• CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    I’m still shocked no one is taking seriously the “Democrats should pick Romney as Presidential choice because reasons” that has seriously been floated.

    I wonder: how many times has someone given a big platform to someone so they can suggest that the Republicans should select a Democrat as their choice? Probably never? Why is it that people always say - with a straight face and very, very seriously - that it is Democrats that should run Republicans on their tickets, because something something unity and tone.

    • wreel@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      3 months ago

      Because it’s not a good idea. They select him and don’t convert Republican voters, lose a good portion of the progressive base and only get marginal, less reliable, swing voters with that move. That’s at least a ten point loss right there.

      It’s going to be a safe bet like Josh Shapiro or, slightly less safe, Cooper.

      • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Yeah, it’s of course a ridiculous idea that moderates and Republicans seem to suggest that Democrats do, but I never see anyone given a big platform to suggest that, say, the Republicans should force donnie to step down and select Hillary as the centrist option, for example. I mean, the New York Fucking Times let Aaron Sorkin suggest that Mitt Romney should be the Democratic pick. I mean, what. The. Actual. Fuck.

        https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/21/opinion/biden-west-wing-aaron-sorkin.html

        Add this to another in a long list to why I laugh right out loud in someone’s face when they insist that NYT is “liberal”.

        It’s also a near-perfect demonstration of Murc’s Law - it’s not up to Republicans to amend their awful and despicable ways, no, the Democratic Party has to nominate someone like Mitt Romney in the hopes that would somehow heal a divide (by coming all the way over to the right, basically) that the right wing is entirely responsible for.

          • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 months ago

            The irony is that liz is much more right wing than donnie; she just happens to believe in the rule of law.

        • _stranger_@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          As a leftist, you kind of should hate the NYT opinion essays. They’re written by people who are explicitly invited to write the opposite of the NYT’s editorial board’s point of view. The old name was “Op Ed” which stands for “Opposite the editorial opinion”. They changed it because the term started to lose meaning when the op-ed no longer showed up literally opposite the editorial column in the printed newspaper, and is instead its own page on a website.

          https://open.nytimes.com/how-we-redesigned-the-new-york-times-opinion-essay-ad5e0270f5bc

          The entire point is to not be an echo chamber. The redesign makes it very clear that it’s an opinionated essay written by a guest by putting the words “Opinion - Guest Essay” in bold and red at the top.

      • jj4211@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Cooper

        Was curious why “less safe”? I was thinking that’s a decent strategic pick, a southern democrat that’s able to win the same elections that Trump and Robinson won, while still pretty well aligned with the democrat platform broadly. He has a good chance to immediately be 16 electoral votes, he has to vacate his governorship this year anyway, so you don’t vacate a known factor in favor of a less known factor. Pandering to Pennsylvania may be a bit more likely with more bang for the buck though given that Pennsylvania has historically been more “winnable” and has more votes though…

        • wreel@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          I say that only because the lift effect may not actually turn it into a locked swing state. NC has been more lean-right than a true swing state so it’s, in my mind, riskier than picking the PA governor for the reasons that you highlight. But regardless, I think any of Shapiro, Cooper or Kelly would be a great balance to the ticket and i would not at all be disappointed with any of them. Honestly it’s an embarrassment of riches with regards to potential VPs and a great position for Democrats.

    • Cethin@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      4 months ago

      I don’t like that option, but I do think it would be effective to disrupt the Republican party. It’d really force a lot of modern “Republicans” to face what the party has become.

      I think it’d be better to out him as VP under Harris than president though. To have a traditionally popular Republican candidate on the ticket would give them a huge platform to point out that the MAGA party is not the Republican party many supported before. It’s just Fascists who stole it because people were too dumb to pay attention.

      • barsquid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        We are two bullets away from a theocratic nutjob president, that’s a really concerning thought with the large number of Repub terrorists in this country.