Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
Man, I hope it's Capt. Kelly. Just because it would be so nice to have a scientist at that level. He could be for the Democrats what they hoped Dr. Oz could be for Republicans, but Dr. Oz is weird as fuck.
He's my pick as well, because I think he's a good, sharp guy, and I think he'll help the ticket the most. If I wasn't concerned about them winning, I'd probably pick Buttigieg. Kelly is a little more conservative than I'd prefer and Pete just impresses me every time he opens his mouth.
Pete is very smart. His background concerns me.
What about his background do you find concerning?
He was a McKinsey fellow and contractor for the CIA. He has the support of (and he supports) a certain sector of elites from within the intelligence and foreign service world that I don't trust, or wouldn't trust in the office of president, which is a civilian office. It's not that the CIA and McKinsey fellows don't have their place in government, I just don't think that place is in the big chair. That's a bit too much like putting the fox in charge of the hens. I guess a better analogy would be that it's like putting a fox in charge of the foxes, when foxes have been traditionally been under the charge a creature whose conscious is beholden to those who domesticated it, a horse for example.
I don't like anything about his meteoric rise without any accomplishment or political success to speak of, how he was declared winner in Iowa in 2016 despite having less support by every concievable metric, and then how once he was the presumptive frontrunner by the punditry, it was just three or four phone calls and then he's just out of the race, along with Harris and one or two others, they all fell in behind Biden, and that was it for Sanders.
It would be nice to have someone in the Executive Branch that has experienced the Overview Effect.
I really, really hope it’s not Shapiro. Shapiro would be a huge setback for stopping the Israeli genocide, which is a massive not only campaign issue, but worldwide issue.
I think it's Shapiro.
Hoping for Walz but Kelly would be awesome, too.
Please not Pritzker. PLEASE. Sen. Kelly. LFGGG!!!
Yeah, I want to keep Pritzker here in Illinois. His tenure as governor has been a breath of fresh air after Bruce Rauner.
For now absolutely. He’s been a real gift to IL. But I would be all in on a Pritzker/AOC ‘28 or ‘32 ticket.
I've been looking at this.
Kelly looks good but has little actual experience in government. And I doubt she wants to gamble with losing a Senate seat. So I think he's out.
Shapiro has lots of state government experience, it's not federal but still good for him thinking through policy decisions and knowing how to get things done. Also a swing state, and he has mid west appeal which works over multiple swing states. Apparently really good at fighting against maga types. I think he's in.
Shapiro was my bet. Something about his face makes me love the Kelly brothers...idk what it is they just feel like good people. I wanted him to get the nod but I think Shapiro simply checks too many boxes.
And I doubt she wants to gamble with losing a Senate seat.
With a Dem governor to appoint a replacement, and a state that's looking more blue than Wisconsin or Michigan or Virginia, its honestly not as big a gamble as you'd think.
Replacement lasts until 2026, whereas Kelly would last until 2028. That's Harris's mid term election. Losing the Senate can gridlock everything.
We lost the Senate when we elected Sinema and Manchin.
New episode of The Whitest Kids You Know?
Politically, in our racist and sexist country, the VP probably has to be a white man. If it's not, the ticket loses a few percent of the vote.
Ralphie May? And the last one is Tom Hanks?
I hated Buttigieg because he went back on his progressive roots and disappointed his socialist father BUT I wish she would pick him.
My money though is on Kelly or Shapiro because they need AZ and PA.
I hated Buttigieg because he went back on his progressive roots and disappointed his socialist father
Buttigieg was always a technocratic cypher. He relied mostly on his access to elite schools, and background as a "McKenssyite" to get access to the stage. His primary credentials were being a one time mayor of a college town, and his elitist access that being a McKensie fellow afforded. When it seemed inconvenient to be a progressive, he was no longer a progressive. My central issue with him as a candidate was simply that he had not run-in and won a state or federal election. Its a soft-requirement I've had for a while is that you at least need to show me you can win elections. Him going on to spoiling the progressive tickets when and where necessary and being rewarded for that with his position as Transportation Secretary, was just insult to injury.
Yeah, him being rewarded for stopping a Bernie Sanders presidency was infuriating.
For context about his father...
Pete Buttigieg Just Dealt a Blow to His Father's Legacy
https://jacobin.com/2020/03/pete-buttigieg-joseph-father-legacy-antonio-gramsci-bernie-sanders
Fascinating read. It actually makes me want to buy Buittigieg's fathers book.
I love Buttigieg and his VP debate versus Vance would be fun to witness, but is the US ready for a black female presidential candidate with an openly gay VP? I seem to have been wrong about how much racism and sexism would hinder Kamala so maybe it's not an issue? I still fear it would be too much
I don't like all Kelly's positions, but helping potentially win AZ would be important and for undecideds and simple minded people the astronaut factor is not to be underestimated. He seems like a very "safe" and sensible pick.
Yes, we need to stop proactively enforcing a bigoted worldview because you think there's a secret well of untapped bigots ready to be set off by any choice that isn't straight white or male. "I'm not bigoted, but we need to acquiesce to bigoted sensibilities" leads to the same result as just being bigoted.
The people who would be so incensed by a non-straight VP already know who their candidate is, and if the reaction to Harris is to be believed, they won't be able to keep in the slobbering homophobia that will turn off people who may have had a mild prejudice but still balk at the ugly open bigotry of the Republican base.
Dude I thought America would never elect anyone but old white men but they elected Barack Obama. I'm pretty sure Pete's being gay is less of a problem for the right than a smart black man as the literal president.
is the US ready for a black female presidential candidate with an openly gay VP
Only if they're Republicans.
I'm maybe biased towards Beshear, but I feel like it's between him and Kelly.
Kelly seems like an incredibly sensible pick for appeal to 'undecideds'.
My worry about Buttigieg is that his past in South Bend runs the risk of reinforcing or even lending legitimacy to the "she's a cop" narrative.
I guess, but like Harris to Biden, the top of the ticket has a much worse story on that front (Crime Bill > AG misdeeds > poor oversight of a PD). Buttigieg's story just wasn't that important, it was only made important because when your one qualification is being mayor, you better have been the most perfect mayor there ever was. I suppose there's potentially a reinforcement effect, but if "cop" was a major concern on Harris we'd be seeing a lot more active and organized protest.
BUT I wish she would pick him.
Not enough McKinsey consultants in the White House.
The smear campaign against Shapiro has been intense the past few days. It's impressive.
Is it really a smear campaign, or is it just people stating the facts about his positions and policies?
As I see it, they are attacking him while simultaneously ignoring other contenders' similar stances, even when pointed out by others.
Feels like smear to me.
NBC News Media Bias Fact Check Credibility: [High] (Click to view Full Report)
Name: NBC News Bias: Left-Center
Factual Reporting: High
Country: United States of America
Full Report: https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/nbc-news/
Check the bias and credibility of this article on Ground.News
Thanks to Media Bias Fact Check for their access to the API.
Please consider supporting them by donating.
Footer
Beep boop. This action was performed automatically. If you dont like me then please block me.💔
If you have any questions or comments about me, you can make a post to LW Support lemmy community.