Whether it's your first Bonnaroo or you’re a music festival veteran, we welcome you to Inforoo.
Here you'll find info about artists, rumors, camping tips, and the infamous Roo Clues. Have a look around then create an account and join in the fun. See you at Bonnaroo!!
Post by Delicious Meatball Sub on Jul 25, 2024 12:27:25 GMT -5
Is there actually any evidence that picking a candidate from a state helps you win that state? I’m sure there are exceptions, like maybe picking Shapiro helps Harris in PA on the limited basis of smoothing over energy policy concerns. But overall it strikes me a as a bunch of bullshit and it takes good statewide elected people out of office that might be hard to replace long term.
Mark Kelly isn’t gonna make Harris all that much more likely win Az, and Gretchen Whitmer is probably working her state just as hard to help Harris whether she’s on the ticket or not.
Pick someone who is generally qualified, with limited downside, and who’s good on TV. That’s all you need.
So all the worst choices? Seems very accurate for the Dems to do that when things are going well.
Shapiro/Kelly/Pete are the worst choices? Who exactly do you think is a good one? (or did I misinterpret your comment?)
Andy Beshear Cooper Waltz Kelly . . Shipiro Mayor Pete
If we are keeping it realistic and going with an extremely white dude. I don't expect a progressive but I'd rather have someone mostly unknown to the nation as a whole and one who doesn't have obvious red flags for parts of the coalition. Anyone working against anti-genocide protesters or with a history of being anti-labor isn't worth the risk. IMO Just on top of my disgust with those things. Now I'm sure you could dig into any of their records and find bad things to point out. I'm just trying to focus on what's current. If I'm missing something obvious about one of these guys kick them down the list. lol
Kamala and Pete both had trouble gaining traction in the 2020 primary. Not a great pairing. And I'd rather not have a McKinsey snake set up to run in the future. Please God.
Is there actually any evidence that picking a candidate from a state helps you win that state? I’m sure there are exceptions, like maybe picking Shapiro helps Harris in PA on the limited basis of smoothing over energy policy concerns. But overall it strikes me a as a bunch of bullshit and it takes good statewide elected people out of office that might be hard to replace long term.
Mark Kelly isn’t gonna make Harris all that much more likely win Az, and Gretchen Whitmer is probably working her state just as hard to help Harris whether she’s on the ticket or not.
Pick someone who is generally qualified, with limited downside, and who’s good on TV. That’s all you need.
So just pick Pritzker and be done with it I say.
This. Somebody milquetoast that probably won't tie the party down with too much obvious centrism in a future run. That's all I ask.
And if Kelly is pro-labor now leave him in the Senate for his vote. Cool. Good.
Post by Delicious Meatball Sub on Jul 25, 2024 12:38:29 GMT -5
Our conclusion: While presidential candidates typically enjoy a home-state advantage (approximately 3 points to 7 points), vice presidential candidates generally do not. In each of the three analyses described above, a presidential ticket performs no better in the vice presidential candidate’s home state than we would expect otherwise. Statistically speaking, the effect is zero.
We did find that veep home-state voters are more likely to care who wins an election compared with non-home state voters—but they aren’t more likely to turn out to vote, volunteer for or donate money to a campaign, influence other voters or attend political rallies.
There is one important exception to all of this: In the small handful of cases where a vice presidential home-state advantage did occur, consistently we find that the state in question has a relatively small population, and the candidate in question has a great deal of experience representing the voters of that state. In other words, the candidate who actually delivers a vice presidential home-state advantage truly must be an institution in state politics—an object of intense affection, loyalty and intimate familiarity. Most running mates (indeed, most politicians) do not meet this remarkably high standard. Those who meet the standard—for instance, Joe Biden in 2008 and Edmund Muskie in 1968—do, indeed, improve their ticket’s performance at home. But, of course, the prize is small: By definition, the states that can be “delivered” this way have relatively few electoral votes.
I think the bit at the end is important. Someone who is truly a legend in their state would seem to help. Like Harry Reid knew where every body was buried in Nevada, so putting him on your ticket in his prime logically would help you win Nevada in a way Cortez Masto doesn’t. Otherwise, it doesn’t matter at all.
Is there actually any evidence that picking a candidate from a state helps you win that state? I’m sure there are exceptions, like maybe picking Shapiro helps Harris in PA on the limited basis of smoothing over energy policy concerns. But overall it strikes me a as a bunch of bullshit and it takes good statewide elected people out of office that might be hard to replace long term.
Mark Kelly isn’t gonna make Harris all that much more likely win Az, and Gretchen Whitmer is probably working her state just as hard to help Harris whether she’s on the ticket or not.
Pick someone who is generally qualified, with limited downside, and who’s good on TV. That’s all you need.
So just pick Pritzker and be done with it I say.
It's honestly very tough to quantify the effect. People point to Kennedy picking LBJ as part of why he won Texas. Clinton won Tennessee with Gore, first time Dems had won TN since 1964. There are counterpoints though, and a lot of recent VP picks are from already-safe or impossible-to-win states.
But this election is going to be determined by turnout, especially given how many "double haters" there are, and I do think Shapiro would help turnout in PA significantly (hell, he polls notably better against Trump on his own in PA than Harris does).
Either way, regardless of the science behind it, I do think the people actually making the decision will think it matters.
Gore is probably closer to one of those exceptions, Gore Sr was a Rep/Senator from 1939 until a few years before Gore became a Rep in 1977.
Perot also got 10% of the vote in Tennessee.
Perot didn't contribute to the effect though; Dems got 41.6% in TN in each 1984/1988, then got 47.1% and 48% in 1992/1996, as well as 47.3% in 2000 when Gore was the nominee. Immediately dropped back to 42.5% in 2004 and continued declining from there.
The better question is whether having a southern nominee for President created that impact vs Gore himself; Carter got 55.9% in 1976 and 48.4% in 1980 (after Dems got under 30% in 1972). I find it hard to look at those numbers and think Gore or a candidate with Gore's demographics/background on the ballot had no impact, regardless.
Is there actually any evidence that picking a candidate from a state helps you win that state? I’m sure there are exceptions, like maybe picking Shapiro helps Harris in PA on the limited basis of smoothing over energy policy concerns. But overall it strikes me a as a bunch of bullshit and it takes good statewide elected people out of office that might be hard to replace long term.
Mark Kelly isn’t gonna make Harris all that much more likely win Az, and Gretchen Whitmer is probably working her state just as hard to help Harris whether she’s on the ticket or not.
Pick someone who is generally qualified, with limited downside, and who’s good on TV. That’s all you need.
So just pick Pritzker and be done with it I say.
Most of the random mentions I have seen with Kelly were less about him helping win Arizona and more about his border stance (which Harris is going to get heat on) and gun control (gun owner but supports "common sense" restrictions). Agreed about VP qualifications though. Someone who is smart enough to dunk on Vance which shouldn't be that difficult really.
What's so good about Pritzker? I dont know anything about him but I think remember him getting praised during covid and he's the billionaire?
Passed a minimum wage increase, marijuana legalization and conviction expungement, eliminated cash bail, banned assault weapons, pushed back on book bans, enshrined abortion rights. Great communicator, can use his money to fund the campaign. Reasonably replaceable in state. Has drawbacks like everyone but deserves to be on the very short list of candidates.
Pritzker would be ideal but is he on the shortlist? Haven't really seen him in the conversation at all for whatever reason.
Nope. And my chicago friends want him to stay there. Also, billionaire? Good or bad thing? Theyre gonna look at that despite what he has done and say its their version of trying to put some rich dude in there.
Personally, I rather not have a billionaire - especially if we're using the argument that Elon Musk and Peter Thiel are trying to buy influence.
Ya I get that, but the counter argument is that the election is gonna be funded by someone. I’d much rather it be the person on the ticket whose views/character I have some chance of evaluating for myself, rather than some unknown tech goon.
I think the big point of the Musk/Thiel argument is not just that they’re buying influence, but that they’re *cartoonishly evil* people who are trying to buy influence in an opaque way.
Is there actually any evidence that picking a candidate from a state helps you win that state? I’m sure there are exceptions, like maybe picking Shapiro helps Harris in PA on the limited basis of smoothing over energy policy concerns. But overall it strikes me a as a bunch of bullshit and it takes good statewide elected people out of office that might be hard to replace long term.
Mark Kelly isn’t gonna make Harris all that much more likely win Az, and Gretchen Whitmer is probably working her state just as hard to help Harris whether she’s on the ticket or not.
Pick someone who is generally qualified, with limited downside, and who’s good on TV. That’s all you need.
So just pick Pritzker and be done with it I say.
gotta save Pritzker to be the next FDR in four years, cant stick him on a losing ship
Yeah. They aren’t wasting time on defense or offense. They’re taking the fight to him without making it only about him as they are offering a contrast in vision.
Republicans have their attacks and lies and negative shit they always do now. I wish less people would fall for the endless hair on fire shit. Just today the house passed a resolution condemning her as border czar which I don’t think anyone ever was that. If it’s not death panels or cutting born babies’ heads off with scissors or this “disastrous economy” (2Q GDP was an extremely healthy 2.8%). I really hate that this country has so many fucking rubes. This lady I worked with who was extremely pro-Clinton became internet radicalized during Obama’s term. She was bitching on social media Monday that she and her husband just finished a 25.00 lunch at Taco Bell which is outrageous and why Biden can’t get out of office soon enough. Luckily I don’t have any of that shit so I don’t fight with people all day over stupid shit. But you could probably get an extreme amount of food at Taco Bell for 25.00 (not sure who would but this is America). Most decent lunch entrees are at least $12.50 if not more. So she’s just another angry white idiot these days I suppose.
Yeah. They aren’t wasting time on defense or offense. They’re taking the fight to him without making it only about him as they are offering a contrast in vision.
Republicans have their attacks and lies and negative shit they always do now. I wish less people would fall for the endless hair on fire shit. Just today the house passed a resolution condemning her as border czar which I don’t think anyone ever was that. If it’s not death panels or cutting born babies’ heads off with scissors or this “disastrous economy” (2Q GDP was an extremely healthy 2.8%). I really hate that this country has so many fucking rubes. This lady I worked with who was extremely pro-Clinton became internet radicalized during Obama’s term. She was bitching on social media Monday that she and her husband just finished a 25.00 lunch at Taco Bell which is outrageous and why Biden can’t get out of office soon enough. Luckily I don’t have any of that shit so I don’t fight with people all day over stupid shit. But you could probably get an extreme amount of food at Taco Bell for 25.00 (not sure who would but this is America). Most decent lunch entrees are at least $12.50 if not more. So she’s just another angry white idiot these days I suppose.
And that's American loyalty to brands and corporations for you. Because, obviously, high prices at Taco Bell are the fault of Joe Biden, not, you know...Taco Bell.
Is there actually any evidence that picking a candidate from a state helps you win that state? I’m sure there are exceptions, like maybe picking Shapiro helps Harris in PA on the limited basis of smoothing over energy policy concerns. But overall it strikes me a as a bunch of bullshit and it takes good statewide elected people out of office that might be hard to replace long term.
Mark Kelly isn’t gonna make Harris all that much more likely win Az, and Gretchen Whitmer is probably working her state just as hard to help Harris whether she’s on the ticket or not.
Pick someone who is generally qualified, with limited downside, and who’s good on TV. That’s all you need.
So just pick Pritzker and be done with it I say.
gotta save Pritzker to be the next FDR in four years, cant stick him on a losing ship
Yeah. They aren’t wasting time on defense or offense. They’re taking the fight to him without making it only about him as they are offering a contrast in vision.
Republicans have their attacks and lies and negative shit they always do now. I wish less people would fall for the endless hair on fire shit. Just today the house passed a resolution condemning her as border czar which I don’t think anyone ever was that. If it’s not death panels or cutting born babies’ heads off with scissors or this “disastrous economy” (2Q GDP was an extremely healthy 2.8%). I really hate that this country has so many fucking rubes. This lady I worked with who was extremely pro-Clinton became internet radicalized during Obama’s term. She was bitching on social media Monday that she and her husband just finished a 25.00 lunch at Taco Bell which is outrageous and why Biden can’t get out of office soon enough. Luckily I don’t have any of that shit so I don’t fight with people all day over stupid shit. But you could probably get an extreme amount of food at Taco Bell for 25.00 (not sure who would but this is America). Most decent lunch entrees are at least $12.50 if not more. So she’s just another angry white idiot these days I suppose.
The only way Taco Bell should cost $25 for two people is if you got it on Uber Eats (which: I have found that a lot of people bitching about food like this are complaining based on a delivery order). That's an absurd amount of food otherwise (at least at the prices where I live).
Now, one person alone at home on a Friday night after all their friends bailed on plans to go see Mitski and you’re too overwhelmed with anxiety to go alone because it’s sold out… is another story.
Is there actually any evidence that picking a candidate from a state helps you win that state? I’m sure there are exceptions, like maybe picking Shapiro helps Harris in PA on the limited basis of smoothing over energy policy concerns. But overall it strikes me a as a bunch of bullshit and it takes good statewide elected people out of office that might be hard to replace long term.
Mark Kelly isn’t gonna make Harris all that much more likely win Az, and Gretchen Whitmer is probably working her state just as hard to help Harris whether she’s on the ticket or not.
Pick someone who is generally qualified, with limited downside, and who’s good on TV. That’s all you need.
So just pick Pritzker and be done with it I say.
gotta save Pritzker to be the next FDR in four years, cant stick him on a losing ship
If you don't think Harris can pull this out, I got some bad news about 2028 for you....
Yeah. They aren’t wasting time on defense or offense. They’re taking the fight to him without making it only about him as they are offering a contrast in vision.
Republicans have their attacks and lies and negative shit they always do now. I wish less people would fall for the endless hair on fire shit. Just today the house passed a resolution condemning her as border czar which I don’t think anyone ever was that. If it’s not death panels or cutting born babies’ heads off with scissors or this “disastrous economy” (2Q GDP was an extremely healthy 2.8%). I really hate that this country has so many fucking rubes. This lady I worked with who was extremely pro-Clinton became internet radicalized during Obama’s term. She was bitching on social media Monday that she and her husband just finished a 25.00 lunch at Taco Bell which is outrageous and why Biden can’t get out of office soon enough. Luckily I don’t have any of that shit so I don’t fight with people all day over stupid shit. But you could probably get an extreme amount of food at Taco Bell for 25.00 (not sure who would but this is America). Most decent lunch entrees are at least $12.50 if not more. So she’s just another angry white idiot these days I suppose.
The only way Taco Bell should cost $25 for two people is if you got it on Uber Eats (which: I have found that a lot of people bitching about food like this are complaining based on a delivery order). That's an absurd amount of food otherwise (at least at the prices where I live).
A 3 crunchy taco supreme combo is $10. So take 2 of those and add an order of cinnamon twists and that gets you to $25.
I used to always go to Jack In The Box and get a sourdough jack combo. That is $13 now. Pre covid it was $7.50.
Whoever is running Kamala’s TikTok & general PR is killing it. Seems like it is genuinely energizing Gen Z. Of course, that still needs to lead to actual voter turnout but I feel night and day better about November then I did last week
Whoever is running Kamala’s TikTok & general PR is killing it. Seems like it is genuinely energizing Gen Z. Of course, that still needs to lead to actual voter turnout but I feel night and day better about November then I did last week