Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop
We can agree to disagree. I think you are wrong, in the way that people who think a lot about politics can be wrong about people who don't think a lot about politics. People who think a lot about politics know a bunch about the candidates and make up their minds early and know things like where the VP candidates went to high school. They wouldn't make their minds up on the basis of who the running mate is because they have such strong views about the top of the ticket. Low-information voters are, similarly, picking a president, not a vice president. On some political issues, like our Cyprus policy or zoning, there are some voters who care an awful lot and vote on that issue. No one cares about the Veep that way.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop
You are right that the eventual Dem nominee is going to have to pull the party together after a primary campaign that could be more divisive than some. One way to do that is with the VP pick.
|
I feel like this part of your post sits in direct opposition to the other part of your post.
I'm not sure any of your opinions are supportable other than based on what you think. And to be fair, neither are mine. But in a close race, choosing:
1. someone black might help bring in more black voters
2. a woman might bring out more women voters
3. Bernie might bring out the Bernie bros
4. someone from Ohio might win you Ohio
5. a progressive, while you've already shored up the less progressive wing of the party, might maximize your support.
But I don't have the same expertise when it comes to low information-voters that you have.
TM
Threaded Mode