• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Who will Kamala pick as VP?

Page 12 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Why not Jon Stewart?

1. He doesn't want it which is good
2. Not like you're sacrificing a major spot in gov/ senate
3. Getting fired by Apple for his stance on China
4. counters the whole deep state narrative
5. might actually get through to some white guys in swing states
 
Last edited:
Indus said:
Why not Jon Stewart?

1. He doesn't want it which is good
2. Not like you're sacrificing a major spot in gov/ senate
3. Getting fired by Apple for his stance on China
4. counters the whole deep state narrative
5. might actually get through to some white guys in swing states
Click to expand...
Lots of us have said it, for years. Ain't no way it's happening though, unfortunately.
 
Indus said:
Why not Jon Stewart?

1. He doesn't want it which is good
2. Not like you're sacrificing a major spot in gov/ senate
3. Getting fired by Apple for his stance on China
4. counters the whole deep state narrative
5. might actually get through to some white guys in swing states
Click to expand...
I refer you to point 1!
 
Indus said:
Why not Jon Stewart?

1. He doesn't want it which is good
2. Not like you're sacrificing a major spot in gov/ senate
3. Getting fired by Apple for his stance on China
4. counters the whole deep state narrative
5. might actually get through to some white guys in swing states
Click to expand...

it's the first one. He won't run because it's stupid, and he's said this several dozen times over the last 20 years.

why do you people keep putting people forward that have repeatedly pointed out to you that they are simply telling jokes?

is your plan to capture him and store him in a large jar until he relents and agrees to run for office? Why even bother with these suggestions?
 
MrSquished said:
yeah since last night I've been thinking it will likely be Kelly. Can't complain.

I'm going to assume the biggest thing holding Shapiro back is his last name/being Jewish. Cause America!
Click to expand...

I have been tempted to mention that what puts me off (knowing nothing else about the guy) is the fact he has the same last name as Ben Shapiro. Helen Shapiro was inoffensive, though, so maybe that cancels out?

Then again, I'm put off "Mayor Pete" by the fact he's apparently the "Booty Judge" - which makes him sound like a slightly-sleazy rap artist. So my nominative prejudices may be a trifle silly.
 
SteveGrabowski said:
I'd never give up a senate seat outside a safely blue state for an inconsequential office like VP.
Click to expand...

The VP is inconsequential in a vacuum, the main thing is picking someone that helps her win the election in the first place. If that is a ham sandwich in PA or AZ or some other swing state, then I'm all for the ham sandwich. If she loses, we have way bigger worries than a Senate seat (though to be fair, the Democrats somehow getting control of Congress would be the only hope against Pres. 2025 and this corrupt Supreme Court.)

Kinda funny, I keep thinking "Ben Shapiro" as well and it definitely creates an instant negative reaction in me.

Re: Stewart
"Just telling jokes" is way understating JS IMO. Dude is very smart and understands the issues. He can say that he's just telling jokes, because he's not an arrogant narcissistic turd like most politicians. "Political experience" I reckon is way overblown. He's had to deal with staffs and people working for him, the President should be a ceo whose main job is to smile and wave and hire smart people for the actual work. Not that it matters if he doesn't want the job. If it took a celebrity to beat the 2025 neanderthals I'd take it in a heartbeat. Like it or not (I don't), it helps to be a fricking game show host speaker when you are a candidate.
 
Last edited:
zinfamous said:
it's the first one. He won't run because it's stupid, and he's said this several dozen times over the last 20 years.

why do you people keep putting people forward that have repeatedly pointed out to you that they are simply telling jokes?

is your plan to capture him and store him in a large jar until he relents and agrees to run for office? Why even bother with these suggestions?
Click to expand...
He should moderate a debate. He would be fair and tough on both sides and pierce through all the bullshit.
 
Yep, I still remember when he put those Crossfire clowns in their place, they were the first of those ridiculous "on the left! on the right!" jousting cable sham shows. "Why are you hurting the country?" to paraphrase.

I honestly doubt either party would want him as moderator, but especially Trump would bleat about it.
 
Indus said:
Why not Jon Stewart?

1. He doesn't want it which is good
2. Not like you're sacrificing a major spot in gov/ senate
3. Getting fired by Apple for his stance on China
4. counters the whole deep state narrative
5. might actually get through to some white guys in swing states
Click to expand...
Getting into bed with Apple in the first place should be your red flag. I'm glad he got the fuck out but what exactly did he expect?
 
@BoomerD Just wanted to let you know, these kind of attacks on Kamala are being enabled by folks such as yourself who continue a narrative that she was just a slutty woman who slept with a dude to get ahead and not acknowledging anything else about her career. I hope you are keeping those attacks on her to this forum, and not to people in your life who are still thinking about voting.

also, it's great how Gen-Z has co-opted the coconut tree statement as such a positive thing. They are re-claiming it. That was a key phrase republicans took totally out of context to show she just said word salads. Except it's a solid statement about who we are and where we come from. The phrase is fine - it was just taken out of context. So please stop those attacks as well.

awfulannouncing.com

ESPN's Ryan Clark calls out 'disgusting' Fox Business guest over Kamala Harris comments

ESPN's Ryan Clark found a clip of a Fox Business guest discussing Kamala Harris in a denigrating fashion to be "disgusting."
awfulannouncing.com awfulannouncing.com
 
Why in the ever-loving hell would anyone from Illinois ever be considered ??

McRaven being ex-military of course is a selling point. I don't happen to like the hero-worship of everything military in this country but there's no doubt it couldn't hurt. Not sure it helps bring along a swing state though.

Considering her opponent has literally used sex as a weapon (found liable for rape) and admitted in public to having the freedom to grope women as he pleases, anyone voting against Harris due to some relationship she had is an abject asshole in the first place.
 
Fenixgoon said:
During a debate? I don't see why not. The difference being Harris might get corrected on some slight technicality while Trump would immediately be called on bullshit
Click to expand...
In a world where Biden is old/senile and Trump is "strong," a minor technical misstatement from Democrats is seen as equal to 100,000 Trump whoppers.
 
zinfamous said:
it's the first one. He won't run because it's stupid, and he's said this several dozen times over the last 20 years.

why do you people keep putting people forward that have repeatedly pointed out to you that they are simply telling jokes?

is your plan to capture him and store him in a large jar until he relents and agrees to run for office? Why even bother with these suggestions?
Click to expand...
Put him in there with Michelle Obama and see which one gives up first!
 
Word is Kelly has taken a hit especially for his vote against the pro-Union PRO act and anti-labor stances. Only three dems voted against the PRO act - the other two were Manchin and Sinema, plus Kelly.
 
Stokely said:
The VP is inconsequential in a vacuum, the main thing is picking someone that helps her win the election in the first place. If that is a ham sandwich in PA or AZ or some other swing state, then I'm all for the ham sandwich. If she loses, we have way bigger worries than a Senate seat (though to be fair, the Democrats somehow getting control of Congress would be the only hope against Pres. 2025 and this corrupt Supreme Court.)
Click to expand...
Does it matter on election day though? The only times I have seen much voter enthusiasm for a VP were Palin in 08 and Bentsen in 88 and their tickets got creamed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top