No, actually the facts are not in evidence.
(1) College debt is a minority of a minority of the age cohort
(2) there is not any evidence of a clear age cohort ideological preference (versus the preferences of the vocal and over-represented by media visibility of said minority of a minority)
(3) no particular evidence of the wider age cohort voting as a bloc
however obviously you don’t want to pay any attention to the factual issues.
Good point. Thanks.
That is hardly a plus. Trump wasn’t a politician.
Politicians act the way they do because of Voters. The sad sterility of railing against Politicians is that we, the human beings in the aggregate, drive the behaviour. Of course people don’t like looking in the mirror, so it’s always externalized, thus the permanent condition of disappointment with politicians across the ages and across political systems…
If one wants to win, one wants a competent politician, because the job is literally politics.
So you’re putting Susan Rice in the same basket as Donald Trump?
Please, tell me who you want for VP so I can get a handle on the kind of threat level sensation that triggered the massive overreaction above.
Well, perceived baggage or not, I’m rooting for Rice.
I enjoy reading some of Dana Milbank’s columns, but I really don’t care for him politically. Once Trump is gone, he will be taking potshots at Democrats again. He actually votes for the best qualified person who’s NOT on the ballot every four years. Why dfuq even vote if that’s your thing?
Anyway Milbank dislikes Rice because she asked General Keith Alexander why the fuck his NSA was listening to Angela Merkel’s phone calls and she also had the temerity to flip Richard Holbrooke the finger.
She said the F word and flipped a talented and certifiable asshole the finger. Guess she doesn’t know her place. Me likey. Oh, and she had a privileged upbringing. The horror!
Milbank’s article on Rice:
Yes, Kamala is the best of several good, qualified choices. Her critics say she is too ambitious and will be running for the 2024 nomination from day one. That strikes me as pundit class overthinking. She is familiar to the general public and will bring energy to the campaign. Assuming there will be a VP debate, she will run rings around Pence. The fact that Chris Dodd didn’t like her doesn’t bother me a bit (I mean, how in the world is he still influential ???)
And although I’m rooting for Rice, I’d put money on Harris.
No, I am pointing out that non politician, a shared characteristic. not the same basket.
I have no person I “want” as VP. However, I would like a VP that assist on the General Election, and particularly has savvy and experience with the campaign trail, has direct election experience, not 2nd hand.
The job is electoral politics for a high profile national so someone who is a Politician who’s had at least a State level if not a national level exposure in actual electoral campaigns as a candidate.
Just as I may not love Lawyers, but a damn well know for a real sensitive legal job, I want a lawyer, not a non-lawyer for the job.
I think I’m in the same place you are.
And how do you feel about politicians who aren’t good at it at the national level or are unproven at the national level?
Was their a campaign contribution from a known Scientology member? Following the money trail often yields answers to questions.
But Warren was also immensely popular with the base, and among African-Americans especially. I don’t think Harris is a bad pick by any means (she’s always been my favorite, actually), but I don’t think she has that many fewer built-in liabilities than Warren.
Yeah its too bad about Warren.
She clearly has the economic expertise and creativity and who knows what we will be facing in 2021. We need all the creativity and leadership we can get.
Despite the interesting Data for Progress poll that shows her top pick among young and undecided voters, and the reported 50K grassroots folks that contributed to the recent Biden -Warren fundraiser, it seems those voters don’t have enough clout. They may not be reliable enough at the polls to overcome donors and perhaps even centrist Ds in Congress who fear being demonized as “too left” when they try to run again.
So it seems Harris is a “safe” pick as Scarborough carefully suggested today (the head of his company, NBC Universal, did a fundraiser for Harris a few months ago).
Even so, we have already started getting the sexist female attacks (“too ambitious” et al). Then I’m guessing after the VP is picked, if its a woman of color, we will get racist attacks with appeal to fear -i.e. some fake thing about Joe’s health and now a black woman could be running the presidency–horrors. The other side will hope to pick up some suburbans and men and whip up enthusiasm with these attacks.
I’m guessing they will also try to depress the youth and undecided vote–and I read somewhere the undecided is not a small number of possible votes–may be as much as 12% of voter pool (not sure if that is registered or just likely voters).
So I wonder how safe any woman would be and any black woman might be even harder.
That Politico article accidentally published last Tuesday and dated forward to Saturday quoting the campaign saying Harris is the pick, rings true to me. Now the campaign pushing off the announcement until closer to the convention where Joe may be able to manage the reception more closely is probably a wise idea, even if the pick is still Harris.
Honestly, I could see Biden facing backlash in 2021 if things don’t go well and people wonder why a top person like Warren is not in a leadership position to help steer us to more stable economic footing. Article in Intelligencer says she is not even being considered for cabinet pick.
And I wonder about ignoring the clear pick of the younger folks. They are the future so would be good to get them as involved as possible.
I don’t envy Joe making this pick. Its a tough one and I’m sure his heart is in the right place.
Here’s the data for progress poll, if anyone is interested: https://www.dataforprogress.org/memos/warren-is-the-vp-choice-for-key-voters
Agreed.