Walz — Comer Opens Congressional Investigation of Walz trips to China

nycfan said:
You didn’t ask me but I quoted you and can’t figure out an easy way to undo that, so I’ll respond … don’t know about Spoutible but I am on Threads. Had hoped for more there but gave up when they tried to limit news in your feed b/c FB imagined it as more a social influencer site. Still have my account there, may check it out again.
Click to expand...
Thanks. Looks like Threads is out, I'm defiantly looking to mainline news, among other content.

(I've been getting sort of decent results backing out of a quote by carefully selecting all the text in my reply box and deleting it)
 
tallheel95 said:
My husband just sent this article to me, noting, "This is persuasive..."

slate.com

Every Harris VP Possibility Has Real Risk—Except for One

It’s quite clear who her best running mate would be.
slate.com slate.com
Click to expand...
I thought that was one of the stupidest articles I've seen on Slate in a while. If you want to argue that Gretch is the best candidate, fine. But to pretend that she carries no risk is ludicrous. The "risk" for Mark Kelly was that organized labor might be peeved that he didn't support the PRO act. Yeah, Kamala will lose zero union support because of that.

Meanwhile, 26 states run governor and lieutenant governor as a ticket. Until 2022, a two-woman ticket had never won and I doubt many were even run. In 2022, the mostly non-competitive states of Arkansas and Massachusetts elected an all-female ticket. The idea that it is without risk to put two women on the same ticket is almost comically ludicrous. There are a lot of men out there who are uncomfortable with a female president; that's obvious. Some of them will go Kamala the same way that a lot of racists went for Obama. Put a second woman on the ticket and those men might feel henpecked. It might remind them of their wives' sisters coming to visit. It might make them feel completely emasculated. Who knows? The idea that there is no risk is ludicrous.

The guy writes "But it strains credibility on a basic level to assume that Americans would vote for one but not two women." To me, that roughly translates as "I don't understand how politics works, or advertising and mass marketing for that matter." Politics is about likeability, about making connections with voters. If a man feels threatened by seeing two women standing there holding hands above their heads, he very well could become alienated by the campaign. He won't say, "I'm not voting for Kamala because two women," but it very well could affect his perception of the whole campaign. He will just not like Kamala, and the rationalizations will come later.

Again, I can't quantify this effect, but it doesn't "strain credulity" that it might be dispositive in a close election. And it certainly isn't riskless. If he had other discussion on that point, maybe it would be more convincing but that is literally the entirety of his discussion about the two women issue.
 
I'm a 75 year old Southern white man, born and raised in Rocky Mount, NC, and I'd be perfectly fine with a Harris-Whitmer ticket. Let women run things for a while. But, sadly, I'm afraid I am in the minority with that position.
 
nashcounty said:
I'm a 75 year old Southern white man, born and raised in Rocky Mount, NC, and I'd be perfectly fine with a Harris-Whitmer ticket. Let women run things for a while. But, sadly, I'm afraid I am in the minority with that position.
Click to expand...
A women, much less a Black women has never won it Well it looks like we jumped that hump-but lets not "double dare" with two women-because it is a few thousand votes here and there that count
I am not paraphrasing you-just giving my two bits
(and yes a Woman should run the NCAA)
 
My preference is Kelly, but also have to consider how important PA is in a path to victory. If Shapiro makes that more likely, maybe it’s the smarter move.
 
I kinda like minn Tim Waltz if people are afraid of Shapiro's Israel/Hamas attack points. Might be too liberal? But he's got some personality...

Readtangle.com says

He's one of most active and productive liberals in the country, and in Minnesota he's managed to pass a constitutional right to abortion, three months of paid family leave, paid sick leave, universal free school meals, legal cannabis, free public college, automatic voter registration and red-flag laws for gun purchases, all with a slim majority in the state government. He has a military background and had a career in education as well. For progressives, he’d drive turnout, but he opens a lot of attack lines from Republicans.
 
Last edited:
From my perspective (that perspective being relatively ignorant / not a political junkie, and going off of one week's worth of first impression) - Kelly looks like the man for the job.
 
Saw where Beshear is in Iowa today for a Dem convention. Like the idea of giving top VP candidates a "test" appearance to see how they interact with the audience and KH. I think the question with Beshear is whether his obvious political retail skills translate outside KY.
My late wife was from Johnstown, PA so I know from experience that through PA leans Democratic, it is also fairly complicated since a decent portion of the usual Dem voters are somewhat "old school." Harris IMO will need some help to lock up PA and does that require Shaprro on the ticket? He has harshly criticized Netanyahu as well so I think concern over ME is overblown in his case.
Some pundits have said KH is looking for: 1) younger than her, 2) fills in her personal and political gaps, ie perhaps someone slightly more conservative and folksy, 3) executive experience as she wants a "governing partner." If true, that likely means a governor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top