Yeah, a lot of us don’t do identity politics. I don’t care if they’re a man or woman or whatever. It could be a sentient ham sandwich for all I care.
What matters is their record and their willingness to fix things.
no
The democrats wouldst vote f’r aught with a D behind their nameth.
Verily
gender is irrelevant
will they stand with the people or the corporations?
A freaking men. No pun intended.
I want to see 2 things:
-
Term limits on all gov’t elected position, including the Supreme Court and all of Congress
-
Lobbying reform. Like massive.
If you have a good game plan to enact those two things then I’m down. I don’t care who or what you are.
-
In general, I believe a two woman ticket would get fewer votes than a woman/man ticket, which would get fewer votes than any male-led ticket. The misogyny effect is strong. But it really depends a lot on the specific people.
There are way too many Conservatives, who are … conservative
No. But it won’t happen anyway. Whitmer is really the only realistic choice besides Kamala and Whitmer has said she doesn’t want the POTUS or VP nomination. It’ll likely be Kamala at the top of the ticket and one of a handful of male governors competing for the VP slot. Probably from a swing state like Shapiro or Cooper
She didn’t say she doesn’t want the office, she said she didn’t want to get it via a convention coup without Biden stepping aside willingly, a sentiment that basically everyone who’s been floated as a viable alternative has also expressed.
As much as we might see policy and electoral virtue in them, they’re all still politicians, they’ll take a promotion in an instant, but not until they think they can get it without becoming a target for party leadership.
Could? Possibly, sure.
Would? Why should any ticket guarantee a win based solely on arbitrary characteristics of the candidates? Nothing about being a woman, a man, trans, cis, gay, straight, bi, ace, black, white, Latino, Asian, biracial, triracial, short, tall, hirsute, bald, balding, skinny, jacked, overweight, or any other randomly chosen descriptor should be a factor in electability. The fact that it’s even in question is a strong indictment of how we view politics in a broad sense.
Depends on the women, Kamala has serious baggage receiving an appointment from her lover.
Whitmer has a good bit of support, I could see a Whitmer/AOC ticket going places but it would be challenging.
Which women? What are their voting records? What experience do they have? Can they work with the other party if they need to? Are they respected by foreign leaders?
If it’s this election, are we sure putting them on the ticket will survive certain legal challenges?
Too many questions without enough answers.
Generally speaking though, no, I don’t think it would happen. I would totally support it, but I think there are too many misogynists out there. On the other hand, I never thought there would be a Black president either.
Depends on the women honestly, where Joe struggles with the shadow being old casts on his flubs, any woman who takes his place would face the same shadow being cast from being a woman.
Yes Hillary was the victim of a 40 year character assassination campaign but you cannot tell me that even half the shit that’s been flung at her would have stuck were she a man.
That being said, a Harris Whitmer ticket would in either configuration do a lot to re-energize people who have begun to despair over Joe’s odds.
No. That would be trouble.
I’d vote for it but probably not.
Gender is not a relevant consideration for the Democratic Party.
Imagine genuinely thinking this.
Considering Hillary won the popular vote, I think most people don’t consider gender very important. Or at least the people who do consider gender very important are voting Republican anyway.
Generically, no. For some specific ticket: sure, theoretically possible. But, in practice, I don’t see any actual such combination that the Dems have any chance of nominating. Well I don’t know anything about Whitmer, whose name I keep seeing.
