Joe Biden replaced? (Page 2)
-
No new posts
Moderators: k9car363, the bear, DerekL, alicefoeller | Reply |
|
![]() ![]() |
Champion ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() Personally, I think the choice of Veep, for the vast majority of voters, comes falls under the heading of “can’t really help—can only hurt”. No matter what people think of Ryan, he’s not going to be running the show—Romney and his closest advisors are. It’s no different than McCain’s pick of Palin or Bush’s Sr’s pick of Quayle (though Ryan is smarter and more competent than both). The older wealthy candidate chooses younger running mate to give the impression that the administration will be open to new ideas and to entice the younger generation into thinking that they’ll have a voice in the administration that right now, doesn’t seem to relate well to them. Or, on the other side, the younger, less well-known candidate (Obama or Bush Jr.) chooses old, political war-horse, to reassure the older voters that there is still the voice of experience in the white house, and that the views of older Americans will be considered. It’s BS either way. This will be Romney’s White House, through and through. Ryan, other than the occasional photo op, will be marginalized until it’s time for him to run on his own ticket. I think Ryan has some interesting ideas, but he’s not going to have any say whatsoever in the policies of this administration, any more than Palin would have had in McCain’s White House. He’s basically political eye candy. I think he is capable of making a contribution, although I disagree with most of his views, but I don’t think that’s what he’s there for. Edited by jmk-brooklyn 2012-08-16 1:11 PM |
|
![]() ![]() |
Slower Than You ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() Obama will be signing his death sentence if he replaces Biden with Hillary. |
![]() ![]() |
Champion ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() Jtiger - 2012-08-16 1:03 PM scoobysdad - 2012-08-16 12:21 PM marmadaddy - 2012-08-16 12:18 PM Again, this was not my point. My point was how, IMO, Americans are increasingly voting based on the charisma or "star-quality" of politicians, regardless of party affiliation, and that politicians seem to be realizing this. ADMIN NOTE: Says a lot about his presidency, and unfortunately, the intelligence of many American voters. Let's make this really clear. Calling a person or group of people stupid due to their political beliefs or how they vote is NOT OK here. It's an ad hominem and no less an insult than saying "If you vote for X you're an idiot". Any future posts that try this tactic will be removed and forum timeouts will be handed out accordingly.
This is nothing new. Not sure that was the case in '04 or '00. The last "star" before Obama was Bill Clinton. Bush, Quayle, Kerry, Edwards, Gore, Liebermann and McCain were not what I would call "stars" on the par of Obama, Hillary or Paul Ryan (though some may disagree Ryan is already a star, he has been the real face of the Republican Party and architect of the Republican Plan-- I would say he's at least where Obama was prior to launching his '08 campaign.) Palin, well, maybe she became one. |
![]() ![]() |
Champion ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() jmk-brooklyn - 2012-08-16 1:08 PM Personally, I think the choice of Veep, for the vast majority of voters, comes falls under the heading of “can’t really help—can only hurt”. No matter what people think of Ryan, he’s not going to be running the show—Romney and his closest advisors are. It’s no different than McCain’s pick of Palin or Bush’s Sr’s pick of Quayle (though Ryan is smarter and more competent than both). The older wealthy candidate chooses younger running mate to give the impression that the administration will be open to new ideas and to entice the younger generation into thinking that they’ll have a voice in the administration that right now, doesn’t seem to relate well to them. Or, on the other side, the younger, less well-known candidate (Obama or Bush Jr.) chooses old, political war-horse, to reassure the older voters that there is still the voice of experience in the white house, and that the views of older Americans will be considered. It’s BS either way. This will be Romney’s White House, through and through. Ryan, other than the occasional photo op, will be marginalized until it’s time for him to run on his own ticket. I think Ryan has some interesting ideas, but he’s not going to have any say whatsoever in the policies of this administration, any more than Palin would have had in McCain’s White House. He’s basically political eye candy. I think he is capable of making a contribution, although I disagree with most of his views, but I don’t think that’s what he’s there for. As you said, he's there to appeal to the younger, less-wealthy crowd. And people who do P90X. |
![]() ![]() |
Champion ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() tuwood - 2012-08-16 11:11 AM
There's been a lot of chatter the last few days about replacing Biden with Hillary. Do you guys think it will happen or if it would help?
No, and NO! Personally I think adding Hillary to the ticket would provide a spark to the ticket I agree, if by spark you mean the ticket would go down in flames Hillary is currently the lock nominee for 2016 no matter if Obama wins or loses. No way |
![]() ![]() |
Master ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() She wont do it. Why risk associating yourself with Obama and his decisions for the next 4 years and decrease your good chances in 2016? She has much to lose and little to gain IMHO. |
|
![]() ![]() |
Elite ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() scoobysdad - 2012-08-16 12:07 PM mr2tony - 2012-08-16 10:40 AM I agree, Tony. It's very interesting to me that the RockStar President, now faced with a RockStar opponent in Paul Ryan, is having to take a serious look at bringing in a RockStar running mate to try and off-set how much his own star has fallen. Says a lot about his presidency, and unfortunately, the intelligence of many American voters. scoobysdad - 2012-08-16 10:36 AM I think Obama has to consider a couple of things: Would the distinct reek of desperation that replacing Joe Biden now (so soon after the announcement of Paul Ryan as a VP candidate) send out outweigh the handicap and risk of keeping Joe Biden as his running mate? Perceptions are important, and this move now would show: 1) Obama made a really bad choice in 2008, and 2) The Democrats really fear Paul Ryan, what he has to say and how he is capable of saying it-- that's going to put Obama squarely on the defensive. It could have the opposite effect -- it could make people say `Biden is the problem, with Hillary we have the change we need!' Of course that's people who are going to vote for Obama anyway, but it may sway some fence-sitters. Biden is a pill for Obama. I'm sure the president doesn't like having to go around explaining what his Veep meant everytime he opens his mouth. Let's be honest though. At this point in '08, Sarah Palin was a "rock star." Palin's debate performance was not good. I do expect Ryan to be a much more effective debater than Palin. That said, I would not underestimate Joe Biden. All that said, Hillary will not be added to the ticket. It would be a desperation move and it would not benefit the Democratic ticket. (it aint happening)
|
![]() ![]() |
Pro ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() just saw this article. Sounds believable and i found it on the internet so it has to be true.
|
![]() ![]() |
Veteran ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() Personaly I could care less about politics. Does it really matter who is President? As long as the Buckeyes win on Saturday all is good! |
![]() ![]() |
Expert ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() ejshowers - 2012-08-16 11:08 AM Near zero chance of it happening. X2 agreed...Plus I like Joe... He always finds a way to make me laugh |
![]() ![]() |
Expert ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() jacasa - 2012-08-16 10:44 PM Personaly I could care less about politics. Does it really matter who is President? As long as the Buckeyes win on Saturday all is good! X2 Go Bucks |
|
![]() ![]() |
Master![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() scoobysdad - 2012-08-16 1:35 PM Jtiger - 2012-08-16 1:03 PM Not sure that was the case in '04 or '00. The last "star" before Obama was Bill Clinton. Bush, Quayle, Kerry, Edwards, Gore, Liebermann and McCain were not what I would call "stars" on the par of Obama, Hillary or Paul Ryan (though some may disagree Ryan is already a star, he has been the real face of the Republican Party and architect of the Republican Plan-- I would say he's at least where Obama was prior to launching his '08 campaign.) Palin, well, maybe she became one. scoobysdad - 2012-08-16 12:21 PM marmadaddy - 2012-08-16 12:18 PM Again, this was not my point. My point was how, IMO, Americans are increasingly voting based on the charisma or "star-quality" of politicians, regardless of party affiliation, and that politicians seem to be realizing this. ADMIN NOTE: Says a lot about his presidency, and unfortunately, the intelligence of many American voters. Let's make this really clear. Calling a person or group of people stupid due to their political beliefs or how they vote is NOT OK here. It's an ad hominem and no less an insult than saying "If you vote for X you're an idiot". Any future posts that try this tactic will be removed and forum timeouts will be handed out accordingly.
This is nothing new.
Bush came across as the "guy I could drink a beer with" Gore and Kerry didn't have that kind of appeal, nor did McCain which is why he lost among other things. |
![]() ![]() |
Pro ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() aha, now we know why Obama didn't dump him: http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/biden-ive-known-three-presidents-intimately_650523.html |
![]() ![]() |
Master ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() Who could he pick that is not 1. a bigger screwup than Biden or 2. more qualified than himself? Nope Biden is the man. |
![]() ![]() |
Pro ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() Jtiger - 2012-08-20 9:18 AM ... Bush came across as the "guy I could drink a beer with" Gore and Kerry didn't have that kind of appeal, nor did McCain which is why he lost among other things.
i don't think that is the case. I liked McCain. He came across often fairly well (except when he got his ire up). He used to come on The Daily Show fairly often, able to poke a little fun at himself, and to make his points. He came across as a "guy to have a beer with"; much more so than Obama (who I ultimately supported), who is more cerebral and distant, IMHO. I think it was his choice of Palin that sank him more than his personality. Now the headliners I would like to see face off in 2016 are Hillary and Condi Rice. Two very smart women, both having served as Secretary of State. Each with some "baggage" in their political past (Bill and the affairs, W. and, well, I'll just leave it at that), that they would need to distance themselves from just enough. |
|