Maybe their internal polling is saying it's a bad idea, but I really think this is the perfect opportunity for an all-woman ticket. Select Warren or Ocasio-Cortez as VP.
this post was submitted on 03 Aug 2024
-4 points (44.4% liked)
News
23259 readers
3386 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I would be, no exaggeration, STOKED for a Kamala/AOC ticket
While I could get behind the feat, I think it's important to remember how sexist this country has the capacity to be. Sadly, it may be prudent balancing her ticket with a man. To be fair, polls may still be premature.
Second, gender could turn out to be one of the driving forces this year. While Harris is doing no better among women than Biden did in 2020, she is running 11 points behind him among men. She cannot win with only 37% of the male vote—unless she can engineer offsetting gains among women.
Warren is only 3 years younger than Trump. AOC is a poster child for GQP fundraising boogymen. It would be cool, but I don't see it happening. I'd enjoy being wrong about that, because either one would destroy Vance in a debate.
Shapiro is a safe choice. The Lieutenant Gov is also a Democrat, unlike North Carolina (cited as one reason Cooper didn't want the job) and Davis would be the first black governor of Pennsylvania. Shapiro is more of a centrist, but his politics are really shaped by the demographics of Pennsylvania. He would likely pivot on some issues like fracking or unions, but his support of Israel is not likely to change and it is going to be divisive.
I suppose, but I also feel (and I say this as a Jew) like having the name Shapiro is going to turn some people off. I don't want that to be true, but it is.
I mean, the antisemites are already voting for Trump.
Not all of them. Unfortunately, I've met my share of antisemites on the left. And no, I don't mean critics of Israel.
You don't say...
Yeah, but the whole ‘trying to join the IDF’ thing completely negatively outweighs any other beneficial factors about him.
A lot of people don't realize that Pennsylvania is fifth in Jewish population, after New York, California, Florida, and New Jersey. We also have the most KKK propaganda coming out of our state. So that's a weird dichotomy of extremes. Any sort of nuance will quickly tip the scales to one side or the other, and it's easy to get the stink of anti-Semitism on anything less than full-throated support of Israel.
That's not to say I think Shapiro is being insincere. I believe he would join the IDF and fight for Israel, which I agree is alarming. But I don't think it hurts the ticket nationally, and in fact I think it will get more votes than it costs. That's just where the voting public is at right now. There aren't that many people who oppose Netanyahu who say they will stay home.
Genocide Joe lost his support from the left for enabling genocide.
So far Kamala has walked a tolerable line on the issue, taking this person as her VP would make her our enemy as well. Its not a smart move.
AOC would be a perfect pick.
I'd take Katie Porter as well, I know she isn't as progressive as Warren or AOC, but since she lost her Senate bid to Schiff, she's not doing anything else, and has quite a bit of goodwill even among non-liberals for her whiteboard takedowns of CEOs and pentagon waste.
They aren't even on the short list. See here:
Govs. Andy Beshear of Kentucky - No strategic advantage. Kentucky will never vote for a Democratic President.
J.B. Pritzker of Illinois - No strategic advantage, Illinois is already a Blue state.
Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania - Good strategic pick, problematic given past statements supporting Israel. Also had a $295,000 sexual harassment settlement. OTOH, that would free up Harris to speak more strongly on Gaza.
Tim Walz of Minnesota - Barely a strategic advantage, but it seems likely Minnesota will go Blue regardless.
Sen. Mark Kelly of Arizona - Good strategic advantage, but would open a vacancy in the Senate when there is already a razor thin margin. May do more harm than good.
https://www.azleg.gov/ars/16/00222.htm
"C. For a vacancy in the office of United States senator, the governor shall appoint a person to fill the vacancy. That appointee shall be of the same political party as the person vacating the office and, except as provided in subsection D of this section, shall serve until the person elected at the next general election is qualified and assumes office. If the person vacating the office changed political party affiliation after taking office, the person who is appointed to fill the vacancy shall be of the same political party that the vacating officeholder was when the vacating officeholder was elected or appointed to that office.
D. If a vacancy in the office of United States senator occurs more than one hundred fifty days before the next regular primary election date, the person who is appointed pursuant to subsection C of this section shall continue to serve until the vacancy is filled at the next general election. If a vacancy in the office of United States senator occurs one hundred fifty days or less before the next regular primary election date, the person who is appointed shall serve until the vacancy is filled at the second regular general election held after the vacancy occurs, and the person elected shall fill the remaining unexpired term of the vacated office."
Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg - No strategic advantage, his ~~Ohio~~ Indiana background won't sway voters in that state. Trump is going to run hard against the Biden administration and having members from that administration in the #1 and #2 positions may be a drawback.
Based on this, I think Mark Kelly is the best choice, but who knows? Having the first joint appearance in Philly leads to it being Shapiro, but he has more baggage than the others.
Ohio background
Indiana. Just FYI. No other arguments from me.
My bad, something about him just screams "Ohio" to me for some reason. LOL. Equally applies to IN as OH. Putting him on the ticket won't win the state.
Nope, Pete would be very unlikely to help with Indiana. Plus, he worked for McKinsey so I do not trust him.
Please do not choose this guy.
The main reason to pick Shapiro? He can deliver PA. There are better options for VP in terms of policy and views on things. Facts. Fight me.
That is a succinct version of what I think, too. I'd be happier with others, but understand the choice.
The sexual harassment settlement for the person in his office could make certain points harder to land.
Sexual harassment and years-ago racism against Palestinians. Capital NOPE.
Time Magazine - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for Time Magazine:
MBFC: High - Left-Center - High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this source
~Media~ ~Bias~ ~Fact~ ~Check~ ~|~ ~bot~ ~support~Search topics on Ground.News
https://time.com/7007317/how-josh-shapiro-could-help-kamala-harris-win/