Who will Biden choose as running mate?

[acbytesla]

I think it raises an interesting question, though. We make it illegal in hiring because we believe that society benefits in some important way from prohibiting this kind of discriminatory practice. Obviously the legality of the VP pick is different. But what about the underlying ethics that inform the hiring law? Are those ethics really that different?

As opposed to 230 years of having white males.

It should also be noted, that Biden isn't selecting a Vice President, the voters are.

 

[theprestige]

You doubt it's illegal? By what extreme stretch of the imagination could it possibly be illegal?

Of course, Trump pandering to the religious right by picking a fundy Christian is just fine.

Rent free. Who is Biden pandering to, with his VP proposal?

 

[Safe-Keeper]

He's probably 'pandering to' everyone who sees no reason why a president's staff needs to be almost exclusively white males. Which covers a lot of different groups.

 

[theprestige]

You're... joking, right?

Discriminating against someone because you don't like their dark skin, gayness, or religion is the polar opposite than choosing a candidate specifically to increase diversity in your staff. That's... pretty basic stuff.

You say polar opposite, I say two sides of the same coin. If you reject the more qualified candidate because they're white and male, in favor of a less qualified candidate because they're black and female, that's the exact same discrimination on the reverse as it is on the obverse.

Unless the qualification is literally "black and female". Which is just the "magical negro" stereotype, transplanted from literature and film into our politics. Where I predict it will do more harm than good.

 

[theprestige]

It should also be noted, that Biden isn't selecting a Vice President, the voters are.

The way I see it, voters tend to think of the VP as part of the candidate's total package. Some will select the candidate because of their VP pick. Some will select the candidate in spite of their VP pick. Some will select the candidate without caring about the VP pick. None will select the VP independently of their preference for the candidate.

 

[TellyKNeasuss]

And she's incredibly intelligent. I'd love to see her debate Trump sycophant Pence.

If Harris is the choice, there is zero chance of a VP debate. There's no way the Republicans would risk letting Pence face off against Harris.

 

[Dr. Keith]

If Harris is the choice, there is zero chance of a VP debate. There's no way the Republicans would risk letting Pence face off against Harris.

If Harris is the choice she should do the presidential debates, too.

 

[TellyKNeasuss]

I doubt it's illegal. I think it is an interesting case of affirmative action and hiring quotas in action. Tucker Carlson is an ass. But Biden is giving us some insight into what he thinks the real issues are, and what he thinks a good solution is.

I don't give a flying about Carlson's questions. My questions are:

If he picks a black woman for VP, is it because of her race and gender?

Does that mean her race and gender are what make her the best person for the job?

If so, then what exactly is the job? What exactly is the VP's job, anyway? How much do the two jobs actually overlap?

And what if he doesn't end up picking a black woman? Then what? Why did he say he would earlier? What problem was he trying to solve earlier? Why does he think it no longer needs to be solved?

Hypothesis: What he said earlier was a gambit to win votes for his nomination as the party's candidate. Now that his nomination is effectively guaranteed, he's free from that commitment and can consider other factors when trying to win the general election.

I highly doubt that Dan Quayle, Sarah Palin, or Mike Pence were chosen because they were the most talented people available for the job.

 

[theprestige]

I highly doubt that Dan Quayle, Sarah Palin, or Mike Pence were chosen because they were the most talented people available for the job.

Depends on the job, doesn't it?

The way I see it, the VP has essentially three jobs:

1. Act as an Emergency Backup President

2. Preside over the Senate and cast tie-breaking votes.

3. Pick up votes for their running mate in some unquantifiable but assumed-to-be-qualitatively-true kind of way.

To this can be added a fourth non-essential job:

4. (optional) Act as a technical expert in some area the President deems necessary. Whether it's acting as an ambassador without portfolio, wrangling the military-industrial complex, keeping certain interest groups onside, etc.

None of the first three jobs requires much in the way of talent for the job at all, obviously. So unless Biden needs somebody for job number four, I doubt his pick will be particularly talented either. It's pretty typical of VP picks on both sides of the aisle. Look at Obama's choice, for example.

 

[Safe-Keeper]

You say polar opposite, I say two sides of the same coin. If you reject the more qualified candidate because they're white and male, in favor of a less qualified candidate because they're black and female, that's the exact same discrimination on the reverse as it is on the obverse.

Unless the qualification is literally "black and female". Which is just the "magical negro" stereotype, transplanted from literature and film into our politics. Where I predict it will do more harm than good.

And I see that as a kind of whataboutism. Again, working for and against diversity are polar opposites. We'll just have to agree to disagree, I suppose.

Also, the 'turning down less qualified candidates' part is pretty unfounded.

 

[Safe-Keeper]

None of the first three jobs requires much in the way of talent for the job at all, obviously.

Oh. What was your posts about less qualified candidates about, then? We are, as you say, talking about a person whose job is to pick up the phone every morning and ask if the president is dead, and then go back to sleep?

 

[Brainster]

So, if a candidate wanted to use the VP slot for EC advantage on a state basis it would've to be state that is very close to make any difference. That's got to be a very short list at this point.

Frankly, I think it is more important to view the VP choice in how it impacts overall turnout. But I appreciate that you ran the numbers.

Oh, yeah, I was just talking about the VP effect on his/her home state. Obviously there is a lot more to the selection calculus than that, things like shoring up perceived weaknesses of the presidential candidate, or exploiting those of the opposition candidate.

 

[theprestige]

And I see that as a kind of whataboutism. Again, working for and against diversity are polar opposites. We'll just have to agree to disagree, I suppose.

The debate about whether affirmative action is inherently discriminatory, and whether this is acceptable in exchange for more diversity has been going on for a long time. I doubt we'll resolve it here. I think Biden's promise of a black woman VP does tell us something about where he stands on the question, though.

Also, I think a lot of people make a fetish of diversity for its own sake. If Biden and his running mate agree on ideology, agree on policy, agree on the problems of the day and the solutions to those problems, and the only difference between them is race and gender, then how diverse is the ticket, really?

 

[theprestige]

Oh. What was your posts about less qualified candidates about, then? We are, as you say, talking about a person whose job is to pick up the phone every morning and ask if the president is dead, and then go back to sleep?

I was talking about affirmative action and quota hiring generally. I agree that in the case of the VP, qualifications don't matter so much.

But I guarantee you, when Biden does announce his pick, he'll at least pay lip service to the idea that the job requires qualifications, and that his pick has them.

 

[Brainster]

None of the first three jobs requires much in the way of talent for the job at all, obviously. So unless Biden needs somebody for job number four, I doubt his pick will be particularly talented either. It's pretty typical of VP picks on both sides of the aisle. Look at Obama's choice, for example.

Biden was chosen to shore up a specific weakness of Obama in terms of foreign policy credibility. For that matter, Palin was chosen to exploit a perceived weakness of Obama among women after the bruising primary battle with Hillary.

Of course, shoring up Biden's weakness is a bit tricky. You want someone young, but does that just raise the question of whether that person can step in if Biden dies or becomes incapacitated? A younger Presidential candidate might assess the risk there as minimal, but Joe doesn't have that option.

That's part of why I see Harris as the most likely choice. If Joe passes on the baton, he'll be passing it to someone who's more from his (vanishing) wing of the party than with anybody else.

 

[Trebuchet]

I was talking about affirmative action and quota hiring generally. I agree that in the case of the VP, qualifications don't matter so much.

But I guarantee you, when Biden does announce his pick, he'll at least pay lip service to the idea that the job requires qualifications, and that his pick has them.

Ok. Go back to the list in the poll and explain why those names aren't at least as qualified as half-governor Palin, Dan Quayle, Spiro T Agnew, or Mike Pence.

 

[Beelzebuddy]

I wish he'd hurry up and pick Harris. The breathless speculation is just annoying.

 

[theprestige]

Biden was chosen to shore up a specific weakness of Obama in terms of foreign policy credibility. For that matter, Palin was chosen to exploit a perceived weakness of Obama among women after the bruising primary battle with Hillary.

Of course, shoring up Biden's weakness is a bit tricky. You want someone young, but does that just raise the question of whether that person can step in if Biden dies or becomes incapacitated? A younger Presidential candidate might assess the risk there as minimal, but Joe doesn't have that option.

That's part of why I see Harris as the most likely choice. If Joe passes on the baton, he'll be passing it to someone who's more from his (vanishing) wing of the party than with anybody else.

One issue with calling out Biden's age as a weakness is that you're not saying, "these two, together, make a complete presidential package." Like with foreign policy or something like that. You're saying, "... and just in case your preferred candidate dies in office." Which is a totally different mood.

 

[theprestige]

Ok. Go back to the list in the poll and explain why those names aren't at least as qualified as half-governor Palin, Dan Quayle, Spiro T Agnew, or Mike Pence.

... Or else what?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Rumor is it's between Rice and Harris.

Susan Rice would be perfect.