• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Dem VP - who ya' got

deactherunner said:
On that note, Gillibrand would be an interesting VP candidate, but she probably played herself out of the role by coming out against Franken and the Bubba.
Click to expand...

#metoo, amiright?

sailordeac said:
one of the most obvious and persistent habits of people on the left is overestimating the magnitude and the rapidity of change

the Dems are far from finished with intersectional politics (although it would be better for them and the country as well, if they were)
Click to expand...

Why would it be better for Dems and the country if they were finished with intersectionality? what are intesectional politics, sailor? you realize that the concept comes from law and theories of racial and sex discrimination in lawsuits?
 
JuiceCrewAllStar said:
which I don't think is a good thing

I'd rather have a fresh start going into 2024 than having a default nominee -- we'll just fall right back into the exact same electability problem we had this go around

pick the best person, either to boost election chances or, preferably, because you think they'd actually be the best for the job and let 2024 shake itself out when it happens

don't exclude someone like Elizabeth Warren from consideration because she won't be a good 2024 presidential candidate
Click to expand...

The idea that a current VP begins as the front runner is simply a natural head start. The problem is when the people in charge of the party presumptively annoint a candidate like a current VP or Clinton last time. The idea that someone paid their dues and it's just their turn is bs.

Warren should not be the nominee next time because I think the country needs younger options and fresh blood but I hoped for this time.
 
loyalty is very important in politics, so people who have served loyally and demonstrated their competence expect to move up and eventually to be given their chance

in a democratic process, the voters need ultimately to decide, and they may respect the loyal service and experience or they may not
 
BiffTannen said:
Rep Clyburn throws out the name of Atlanta Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms as possible VP pick. She has a served in city council and been mayor for 2.5 years.
Click to expand...

I don't even think shes that particularly liked in Atlanta, with too many ties to the previous corrupt administration.
 
Louis Gossett Jr said:
I don't even think shes that particularly liked in Atlanta, with too many ties to the previous corrupt administration.
Click to expand...

Not to mention she's being investigated by the ethics commission for excess campaign fundraising.
 
Not related to her possible selection, but she is about my age and grew up not too far from Wayne Williams home during the whole ordeal.
 
Strickland33 said:
the last few months is starting to bring out the vulgar historical materialist in me

it's not even just porfolio bros anymore; liberals as a class are just spineless cowards who simply don't give a shit about issues that aren't pragmatically useful to them to achieve some sort of political or ideological ends. there is a crushing lack of humanity in the center-left right now.
Click to expand...
The idiots are losing their usefulness.
 
TownieDeac said:
if hillary didn't kill intersectional politics for dems it's quite clear biden has, along with all but destroying the me too movement

turns out it doesn't really matter as much as we thought it did, except to college educated white voters anyway!
Click to expand...

Total horseshit and why Dems lose. Dems eat their own. Their purity tests make GOP ones look like an open door.
 
RJKarl said:
Total horseshit and why Dems lose. Dems eat their own. Their purity tests make GOP ones look like an open door.
Click to expand...

to be clear what i mean is dems rejected intersectional politics in favor of hillary and biden
 
TownieDeac said:
to be clear what i mean is dems rejected intersectional politics in favor of hillary and biden
Click to expand...

What would not rejecting intersectional politics have looked like in the 2016 and 2020 primaries?
 
TownieDeac said:
to be clear what i mean is dems rejected intersectional politics in favor of hillary and biden
Click to expand...

What the hell does that mean? Hillary was an arrogant, lazy candidate. Biden has ties to many states and in many regions. They aren't at all alike other than being old and white.
 
PhDeac said:
What would not rejecting intersectional politics have looked like in the 2016 and 2020 primaries?
Click to expand...

2016 hillary paid some good lip service to it without actually coalition building, and voters didn't really care

2020 biden could not have tried less to build a coalition. he didn't campaign, he didn't talk about social justice or women's issues whatsoever. again, voters didn't care, the ones who did went to warren or sanders, and biden was the default candidate remaining.

turns out either electability or "kitchen table issues" matter more to voters than making an intersectional pitch or trying to build a coalition of diverse voices into your platform.

only tangentially related but

was listening to a feminist podcast recently that postulated that postwar feminism that focused on getting women to work made sense in the war and postwar era, because women had to work and because women who worked actually had pretty decent jobs, and there was a pathway to middle class. now it's nearly impossible below the PMC to have a single-income family with kids without hovering within a standard deviation of the poverty line, and women in the workforce have focused on either pay equality or equitable distribution of labor within the household or around sexual violence prevention in the workplace. but the inherent problem therein is you can't extricate class from any of these issues, and as it turns out work did not in fact set women free. it's just another means for women to be made lesser, or have to work harder for equality. for those reasons, i think it's become obvious to women outside the PMC and college-educated ranks that representational or intersectional feminist politics don't work.
 
I agree that 2020 Biden didn't try to build a coalition, yet he did end up with a broad coalition.

I'm not sure if you're describing intersectional political as the coalition or the platform.
 
 
Yeah, kinda. Definitely attractive though.
 
BUMP

African American woman from a swing state please. But no to Abrams. Anybody associated with Bloomberg has to sit this one out.
 
Last edited:
BillBrasky said:
BUMP

African American woman from a swing state please. But no to Abrams. Anybody associated with Bloomberg has to sit this one out.
Click to expand...

Who is Bloomberg? His campaign literally feels like a decade ago.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top