Capitol Hill Blue Forums Political Issues Politics In General Is it too soon to be talking 2020?

I could not disagree more, and I'm not looking for a fight. Just agree to disagree man,

Almost anybody at the presidential podium would introduce and defer to his expert on the subject, when asked a difficult technical question. Not Trump. It's not a President's job to answer difficult technical questions, unless somebody asked Jimmy Carter a question about nuclear reactors. Ask Biden about a virus, and he would have his HHS or infectious disease expert like Fauci answer. And then not contradict him in the next sentence.

Trump is almost unique in this sense. He's actually told us again and again that he knows more on every subject than the experts. That's a very dangerous delusion for anybody in power to have.

In the fullness of time...we will know whether I am right or wrong. I would prefer in the end to agree that you were right.

WORST vs.

OKAY - GOOD - BETTER - BEST

He'll be a better president than Trump - - but let's just let Trump destroy the country, and by proxy, most of the developed world, for another four years, because - -



I just don't get it, and I never will.

I said numerous times on another site that the Democrats should nominate a fresh young face. That if that fresh young face was from flyover country, so much the better. That wasn't to be. Fresh young faces from flyover country had been successful for the Democrats in the past. Obama, Illinois, Bill Clinton, Arkansas, Jimmy Carter, Georgia. Old politicians not so successful. Hillary Clinton 2016, John Kerry 2004, Al Gore 2000, Micheal Dukakis, 1988, Mondale 1984. JFK was young, although LBJ probably would qualify as an old politician. But death led him to the presidency. Then another old politician lost to Nixon in 1968, Humphrey.

This year we were left with two old white men and an old white woman from the Northeast. Although Buttigieg gave me a bit of hope in Iowa and Amy Klobuchar after New Hampshire.

With all said and done at this point, I'll vote and support Biden. I hope he picks a young fresh face for his VP. Again one from flyover country would be ideal. Regional balance on the ticket.

Biden is far from the choice I had hoped for. But he's the one the Democrats chose. I'm not really enthusiastic about him, but of the choices I do think he stands the best chance of dethroning Trump of those who were left prior to Super Tuesday. Unlike a couple of others, I'm sure Biden will win the independent vote and with the democratic party still being the larger of the two major parties, he'll become our next president.

So how about it old Joe, a fresh young face from flyover country as VP. One you can groom for 2024?

He's kind of limited himself by promising to have a woman as VP. I won't be surprised if it's Warren. That would actually help him with the left. She's already said she would do it, if asked. Klobuchar probably gets him more Northern swing states. She's also a lot closer politically to Biden.

Abrahms. Seriously.

Warren wouldn't help Biden get to 270. The Northeast is going Democratic whoever Biden chooses as is the West Coast. I would think someone who could deliver a state Trump won in 2016 and have a positive influence in swing states in flyover country would be much better than an old woman, Warren.

Warren probably would hurt Biden in some swing states. Hillary won Minnesota by a single point in 2016, a Klobuchar would guarantee Minnesota stays blue and help in Wisconsin. Baldwin, Wisconsin would deliver that state to Biden, help in Minnesota and Michigan. Whitmer, Michigan would turn Michigan blue, help Biden in neighboring Ohio and Wisconsin. All states Trump won.

Abrams in Georgia wouldn't guarantee a win here. But one must remember she lost the governor's race by a mere 55,000 votes. She's a good campaigner, there is probably around a 40% chance with her as Biden's VP, Georgia could be won. I'd give Masto, Nevada a good hard look. Hispanic and ensures Nevada stays Blue. Masto could deliver Arizona to Biden and would have heavy influence in Texas.

All the above provides regional balance along with helping Biden get to 270. Warren neither helps Biden get to 270 nor does she give the ticket regional balance.

I'm a numbers guy, ideology means little to me. The idea is to get my candidate a win. Warren won't help in the midwest nor the south. Harris has been mentioned, but California is going blue anyway. it make no difference whether Biden wins California by 3 million or 4 million votes.

If I knew of a good candidate from Florida or Pennsylvania that could deliver those states, I'd go with them. You're talking 29 and 20 electoral votes and both states Trump won.

There's no Democrats in Florida to speak of, me and another fella over in Pasco County and I think that's about it.

LOL, okay. Well, you'd have to be a woman and preferably a minority to be considered. Congresswoman Demmings has been mentioned. But choosing candidates from the House hasn't had any luck on helping carrying their home state. One just has to go back to 2012 when Romney chose Ryan, they still lost Wisconsin. A candidate from the House just doesn't have that statewide appeal a senator, governor etc. who hold or held statewide office.