Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop
It's a fair point. On the Democratic side, to be successful a candidate has to mobilize a coalition and get different groups excited. Picking a VP candidate could be part of doing this, but it doesn't have to be. For example, I don't think that Obama won anybody's vote with Biden (and was not trying to -- I think he picked Biden as someone he wanted to work with in the White House), but I do think he did a good job of exciting and unifying different parts of the Democratic Party. I think Tim Kaine would have been a fine VP and didn't turn anyone off, but Hillary was not good at unifying the party and Kaine didn't help her. A successful candidate needs to tell different groups what they want to hear.
|
Yes. A once-in-lifetime candidate like Obama has the ability to unite the entire party.
When no such candidate exists--and no matter how many times Adder says Kamala or Warren is that type of candidate, they are not--it makes sense to bring as many people into the fold as possible. And given the fact that those in the center of the political spectrum (
i.e., fragile white people who need comforting)
will not vote for Harris, Booker, Bernie, Warren, Buttigieg, or O'Rourke, making those on the
progressive side feel included and even that their candidate is next in line, is probably the best way to go.
TM
Threaded Mode