Contrary to a piece I wrote last month, I'm starting to warm to the idea that Joe Biden's best choice for a running mate is Stacey Abrams. No, I haven't forgotten about the "experience" factor. If elected, Biden would be the oldest president ever to take the oath of office. Voters certainly have a right to know whether his VP is ready to assume the duties of the presidency on day one if, God forbid, he's unable to serve out his first term, especially given the severity of the crisis that is currently threatening the nation.
Obviously, there would be a learning curve, but let's be honest here, virtually all of the candidates being considered would have a learning curve to some extent, insofar as none of them have ever held the job. That shouldn't disqualify her - or them for that matter - anymore than Barack Obama's lack of experience disqualified him from being president. You either grow in the job or, like Trump, you shrivel in it.
Look, was Elizabeth Warren my first choice? Yes, and for reasons that should be painfully obvious. But there are two inherent problems with picking her: One, she's a senator from a state with a Republican governor, which means that at least temporarily, a Republican would control that seat. And while it's likely that Dems would prevail in a special election, by no means is it a slam dunk. We all know what happened in 2010 when Martha Coakley - possibly the worst candidate ever to win her party's nomination - lost to Scott Brown. A repeat of that fiasco isn't exactly out of the realm of possibility.
According to the latest polling, Democrats stand a pretty good chance of netting at least three Senate seats this November, and that's with Doug Jones losing in Alabama. That would give them the majority in the upper chamber. Would the Biden campaign risk losing that opportunity just to placate progressives? Consider this: Mitch McConnell is already on record as saying he will block every bill that comes from the House and all of Biden's judicial nominees. What good is winning the White House if you can't accomplish anything while in it?
Then there's the other problem, one that, unfortunately, old hoof and mouth brought on himself. There was already growing concern within the African American community that Democrats and, particularly, the Biden campaign were taking black voters for granted. The interview with Charlemagne tha God only reinforced that concern. It now looks as though Biden will have no other choice but to pick an African American woman as his running mate.
So, if that's the case, why not Kamala Harris or Val Demings? Both are certainly qualified and would make excellent vice presidents. I have already pontificated at great length about my reservations concerning Harris. Put succinctly, she doesn't poll well with either blacks or progressives. Her outreach among both groups would be dubious at best. As for Demings, I'm not a big fan of running mates that come from the House. Just ask Mitt Romney how effective Paul Ryan was for him in 2012. While Ryan's district did vote for Romney, Wisconsin itself went to Obama. Also, her past experience as Chief of Police in Orlando, where the department was cited multiple times for using excess force could be problematic. If the aim is to attract African Americans to vote for you, it's typically not a good idea to have a running mate who oversaw a department that had issues with that community. See Pete Buttigieg and Amy Klobuchar for reference.
Which brings me back to Abrams. Why the change of heart? Well, for starters, her interview on Lawrence O'Donnell's show the other week convinced me she's ready. In short, it was one of the best performances I've seen from a potential VP candidate in quite some time. She had command of the issues and an almost Obama-like presence about her. Just having her on the ticket puts Georgia in play and both North Carolina and Florida in the win column, the latter going to Trump in 2016 by a single point.
And that's the biggest reason for going with Abrams. If we assume that Biden has the center lane covered - a given at this point - then it's imperative he pick someone who can help him where he needs the most help. And that would be with progressives AND millennials. Abrams checks off every box on the scoresheet. She's an African American woman (check), she's a progressive (check), and because of her age, she can relate to and, hopefully, inspire younger voters (check). In betting parlance, she's the political equivalent of a trifecta.
As Rachel Bitecofer writes in The New York Times, "Hillary Clinton's 'do no harm' pick of Tim Kaine ended up doing her considerable harm. The strategy built around the pick ended up leaving the progressive flank vulnerable to, among other things, a sophisticated Russian propaganda and disinformation campaign."
Biden needs a running mate that can unite the party's various coalitions and "balance the ticket." Choosing Stacey Abrams would send a strong signal to the base of the party that there will be a seat at the table for everyone in a Biden Administration. And in what promises to be a turnout election, it would energize progressives in a way that hasn't happened since Obama won in '08.
Comments