I don’t like him.
Politically, it’s a very smart move.
Cause I’m still voting D here, even not liking him. They’re trying to pull all the undecideds they can.
Sure. He’s white, straight, and male, to balance out the ticket for racists/sexists/homophobes. Package him, ship him out, and let’s defeat Trump and Project 2025!
He’s a pair of wraparound sunglasses and a selfie in a truck away from looking like a lot of Trump’s base. That sort of thing helps because we should not assume
votershumans are rational.Trump’s base is voting for Trump… Going after them even a little is a waste of everyone’s time, energy, and money.
Yes, but if people adjacent to Trump’s base see themselves on the Democratic ticket they’ll be less likely be alienated from the party.
I’ve lived in Trump country. For every Red Hat there’s five or six undecided guys who work/drink with them. If they see a guy who could also be pounding Rolling Rocks with them on the Democratic ticket it will help a little bit. And when there’s 10,000 votes between us and fascism we need all the help we can get.
To repeat: Stop assuming humans will be rational.
Also astronaut, veteran, and fairly progressive.
And from a swing state
And married to a victim of an assassination attempt.
I fall to see the relevance… can someone enlighten me?
He stood by his wife, then-US Representative Gabby Giffords, after she was shot in the head during a 2011 assassination attempt.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Tucson_shooting
Basically, he also gets points for just being a good husband.
I see, thnx!
Could you shortly define “fairly progressive” in this context for a non-American? (Nordic, specifically.)
Don’t ask lemmings to define people’s progressive cred rofl
Literally nobody is left wing. It’s a pure, unattainable ideal, untainted by mortals and their worldly failings.
I was more interested in how he replies than the actual answer.
Sort of making them confront their own statements.
Likely more to the right than center, as many Democrats would be outside of America.
Right?! How about instead of “balancing” the ticket for bigots on the right, we balance it for progressives on the left?!
Oh but the left never votes and the center right always does… Yeah, because the center right always has at least 2 candidates to choose from while the left has none.
Believe me, I agree with you; I wish I had a true Progressive to vote for this November! By the way, were not really balancing the ticket for right-wingers, it’s more courting undecided voters, whether they be left, center, or right. Like it or not, the swing states will decide this election. And we can’t let Donald Trump and Project 2025 win, there’s too much at stake.
Please vote, volunteer, and donate for Kamala Harris. When she’s president, turn that attention to getting progressives elected. Showing the American people an improvement in their lives is the only way to avoid these narrow 50/50 splits between good and bad candidates as we reform and improve things…
I don’t believe there are that many undecided voters in the center… The “undecided” voters are all on the far left… And they’re deciding whether to show up, or not show up at all. Going after them by showing that the Dems will actually be fighting for them (against the oligarchy) is the smart move. The center is already decided.
However, I am open to the possibility that what’s true on a national level might not necessarily be true in the swing states… So if anyone has any studies comparing the center undecided with the left undecided in the swing states, I’d love to see it
He does not support Medicare for all, and also does not support the green new deal, according to his wiki. He also supported increased oil drilling.
So he’s pretty moderate right IMO, which sucks. I hope he’s not her choice.
His position on healthcare seems to be Medicare for All Who Want It, without forcing people to drop their private health insurance if they prefer to go that route.
Yeah, see this is why I was so attached to Biden. The average Democrat isn’t really all that left. All this stuff with climate change and unions under Biden was very much an anomaly, and we’re probably returning to a certain amount of status quo with Harris.
Idk, I could be wrong; maybe she’s super left and this guy’s being floated as a gift to the New York Timeses of the world so the ticket will be acceptable to the six figure Manhattan shitheads that their editors are friends with, so they won’t print bullshit about her to try to lose her the election. And she still doesn’t want to destroy American democracy and all climate change remediation since Obama, which makes her worth voting for. But yeah we can expect a certain amount of corporate bullshit to come back into the equation now, I think. 😕
The average Democrat is to the left of their representatives on a lot of things, including climate change: https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/08/09/what-the-data-says-about-americans-views-of-climate-change/
Kelly is not an average Democrat representative, he’s definitely on the right end of the caucus.
True, but he is representing AZ, and technically he should be following the wishes of his constituents.
The real problem with picking him I would think, would be opening a senate seat in a purple/red state like AZ. The last thing the senate needs is another Sinema (or an even worse republican ).
Not a problem. The governor of Arizona, a Democrat, will fill that seat, and Arizona law requires she fill it with a Democrat.
From what I’ve heard, it sounds like her senator policy stances were left of Joe? But chances are, her vp will prolly be more center, and who knows what her policies look like when she has to take stances that aren’t representing just California.
Joe did a pretty good job as president courting progressives though. It was all much further left than his time in the senate. Still not far enough left for me, but better. I hope Harris follows that. The population generally is moving in that direction, so they need to.
Yet the people around this instance thinks he’s a great VP candidate…
Funny how you’re upvoted a lot for mentioning this, but someone else does, then it’s a downvote parade.
If the goal is preventing Trump from winning and shoring up harris’s weak points, Kelly is a pretty good choice. We can argue about drilling and green energy after Trump is in jail for all his crimes.
Trump is never going to jail. For fuck sakes, when will you stop drinking that kool-aid? It’s a practical fantasy at this point. If he hadn’t gone to jail for two impeachments and so far hasn’t gone to jail for the recent convictions - what makes you think he’ll ever go to jail now? Get over it.
I think it’s a healthy balance, on the ticket, that helps reach those purple states more.
I think he’s pretty electable and, right now, anyone who helps win is good.
I think “electable” is dead in the water and, for now, a thing of the past. What the Democrats need is someone who will get dems to the polls come election day. Luke warm glass of milk isn’t going to cut it because MAGA is fired up. Dems need to be fired up too.
What the Democrats need is someone who will get dems to the polls come election day.
Democrats in contested states.
We win the popularity contest, time and again, but because we keep picking blue-state Democrats, we keep losing elections.
If we would ever pick a Democratic candidate who has actually won an election in a red state, the election would be a runaway landslide, and the GOP would have to come crawling left.
The Green New Deal was a white paper produced by a DC think tank. Obama implemented some of it. Biden implemented a lot of it through the climate change bill.
Jeff Jackson from NC would be my vote. Dude has been pretty great for communicating with constituents, seems to genuinely give a shit, and is pretty progressive.
Bawww, some people in this magazine are funny.
Cwy to the modewators, shitheads. lol
wat
Did you even respond to the correct post??
Probably not since it could very well be a bot and it just posted it’s copy pasta in the wrong spot.
Huh?
I hope trump wins out of spite against the snowflakes who’re overly sensitive and don’t understand the implications of how weak of a VP Mark Kelly is.
Almost 10 comments in this thread and near 400 words from you without one single explanation of WHY Mark Kelly is a bad choice. You’re one example of why voters are so uninformed, you would rather argue than present anything credible for others to learn.
He’s scared. He’s low-educated. He knows it guarantees Harris the White House.
Nah, not going to. Some of the others who have commented have stated their reasons and I sided with them. Perhaps if you’ve taken at least a minute into my post history while you’re downvoting every comment like a little stupid child (hey this isn’t Reddit by the way so points don’t affect me in the rate I’m posting so ha). You would see what comments I’ve responded to!
Like mind blowing shit there.
I would suggest taking some time to evaluate yourself, I haven’t downvoted anything and was looking at your comments to see what your actual thoughts were since you seemed like you were informed on the subject matter (but guess not). I believe you’re the only one here worrying about votes (if it doesn’t matter why even bring it up?). If you’re here just siding with people who comment actual relevant information, just upvote and move on. You’re being the loud voice that says nothing and doesn’t add to the conversation, just making the actual information harder to find with more comments of bickering to scroll through.
Based on your personal experience, which color crayon would you say tastes the best?
You could just state you don’t understand political strategy without also insulting everyone…yikes.
Nope, with you assholes throwing the first stone, it’s no point in doing so. Why entertain assholes with trying to be serious when you pricks weren’t being serious to begin with aside from jousting because you’re ironically being triggered by my responses, huh?
You can’t have it both ways.
Lol wreck’d before I could read it, must have been a gem!
Spite, eh. You’re a turd, man.
And you’re a trolling shitlord yourself.
I want this because in addition to Kelly being a great choice, I want Gabby Giffords as 2nd lady. We need a gun reformer close to the highest office, especially given the recent potshot at the gop candidate.
HELL YES
Not just that! Fuck yeah!
So, we’d swap out a too-old guy for a younger person with a too-old guy as her backup? Sigh…
He’s 60 years young. That is younger than average for a congressman.
He can’t even collect social security for a few more years.
Mark Kelly is 60. The ideal age for a first-time presidential candidate is 57, so they can retire after two terms and retire at 65. Mark is 3 years past ideal, but still 18 years younger than Trump is now.
He and his twin brother could both complete two full terms and still be 2 years younger than Trump is now.
Mark should be at the top of the ticket, though. He is far more competitive in the contested states.
Pretty sure Kamala Harris is around that age too.
Yes, 59.
“He doesn’t have hair! That means he’s OLD!”
Can you imagine a VP debate between an actual fucking astronaut and Peter Thiel’s former blood boy?
Hell yes.
Hey guys! I’ve got a great story!
Lots of randos on Reddit, Mastadon, and Lemmy are saying “Kelly” should be the VP.
GFY Huff…
he’d be great for sure. if we could get gallego and another dem senator to replace him it would be even better. plus katie hobbs being gov would ensure republicans can’t just name whatsherfacenewslady
Anecdote time: last week a 30 year old woman I work with stated with confidence she wouldn’t be voting this year. Earlier today she told me she would be voting for Harris and asked who the vp would be. I said Shapiro, beshear, or Kelly. She looked up each of them on Wikipedia and immediately said something to the effect of, “why have I never heard of Kelly? I’d vote for this guy at the top of the ticket. I hope she picks him.”
The guy’s bio speaks for itself. Plus we’d get fun twins hijinks at the naval observatory and I think we as a nation need that.
I would love to see Mark at the top of the ticket, and Scott as his Chief of Staff.
Not that he would be a bad choice for VP but I want him to stay in the Senate. He can do more good there.
In office vs in Senate I do agree. However I think the good he can do by being on the ticket does more for the nation than if he was in the Senate and Trump won. (Not saying thats the only option but its a possible outcome)
