biden.

If the candidate can’t carry it on his or her own, it’s gonna be a hard up hill climb no matter who the VP choice is. Our best bet is to pick a galvanizing Presidential candidate and use the VP choice to calm the nerves among more timid electorates. Sound familiar?