DiscussMormonism.com

I'm not a professional politics talker so, keep that in mind. At this time I feel the only field of focus should be finding the Democrat. candidate that has the best shot at dethroning the Don. In my opinion, Pete, should take a seat, (this time.) Every vote may wind up important and there are a whole lot of undecided-s who will be decidedly against Pete's same sex sexual attraction lifestyle affiliation thing homosexuality.

I say Joe B. picks an attractive 50 year old moderate republican female for a co-host. That would be a sure win.

Biden/Klobuchar.

Jersey Girl wrote:Biden/Klobuchar.

Get her to switch parties and you got a deal.

I'm sure Democrats would be thrilled with a near octogenarian picking a Republican for vice President. Ticket balancing between parties has worked out incredibly well when it has been done in American history. Abraham Lincoln did it, and it only ended up strangling the civil rights movement for 100 years. So it was fine.

I don't understand the assumption that the only voters who matter are moderate conservatives. You do this, and the odds that you turn off a substantial number of would-be liberal voters is pretty good. And you might not gain much for doing it, as there is asymmetrical negative partisanship between typical Republican and Democratic voters and there is still a Democrat atop the Democratic ticket.

I'm just thinking out loud EA, and have not put a lot of time yet into trying to dissect the political cluster____ going on. I do agree with myself of Pete though.

Dantana wrote:I'm not a professional politics talker so, keep that in mind. At this time I feel the only field of focus should be finding the Democrat. candidate that has the best shot at dethroning the Don. In my opinion, Pete, should take a seat, (this time.) Every vote may wind up important and there are a whole lot of undecided-s who will be decidedly against Pete's same sex sexual attraction lifestyle affiliation thing homosexuality.

I say Joe B. picks an attractive 50 year old moderate republican female for a co-host. That would be a sure win.

Yeah, someone should tell Buttigieg that under Trump, bigotry is on the rise. Since he's gay, he'll wake up and drop out.

And let's make sure that the Moderate Republican Female is a member of the NRA and is a climate change denier. That'll really balance the ticket.

I feel the desperation to get rid of Trump. If Biden were to pick a moderate Republican women, it is a sensible triangulation in the abstract. But who does Joe get to work for the ticket? You think Bernie Sanders supporters will accept being throw aside for a second election in a row? 'Balancing a ticket' cannot mean alienating the rest of the party you need to work to elect you.

Do you think people would vote for a crooked narcissistic sociopath over an honest, smart, veteran who is homosexual?(Trump vs Buttigieg)

moksha wrote:Do you think people would vote for a crooked narcissistic sociopath over an honest, smart, veteran who is homosexual?(Trump vs Buttigieg)

I'm just opining that there is the potential that every vote may count in November. So, yes to that. I think that there is a large enough group out there with Christian values - Pro life, anti same-sex - lifetime Republicans, who do think Trump is an idiot, and would swing over with a viable Democrat candidate. Hillary was not viable to them. Any of the front running Democrats right now also might not be viable to them. So, try something else to try to win them. I think Joe B. could pick Sarah effing Palin and not lose a single Democrat. vote.

Pete Buttigeig polls among the worst of any Democrat against Trump. Of the major candidates, he polls the worst. This may be related to name recognition, but there are other reasons that can explain it too. There's really not a sound basis to suppose he's the most electable.

I think Joe B. could pick Sarah effing Palin and not lose a single Democrat. vote.

This intuition is quite wrong. Yes, there are lots of people who dislike Trump enough that they are motivated to vote against him no matter what. No, this number is not so absolute that they'd all tolerate this. This would be an extremely powerful demotivator for liberals. I know your example is hyperbolic, but I'm in the against Trump no matter what category. If proto-Trump was the VP candidate of a Presidential candidate who appears to already have one foot in the grave, I'd have serious reservations about not just voting 3rd party.

Hillary was not viable to them.

Notably, Hillary tried the strategy you are recommending. The Democrat convention in 2016 looked more like a Republican convention before the Republican party went insane. She went with a moderate Democrat for VP. Of course, Hillary had years of negative feelings built up against her by Republican leaning voters. A newer face might not have that, but don't underestimate the power of right-wing media to drive up the negatives of any Democratic candidate in that population.

Just checking on how Mayor Pete does against Trump compared to other candidates in Wisconsin, the swingiest of states:

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epoll ... -6970.html
Looks like Mayor Pete and Trump are neck-and-neck.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epoll ... -6849.html
Biden is clearly ahead right now.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epoll ... -6850.html
Sanders has a slim lead, but also roughly neck-and-neck.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epoll ... -6852.html
Warren looks like she would lose Wisconsin to Trump.

Weirdly, none of the other candidates have been included in head-to-head polls since early November while the four front runners in Iowa were in polls in the last month as listed on RealClear. One has to go back to early November to find a poll with a Klobuchar v. Trump head-to-head question where he kills her by 14 points. None of the other candidates currently show as possible searches. Guess the race is already over except for the front four...