Joe Biden's choice for VP

[eran0004]

Diversity for diversity’s sake is actually an important principle. If you just have people with the same background in your organisation then you will be pretty limited in terms of what experiences your team members have had, which could lead to a lot of problems.

 

[Swagger897]

Diversity for diversity’s sake is actually an important principle. If you just have people with the same background in your organisation then you will be pretty limited in terms of what experiences your team members have had, which could lead to a lot of problems.

I'd rather depart a flight and see that I had a black female who served in the air force than a chinese male who was pushed through flight schools by CFI's as my pilot not because of their looks but their training. It shouldn't matter who is up in the front doing their job, and having a diverse team for the sake of diversity doesn't make any sense.

 

[TexRex]

I'd rather depart a flight and see that I had a black female who served in the air force than a chinese male who was pushed through flight schools by CFI's as my pilot

It shouldn't matter who is up in the front doing their job

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

I'd rather depart a flight and see that I had a black female who served in the air force than a chinese male who was pushed through flight schools by CFI's as my pilot not because of their looks but their training. It shouldn't matter who is up in the front doing their job, and having a diverse team for the sake of diversity doesn't make any sense.

That is certainly a valid perspective and I think it should be part of any discussion regarding diversity. The other perspective (which, admittedly took me a long time to come around to recognizing as legitimate) is that lack of diversity is a self-reinforcing problem. If that black female grew up with the understanding (whether or not it was actually institutionalized) that black women just do not become pilots, then she is probably not going to pursue that field, which then sets the stage for the next generation to do the same, etc. Things like affirmative action seek, imperfectly, to change that outcome. Again, it's not a perfect approach because there is not one. I think most Americans would hold the position, in good faith, that they hope that every American child can aspire to be anything they want to be - affirmative action/diversity initiatives are aimed at making good on that. Will it result in some situations in which people acquire positions they are not qualified for? Probably. Will it, eventually, result is a better outlook for a broader portion of the American population? I think so.

 

[eran0004]

I'd rather depart a flight and see that I had a black female who served in the air force than a chinese male who was pushed through flight schools by CFI's as my pilot not because of their looks but their training. It shouldn't matter who is up in the front doing their job, and having a diverse team for the sake of diversity doesn't make any sense.

Diversity isn’t mutually exclusive with competence.

 

[Tornado]

I'm disappointed. We were told to fear how Biden was going to pick the first Gay Black Muslim Transgender Woman Socialist as VP because of affirmative action, and instead he chose some woman who BLM people on Twitter seem to hate for stances she took that the Fox News set is already twisting itself into knots trying to demonize her for not supporting.

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

I'm disappointed. We were told to fear how Biden was going to pick the first Gay Black Muslim Transgender Woman Socialist as VP because of affirmative action, and instead he chose some woman who BLM people on Twitter seem to hate for stances she took that the Fox News set is already twisting itself into knots trying to demonize her for not supporting.

In this thread we already have conservatives attacking her for being "tough on crime". What the what? I'll be interested to see how many give up the "it's the LAW!" stance to criticize her for prosecuting drug offenders.

 

[TexRex]

They're going to find any reason to criticize the decision--indeed anything he does--and even make **** up if need be. I don't respect the guy, I don't like the guy and I won't vote for the guy...but damn.

A term for this sort of thing could be useful. Of course it should stand separate from your everyday Trumpism, not because the two aren't inherently linked, because they are, but to differentiate it from the broader condition. I propose "Biden Aggravation Disorder"; "BAD" for short.

 

[TheGeologist]

They're going to find any reason to criticize the decision--indeed anything he does--and even make **** up if need be. I don't respect the guy, I don't like the guy and I won't vote for the guy...but damn.

A term for this sort of thing could be useful. Of course it should stand separate from your everyday Trumpism, not because the two aren't inherently linked, because they are, but to differentiate it from the broader condition. I propose "Biden Aggravation Disorder"; "BAD" for short.

Wait, you're not voting for Biden or Trump?

 

[DesertPenguin]

Wait, you're not voting for Biden or Trump?

Personally, I'm not voting at all. **** the system. I'm in New York and a blue dominated county so it doesn't matter anyway.

 

[UKMikey]

In this thread we already have conservatives attacking her for being "tough on crime". What the what? I'll be interested to see how many give up the "it's the LAW!" stance to criticize her for prosecuting drug offenders.

Obviously, I can’t vote in a US election but it seems to me that Harris has been simultaneously criticised in this thread for being radical and for not being radical enough. Either some people are desperate to pin something on her or only idiots think that she's some kind of radical leftist. How long before her opponents try to cook up some kind of birther conspiracy against her?

 

[TheGeologist]

Personally, I'm not voting at all. **** the system. I'm in New York and a blue dominated county so it doesn't matter anyway.

Ya never know man. I didn't vote in 2016, and I am never making that mistake again.

 

[UKMikey]

Ya never know man. I didn't vote in 2016, and I am never making that mistake again.

I'm not sure how this works. How much does a candidate have to win the popular vote by before the electoral college result doesn't affect the outcome?

 

[dlshearon]

Personally, I'm not voting at all. **** the system. I'm in New York and a blue dominated county so it doesn't matter anyway.

You should, even though you don’t think it counts. I don’t usually vote in Primaries here because you have to choose Repub or Dem, and every time I kick myself for a few weeks when I don’t.

Go vote, not everyone has that Right.

 

[Blitz24]

You should, even though you don’t think it counts. I don’t usually vote in Primaries here because you have to choose Repub or Dem, and every time I kick myself for a few weeks when I don’t.

Go vote, not everyone has that Right.

Unless you vote blue in the Northeast, your vote is essentially thrown out. A Republican hasn't won NJ or CT since 1988, MA or NY since 1984.

 

[DesertPenguin]

Basically my one extra Democratic vote isn't gonna make a difference locally.

 

[TheGeologist]

Basically my one extra Democratic vote isn't gonna make a difference locally.

Yes, but how many other people say the same thing as you?

That one vote turns in to hundreds of thousands of votes. Be the change.

 

[TexRex]

Wait, you're not voting for Biden or Trump?

Nope. I've only actually voted for a presidential candidate on three occasions in the last 28 years; Clinton the first time around, Perot over Clinton in 1996 and Obama the first time around.

I can get behind measures much more readily than I can people, particularly when, in cases such as Biden, I really don't like the person. If someone could assure me that my vote for Biden would stand alone as the difference between Trump for round two and him, I'd likely still abstain because I wouldn't feel good about myself if I voted for him.

And because I'm compelled to say it again, not voting for Biden does not give Trump my vote. The only way Trump gets my vote is if I actually vote for the ****er.

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

Nope. I've only actually voted for a presidential candidate on three occasions in the last 28 years; Clinton the first time around, Perot over Clinton in 1996 and Obama the first time around.

I can get behind measures much more readily than I can people, particularly when, in cases such as Biden, I really don't like the person. If someone could assure me that my vote for Biden would stand alone as the difference between Trump for round two and him, I'd likely still abstain because I wouldn't feel good about myself if I voted for him.

And because I'm compelled to say it again, not voting for Biden does not give Trump my vote. The only way Trump gets my vote is if I actually vote for the ****er.

So...vote for Harris.

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

I'm not sure how this works. How much does a candidate have to win the popular vote by before the electoral college result doesn't affect the outcome?

Probably never. The electoral college decides the election.

 

[Swagger897]

I'm not sure how this works. How much does a candidate have to win the popular vote by before the electoral college result doesn't affect the outcome?

So long as a candidate can win a higher percentage of the state's elector's, they will get the state's vote. This is why people get upset because popular vote doesn't end in their favor. In the simplest of terms it can be broken down as such (not to be taken as truth): Say the state of Florida has 3 zones. Zone 1 is located on the Atlantic side, and has a population of 2 million people. Zone 2 is the Gulf side, and has a population of 1 million people. Zone 3 is the panhandle, and has 500,000 people. Say all 2 million people of zone one vote for candidate A, while zones 2 and 3 vote for candidate B. By popular vote, candidate A should be the elected president, but the e.c. claims that since candidate B had more zones (electors) vote for them, they receive the total electoral vote for that state, "winning the state."

The 538 number that boils down to 270 is made up of both the two senators from that state and the remaining representatives (Florida for instance has 27 representatives looking over 27 different zones, as well as the two senators equaling 29 for the state). D.C. gets three of their own as well. Theoretically, a candidate can win the election by only taking 11 states (From highest to lowest electoral count: California - 55, Texas - 38, Florida - 29, New York - 29, Pennsylvania - 20, Illinois - 20, Georgia - 16, North Carolina - 15, New Jersey - 14 = 270).

Like Hillary in 2016, she won the popular vote but failed to win enough states to win the electoral college. If you don't win the electoral college, you don't win the election. People can get highly upset about these two numbers but the fail to understand how the represented zones work and how it affects a candidate winning a state. Edit: Roughly 60% of the capable voters went to the polls in 2016. To those who say their vote doesn't matter should look not at their state's popular vote split but their district. If several million people located in different districts had voted for Hillary who didn't vote at all, it's very likely she would've been elected. For those who don't vote, especially in districts with low population relative to those located in high density area's, they do the most damage to the electoral college.

 

[TexRex]

So...vote for Harris.

I don't buy into Dotini's drivel about Biden being pushed aside after his hypothetical inauguration. I think he's far more competent than Trump and will have no trouble sticking around.

 

[DesertPenguin]

Yes, but how many other people say the same thing as you?

That one vote turns in to hundreds of thousands of votes. Be the change.

Not enough to matter that's my point

 

[Dennisch]

So much complaining about politics, and suddenly a page of people who don't vote.

Quality shenanigans, guys. Grade A.

 

[TexRex]

So much complaining about politics, and suddenly a page of people who don't vote.

Quality shenanigans, guys. Grade A.

I count one. Two if you include the individual who won't again not after having not.

 

[Dennisch]

I count one.

I have 2.

But seriously. If people don't vote, because hurr durr, how will there ever be a change?

 

[Blitz24]

I have 2.

But seriously. If people don't vote, because hurr durr, how will there ever be a change?

I will vote. I just know that unless I vote blue, the vote for the presidency will be moot.

 

[Chrunch Houston]

I have been racking my little brain, but I still can't figure out why he picked her.

Why pick someone from California, why not pick someone from a swing state?

She had so little support in the primary that she had to drop out two months before the Iowa caucuses.

Plus the whole Willie brown thing is just creepy and looks like she was sleeping her way to the top. The guy was twice her age.

 

[Dennisch]

I will vote. I just know that unless I vote blue, the vote for the presidency will be moot.

No, well yes but no. It's for the future. These elections are lost. It will be red or blue. But if enough people decide that they have had enough of the Demopublicans, perhaps next time an actual 3rd candidate will have a shot.

 

[FerrariF1GT]

All this talk about not voting and I’m like:

Third-party candidates: Are we jokes to you?

I think it’s cool that Biden selected Harris as his running mate on the virtue of being a woman of color, but the important part to me is if she can handle the responsibilities of being the President in the event that Biden would die if he gets elected because strong leadership is something I value in all my representatives regardless of physical traits and political ideologies. I mean, Trump and Biden are pushing past the life expectancy age now, so I guess the vice president has never been this important.

I sound like I’m pushing the two-party system. Ugh.

-ahem-

Kamala’s cool and all, I genuinely like her, and I wouldn’t mind her being next in line to the presidency, but I’m still leaning on Jo Jorgensen/Spike Cohen simply because the Libertarians are the party that’s closest to my stances... even though Vermin Supreme promised that Cohen would be his running mate.