The Joe Biden 2020 tracker thread (5 Viewers)

[Intensesaint]

A place for all the gaffs, slip-ups and overall outlandish things Democratic candidates will say or do in lead up to the 2020 Election.

 

[Infoman]

Except you haven't addressed it. All you've said is Susan Rice is more qualified in your opinion. You've yet to address how Kamala Harris' experience shows that she is in over her head.

She's only held a national office for a few years, and before that she was barely winning some elections in her own state... Now she's VP material after just a few years as a Senator, and virtually no national policy experience - with a track record for recently getting her hat handed to her by many of the people that were potentially passed over for the same job?

I have... She's inexperienced on a national/global policy level... Heck even as a Senator she is inexperienced... Rice was one example... we have already had that discussions about her and why... any non-junior Senator, Governor, or Prior cabinet member... would be more qualified and experienced.

Her being picked has less to do with what she bring to the table, and more about what she doesn't... I think that's pretty obvious at this juncture... and I still don't understand why that's the play here. But that's just me.

 

[efil4]

I think your right, he does have a position in mind but it won't matter if his VP candidate can not help him cross the finish line.

So long as Trump continues to ad lib and go off script, he could have had Mickey Mouse from Wisconsin as his running mate and it wouldnt have mattered.

 

[efil4]

Kamala Harris will make it harder for Trump to go after them as being soft on crime. They both have pushed very hard on anti-crime legislation in the past, and have long records of being "tough on crime". So Trump can't attack their records to scare people.

That of course is problematic on the progressive end in today's environment. They are definitely not great standard bearers on police reform and are susceptible to being charged as political opportunists on the issue, or Johnny come lately's. They'll have to make the pitch that they are concerned about crime and have worked their whole careers to protect Americans from criminals, but based on the results, they believe that the system they've put in place and have championed needs to change somewhat.

It'll be a somewhat difficult needle to thread.

And to add- Rice pick would have continued to play into the "Obama deep state narrative" that would have been the low hanging fruit Trump thrives on.

This alleviates that angle ( having P and VP candidates from Obama years ).

 

[Optimus Prime]

the media keeps harping on their exchange during the first debate

aren't quite a few VP picks former presidential candidates themselves?

former candidates who slung barbs at the nominee when they were both campaigning?

especially once the nominee became the front runner?

This can't be that unusual a situation where the VP pick is a onetime rival

There is something about the coverage that rubs me the wrong way

 

[TheRealTruth]

Harris said she believed Biden's sexual harassment accusers, is that no longer the case?

 

[Eeyore]

Since when does someone’s unsuccessful run for President matter? Biden ran against Obama and got trounced. That is the best they got!?!

Mike Pence was an out of work ex-Governor whose political career was over. Literally over.

He was selected for two reasons-

1) he actually said yes
2) he is a bible thumping loon that those bible thumping loons like

It is obvious why some don’t want her. Just like Trump said “she is a dream opponent.” And we all know that he means the exact opposite of what he says.


Harris was the smart pick. She checks all of the boxes for Biden.

I would have preferred Tammy Duckworth.

I was hoping for Duckworth as well but I like Harris.

This morning, at the beginning of our shift, my coworkers and I were discussing how long it would be before the birthers started crying for Harris's birth certificate.

It was on my Twitter feed by 10am.

 

[bdb13]

Harris said she believed Biden's sexual harassment accusers, is that no longer the case?

My guess is she would probably answer that she believes that Biden now understands that he was making women feel uncomfortable and that she also believes he didn't cross the line into sexual assault.

Or something like that.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

She's only held a national office for a few years, and before that she was barely winning some elections in her own state... Now she's VP material after just a few years as a Senator, and virtually no national policy experience - with a track record for recently getting her hat handed to her by many of the people that were potentially passed over for the same job?

A post you edited after the discussion had moved on to a new page. Got it.

First, it's disingenuous to say that she was barely winning some elections in California. She's only had one general election contest decided by less than 10 points.

Secondly, she's not without experience. She is well respected for her work on the Intelligence Committee by members from both sides of the aisle. She's smart, she's passionate, and she doesn't back down from challenges.

Honestly, I think it's a great choice. Biden has tons of experience and will most assuredly surround himself with others that have experience and expertise. This is a perfect setting for someone like Harris to thrive and become prepared to take over when Biden steps aside.

 

[TheRealTruth]

My guess is she would probably answer that she believes that Biden now understands that he was making women feel uncomfortable and that she also believes he didn't cross the line into sexual assault.

Or something like that.

Agree that is what she would say, just sounds like an opportunist and typical politician answer.

 

[bdb13]

Agree that is what she would say, just sounds like an opportunist and typical politician answer.

She comes across to me as a pretty typical politician, so..

 

[MT15]

Agree that is what she would say, just sounds like an opportunist and typical politician answer.

or, you know, you could actually look at what the actual allegations consisted of, and come to the same conclusion.

There was only one “allegation” that involved anything remotely criminal and it was eventually debunked, after a while. The young lady clearly has issues and was exploited by some pretty unscrupulous people to make some political points, IMO.

 

[Mr. Blue Sky]

This morning, at the beginning of our shift, my coworkers and I were discussing how long it would be before the birthers started crying for Harris's birth certificate.

It was on my Twitter feed by 10am.

If i were ever going to engage with any of these birther twits (which I wont)- i would simply ask them- Why didnt you demand to see Mike Pence’s birth certificate? Why, specifically, weren’t you suspicious of whether or not he was born in the US? Or of Joe Biden for that matter, when Obama chose him to be VP?

 

[Infoman]

A post you edited after the discussion had moved on to a new page. Got it.

First, it's disingenuous to say that she was barely winning some elections in California. She's only had one general election contest decided by less than 10 points.

Secondly, she's not without experience. She is well respected for her work on the Intelligence Committee by members from both sides of the aisle. She's smart, she's passionate, and she doesn't back down from challenges.

Honestly, I think it's a great choice. Biden has tons of experience and will most assuredly surround himself with others that have experience and expertise. This is a perfect setting for someone like Harris to thrive and become prepared to take over when Biden steps aside.

I edited it before you responded.... others responded to the additions I made before you asked the question... (I did so to add substance for real conversation - not to appease you).

As per usual, since my response wasn't what you wanted to hear... here we are............ again.

Look man, I have had this discussion with nearly everyone here in earnest - except you.

There is no logical way you can tell me she is experienced.... not that I care... because the spirit of my question had more to do with - Why choose lack of experience? Than if it was even a question that she lacked experience... because she does lack experience.

Nothing I posted was disingenuous, nor did it lack logic or substance... It just doesn't match how you feel about it... which is fine.... let's talk about why that is in earnest... instead of having the same tired back and forth, and adding nothing to the discussion, but rather just trying to punch holes in my posts because you disagree?

 

[coldseat]

I have... She's inexperienced on a national/global policy level... Heck even as a Senator she is inexperienced... Rice was one example... we have already had that discussions about her and why... any non-junior Senator, Governor, or Prior cabinet member... would be more qualified and experienced.

Her being picked has less to do with what she bring to the table, and more about what she doesn't... I think that's pretty obvious at this juncture... and I still don't understand why that's the play here. But that's just me.

Are you worried that her "inexperience" will handicap her in being about to be at the head of something like the federal coronavirus response. Frankly, I think she will be huge asset for this country in that roll. And much, much better than anaything Pence has been able to muster.

She will first and foremost listen to the advice of our best scientist. She will be an advocate for and implement a more cohesive federal approach and response. She will be able to effectively manage all of the parts necessary to muster such a response (her expierence as an AG for California tells me that much). I vehemently welcome such a person in that roll because it will help us as a country to pull our collective heads out of our arse and start taking the smart, logical steps that are necessary, like a national freaking mask mandate.

She is a worker, orginizer, intelligent and serious. That's what we need right now!

 

[bdb13]

Fox News Sunday" anchor Chris Wallace on Wednesday said Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) is "a reasonably safe choice" for Democrats, adding that the presumptive vice presidential nominee isn't very far to the left on the political spectrum.

"She is not far to the left, despite what Republicans are gonna try to say," Wallace told "America's Newsroom."

His comments come a day after former Vice President Joe Biden chose Harris as his running mate. After Biden's announcement, President Trump said Harris was his No. 1 pick.

“Despite the president saying yesterday that Kamala Harris was his No. 1 draft pick, that she’s the one he wanted the most, I promise you that there were a lot of people he would have liked to be running against much more," Wallace said.

Chris Wallace: Kamala Harris 'not far to the left despite what Republicans are gonna try to say'

"Fox News Sunday" anchor Chris Wallace on Wednesday said Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) is "a reasonably safe choice" for Democrats, adding that the presumptive vice presidential nominee isn't very far to the left on the political spectrum.

thehill.com

I definitely do not believe Harris is who Trump wanted most, especially when we were hearing the same exact line behind the scenes last week but in reference to Rice.

 

[Infoman]

Are you worried that her "inexperience" will handicap her in being about to be at the head of something like the federal coronavirus response. Frankly, I think she will be huge asset for this country in that roll. And much, much better than anaything Pence has been able to muster.

She will first and foremost listen to the advice of our best scientist. She will be an advocate for and implement a more cohesive federal approach and response. She will be able to effectively manage all of the parts necessary to muster such a response (her expierence as an AG for California tells me that much). I vehemently welcome such a person in that roll because it will help us as a country to pull our collective heads out of our arse and start taking the smart, logical steps that are necessary, like a national freaking mask mandate.

She is a worker, orginizer, intelligent and serious. That's what we need right now!

No... Like I said... The actual lack of experience concerns me far less than... Why choose a VP with a clear lack of experience?

I think what she brings to the ticket as a VP had nothing to do with her being chosen... I think she was chosen for what she does not bring. (a national political track record to beat up on)

In my honest opinion... Here's the situation I see....

There are lot of people that dislike and don't trust Trump out there, but many of them also don't want (perceived or otherwise) an ultra far left progressive agenda running the show... and if Biden was supposed to be portrayed as a "moderate" option for them (and that's what I keep being told)... Welp... the Harris pick makes no sense.... because this election will be about turning middle of the road and undecided votes... everyone who hates Trump is already voting for Biden... everyone who loves Trump is already voting for Trump... that was never changing.... so the pick still baffles me.

Unless of course it was only about race, sex, and not over-shadowing Biden.

 

[bdb13]

Not sure where else to post this:

It’s Way Too Soon To Count Trump Out
By Nate Silver

Joe Biden currently has a robust lead in polls. If the election were held today, he might even win in a landslide, carrying not only traditional swing states such as Florida and Pennsylvania but potentially adding new states such as Georgia and Texas to the Democratic coalition.

But the election is not being held today. While the polls have been stable so far this year, it’s still only August. The debates and the conventions have yet to occur. Biden only named his running mate yesterday. And the campaign is being conducted amidst a pandemic the likes of which the United States has not seen in more than 100 years, which is also causing an unprecedented and volatile economy.

Nor has it been that uncommon, historically, for polls to shift fairly radically from mid-August until Election Day. Furthermore, there are some reasons to think the election will tighten, and President Trump is likely to have an advantage in a close election because of the Electoral College.

That, in a nutshell, is why the FiveThirtyEight presidential election forecast, which we launched today, still has Trump with a 29 percent chance of winning the Electoral College, despite his current deficit in the polls. This is considerably higher than some other forecasts, which put Trump’s chances at around 10 percent. Biden’s chances are 71 percent in the FiveThirtyEight forecast, conversely.

It’s Way Too Soon To Count Trump Out

Joe Biden currently has a robust lead in polls. If the election were held today, he might even win in a landslide, carrying not only traditional swing states su…

fivethirtyeight.com

I'm definitely worried about Democratic overconfidence at this stage.. long, long ways to go.

 

[efil4]

No... Like I said... The actual lack of experience concerns me far less than... Why choose a VP with a clear lack of experience?

I think what she brings to the ticket as a VP had nothing to do with her being chosen... I think she was chosen for what she does not bring. (a national political track record to beat up on)

In my honest opinion... Here's the situation I see....

There are lot of people that dislike and don't trust Trump out there, but many of them also don't want (perceived or otherwise) an ultra far left progressive agenda running the show... and if Biden was supposed to be portrayed as a "moderate" option for them (and that's what I keep being told)... Welp... the Harris pick makes no sense.... because this election will be about turning middle of the road and undecided votes... everyone who hates Trump is already voting for Biden... everyone who loves Trump is already voting for Trump... that was never changing.... so the pick still baffles me.

Unless of course it was only about race, sex, and not over-shadowing Biden.

if you are "middle of the road and undecided" after the last 3.75 years that needs turning, then VP pick wasnt going to be the "turning point".

What i dont get is all that are hung up on "well she really hasnt held office/ran for office". She currently is a member of 5 Senate committees -

• Senate Committee on the Budget
• Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
  Federal Spending Oversight and Emergency Management, Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations subcommittees
• Senate Committee on the Judiciary
  the Constitution, Intellectual Property subcommittees
• Senate Select Committee on Intelligence

Not sub committess- Standing committees - the most influential being Budget and Intelligence.