2020 Presidential Election

[Bluedog]

Biden should NOT throw a "hail mary" on his VP pick based on current polls - he's seemingly well-positioned. And pick somebody who won't make a certain contingent disgusted (i.e. don't pick Klob even though she seems qualified, not worth the risk). You make a more risky VP pick when you need to pick up considerable ground. At the very least, it seems that Biden is overall competitive with Trump - don't handicap yourself with any group that's currently backing you. At least, that'd be my advice if I was his advisor. I think a relative unknown might be okay though, as long as they come off as smart/capable and have some relevant experience. Somebody more unknown would also not turn anybody off.

[JasonEvans]

My own personal view is that very few of the people on his list of 10 women would be qualified, on day 1, to be the President (but I'm sure others disagree). Of course, you could have said that too about DT during the 2016 campaign.

America rarely elects someone who actually has the experience for the job.

You mentioned Trump, who had never won elected office and had never even held an appointed government post. He defeated someone who had been in the Senate for 8 years and had been secretary of state for 4 years.

Obama had less than 1 term in the Senate under his belt when he took on a war hero who had spent 20+ years in the House and Senate.

George W Bush had been governor of Texas for 5 years, but everyone agreed that Texas governor was a pretty weak position as governors go. His opponent had been 8 years as VP and was a longtime members of congress and the senate.

Given that we love to elect Presidents who are vastly less qualified than their opponent, I don't see how some gaps in experience would be disqualifying for all these potential Biden VPs.

-Jason "and, as previously noted, history is full of VP picks who were not even close to qualified to be President on day one" Evans

[OldPhiKap]

Biden should NOT throw a "hail mary" on his VP pick based on current polls - he's seemingly well-positioned. And pick somebody who won't make a certain contingent disgusted (i.e. don't pick Klob even though she seems qualified, not worth the risk). You make a more risky VP pick when you need to pick up considerable ground. At the very least, it seems that Biden is overall competitive with Trump - don't handicap yourself with any group that's currently backing you. At least, that'd be my advice if I was his advisor. I think a relative unknown might be okay though, as long as they come off as smart/capable and have some relevant experience. Somebody more unknown would also not turn anybody off.

Unknown also means unvetted. Sarah Palin is a great example of that.

I agree with your points. Biden needs an easy par, not a challenging birdie.

And all of that, along with the events we are seeing in the streets of our nation right now, points me to Kamala Harris.

[duke79]

Biden should NOT throw a "hail mary" on his VP pick based on current polls - he's seemingly well-positioned. And pick somebody who won't make a certain contingent disgusted (i.e. don't pick Klob even though she seems qualified, not worth the risk). You make a more risky VP pick when you need to pick up considerable ground. At the very least, it seems that Biden is overall competitive with Trump - don't handicap yourself with any group that's currently backing you. At least, that'd be my advice if I was his advisor. I think a relative unknown might be okay though, as long as they come off as smart/capable and have some relevant experience. Somebody more unknown would also not turn anybody off.

I agree with the first part of your post. As one of the posters previously said, it's like Joe is leading the US Open golf tournament by 2 shots when he is standing on the 18th tee in the last round. He just needs to get his drive in the fairway (unlike Phil Mickelson at Winged Foot several years ago), get his second shot (assuming a par 4 18th hole) near or on the green and then avoid, at all costs, a double bogey or worse (unlike Jean Van de Velde at the British Open).

I'm not sure that I agree with you about picking a relative unknown (and if they had the experience and smarts to be President, would they be an unknown?). I REALLY think that he needs to pick someone that (enough) voters view as being "presidential".

[Tripping William]

I agree with the first part of your post. As one of the posters previously said, it's like Joe is leading the US Open golf tournament by 2 shots when he is standing on the 18th tee in the last round. He just needs to get his drive in the fairway (unlike Phil Mickelson at Winged Foot several years ago), get his second shot (assuming a par 4 18th hole) near or on the green and then avoid, at all costs, a double bogey or worse (unlike Jean Van de Velde at the British Open).

I'm not sure that I agree with you about picking a relative unknown (and if they had the experience and smarts to be President, would they be an unknown?). I REALLY think that he needs to pick someone that (enough) voters view as being "presidential".

It's June 5th. The election is just over five months away, in a year in which every single day seems to bring something new and almost completely unexpected. 18th tee? We're maybe to the 5th green here at historic Oakmont.

[Bluedog]

I agree with the first part of your post. As one of the posters previously said, it's like Joe is leading the US Open golf tournament by 2 shots when he is standing on the 18th tee in the last round. He just needs to get his drive in the fairway (unlike Phil Mickelson at Winged Foot several years ago), get his second shot (assuming a par 4 18th hole) near or on the green and then avoid, at all costs, a double bogey or worse (unlike Jean Van de Velde at the British Open).

I'm not sure that I agree with you about picking a relative unknown (and if they had the experience and smarts to be President, would they be an unknown?). I REALLY think that he needs to pick someone that (enough) voters view as being "presidential".

Yes, fair enough. I suppose if they have some relevant experience they wouldn't be all THAT unknown. But it's not like most people know the vast majority of governors & senators of states they are not a part of. They perhaps know them if they ran in the Presidential primaries. So, I guess I was trying to say somebody who hasn't been much on the national scene, but has leaderships positions at the state level or within the House/Senate.

[dudog84]

Of the 28 Democratic candidates, I would rate five as qualified for the job of President -- two of my exclusions would be controversial, so make it seven.

C'mon, don't tease. Some of your posts have indicated that you've spent time in the trenches. It appears you may have the most relevant experience of anyone on the board. I'd really appreciate your analysis. If you think your frank analysis would be too much for the board, is a PM possible? Like rsvman on COVID, I appreciate the expertise.

[luvdahops]

I think Klobuchar should should be on the list. She is smart, cheery, well-spoken and has a good reputation in the Senate with both parties. Also, she has been in the Senate for 14 years. Her issues as a prosecutor will be with her own party, not the Republicans. (Extra credit from ol' Sage -- she published her college senior thesis as a book -- the political controversy around building the HHH dome. Notable, but no extra credit: she interned while in college for VP Mondale.)

Harris has been in the Senate for 3 1/2 years. Yeah, I know, Barack Obama, Barack Obama, but can we agree that he is a one off? She gets credit for six years as CA Attorney Generals and four years as SF DA. She is very good at questioning, which is a real asset in the Senate. Harris will probably get a pass on her prosecutorial actions, unless there's a stink bomb in there somewhere.

Elizabeth Warren is amazing on the stump (some demerits from being a championship debater), but she can make her speeches sing. Two issues, for me at elast: she is about to turn 71 and that ain't great with a 77 YO presidential candidate. Second, she is not exactly in line with Biden's positions. A lot of VP selections are based on personal relations and confidence -- forging a partnership -- Clinton-Gore, Bush-Cheney, Obama-Biden.

Val Demings, Stacy Abrams, Susan Rice? Enough for today.

A third major issue is that Warren is very polarizing, even among Democrats, and would arguably drive GOP turnout more than the others under consideration. IMHO, these issues together (age, fit with Biden, polarizing personality) should disqualify her from real consideration, though I would not be at all surprised to see her with a Cabinet role - a much better fit, again IMHO - in a Biden Administration.

[tommy]

Unknown also means unvetted. Sarah Palin is a great example of that.

I agree with your points. Biden needs an easy par, not a challenging birdie.

And all of that, along with the events we are seeing in the streets of our nation right now, points me to Kamala Harris.

OPK I agree with most everything you write on these boards, plus you're a Deadhead, but sorry I just don't see what Harris brings that Biden needs, and there are some serious downsides to her. The young people that Biden would like to get out to vote are not going to be happy with a former prosecutor, and she was the chief prosecutor of California, recently. I think the criticisms of her in that role are unfair, but they're there. Nor will those angry about George Floyd and the larger issues that awful event has highlighted, be real happy about a prosecutor. Then you have the fact that she is from San Francisco. The Willie Brown connection. Whether she is or not, she comes across to many as wine and cheese, big city elite. Ripe for attack from the right as a limousine liberal. Oh and California itself is in the bag, obviously.

Yes, she is of color. But for the love of God if Joe Biden needs to have an African-American on the ticket as the VP in order to win African-American votes, or even to motivate African-Americans to get out and vote, in this climate, with this opponent, then he has gigantic problems anyway. He simply has to feel confident that he will dominate the African American vote, even without an African-American VP on the ticket with him. That's not to say he should be complacent. He needs to continue to speak to the concerns and aspirations of those voters, but he has other constituencies that he needs to shore up much moreso than Af-Ams, in my opinion.

The rest of the field, in my view, shapes up like this:

Klobuchar: would've been my pick personally but I think the George Floyd atrocity in her state, when she was a former prosecutor in that very state, which by the way has a terrible history of police abuses against Af-Ams, essentially eliminates her. Too bad as she would've been excellent in those upper midwestern states that could essentially clinch this election for Biden. And she's clearly prepared to be President.

Warren: No way can you have two white Alta Cockers on the ticket, especially when one of them is easily viewed by many (and easily tarred by Trump) as a Bernie Sanders clone/socialist. I dont think she is that, but she is an easy target. Very polarizing person. Not a "lay up for an easy par" kind of candidate.

Lujan Grisham: Solid candidate, but what does she really bring you? Would help in Arizona. Fine. What else? Not in the midwest. What other swing states would she help in? And the bigger issue with her, to me, is this: the idea with her I suppose would be to generate excitement and turnout among Hispanic voters. That would be great for Biden if it happened. But what evidence is there that Hispanic voters will turn out in big numbers if a Hispanic candidate is on the ticket? Maybe they would. Maybe they wouldn't. But it's an awfully big risk to take. If she doesn't motivate Hispanic voters to come out in large numbers, there is a huge opportunity cost there. Big opportunity lost that another VP candidate might've helped in another important area or with another important constituency.

Abrams: Simply not experienced enough. Would she even be able to deliver Georgia? I'll believe it when I see it. I can think of a couple of positions in a Biden Administration that would be terrific for her, but not VP.

Demings: This one intrigues me. Yes, she is a former police chief. Some won't like that. Some will. But unlike Harris, she projects as closer to the ground, closer to the people. She's from the south. She's a beer and a BBQ. Harris is avocado toast and Chardonnay. And of course she's from the I-4 corridor. Many commentators are saying that if Biden can somehow untie the Gordian knot that is Florida, this race is over. I think it's safe to say that the Democrats would win California - Harris's state -- if they ran a trained seal against Trump. Or an untrained one.

I know there are others that are being speculated upon, like Susan Rice or the Mayor of Atlanta, and Biden could go there I suppose. (of course the pipe dreams are Michele Obama and Oprah. Pick either of those and the race is over.) Or he could otherwise go off the board.

But to me, if it's not going to be Klobuchar, it should be Governor Whitmer of Michigan. Biden wants to project, above all else, reasonable, middle of the road, adult, rational, and competent. That's the contrast he wants to draw. Whitmer brings that to the ticket. She has executive experience. She's ready to step in if necessary. And of course she clinches Michigan, and would put Biden in a very strong position in the other upper midwest states that, if he can win, leaves Trump with VERY little margin for error in the other swing states. Yes, she's white. That simply can't be a disqualifier. The object is to win the election. Yes she's taken some heat for how she's handled the virus and the shutdown and all of that. But from what I've read, she's actually gotten very high marks from Michigan residents, as a whole, on her handling of the whole issue. So what exactly would be the downside of Whitmer?

Summing up, again assuming Klobuchar is out, my preference list would be:
1. Home run Hail Mary either Michele or Oprah
2. Whitmer
3. Demings

And then a pretty big gap between them and everyone else.

[duke79]

America rarely elects someone who actually has the experience for the job.

You mentioned Trump, who had never won elected office and had never even held an appointed government post. He defeated someone who had been in the Senate for 8 years and had been secretary of state for 4 years.

Obama had less than 1 term in the Senate under his belt when he took on a war hero who had spent 20+ years in the House and Senate.

George W Bush had been governor of Texas for 5 years, but everyone agreed that Texas governor was a pretty weak position as governors go. His opponent had been 8 years as VP and was a longtime members of congress and the senate.

Given that we love to elect Presidents who are vastly less qualified than their opponent, I don't see how some gaps in experience would be disqualifying for all these potential Biden VPs.

-Jason "and, as previously noted, history is full of VP picks who were not even close to qualified to be President on day one" Evans

Yea, I hear what you're saying. No doubt we have elected many people to be president (at least since WW II but really going all the way back to 1776) who have not had not much relevant experience (including, obviously, the current resident of the WH) for running the country. Whether or not this has been good or bad for the country is debatable. And no doubt we have elected many VP's (as part of a president/VP team) who have had even less experience and credentials.

I'm not saying that gaps in their experience and/or credentials disqualify the current list of democratic VP candidates (in an absolute sense) but I just wonder if (some or many) voters will be less likely to vote for Joe B, IF they have serious misgivings about the qualifications of the VP candidate to take over, if the need arises (given Joe's age and what some people perceive to be his declining mental abilities). Maybe I'm making a mistake of imposing my own misgivings on to other voters?

[Phredd3]

Personally, I think the "ready to jump in at a moment's notice in case Biden drops dead" argument is a bit overblown. I think of it more like an intense mentoring period for the next Democratic candidate. Get someone eloquent, charismatic, enthusiastic, and popular with the younger voters who are now out there on the streets. In short, all the things Biden is not. This person's job in the campaign is to keep hope alive and enthusiasm for the party high so that young people and the currently-motivated protestors (of all races, but particularly POC) can keep the momentum going all the way in for the next five months and will actually show up to vote.

Turnout is everything, and it is not going to be Joe's strong suit. Experience will come to the new VP with on-the-job training and Joe's mentorship. He's the father figure that keeps things together and restores order to Democracy, and she's the trainee getting ready for the next round who keeps the base revved up.

There is still a limited amount of time to make a selection. When enthusiasm starts to wane and people can start to see the down sides of Biden, that's the time to step in with the newly-announced, motivating running mate who can carry the floor. As of right now, my choice would be Keisha Lance Bottoms, but we can see how things shake out. I'd be vetting her like crazy, though.

[jv001]

I’m thinking more and more it could be Michelle Lujan Grisham or Keisha Lance Bottoms. Most of the others on Cilliza’s list bring significant negatives and/or controversy. Biden doesn’t need a pick that he will have to defend too strongly. That could end up being a net negative. He needs to make a positive or at least neutral pick, even it is someone who is not particularly well known at the moment.

As I posted way back, I like Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms as the VP on the Democrat ticket. Her speech on the death of Mr. Floyd was a home run. She has been a Judge, a City Council member and now Mayor of Atlanta. She's the Chair of Community Development & Housing Committee for the US Conference of Mayors. Yes, she has not held a high government office other than Governor but Obama didn't have much experience either. She's a graduate of Florida A&M with Doctorate from Georgia State University. In this climate of unrest, she would be a great addition to the ticket. Plus she's the daughter of R&B singer, Major Lance. That get's my attention as I loved Major Lance.

[sagegrouse]

America rarely elects someone who actually has the experience for the job.

You mentioned Trump, who had never won elected office and had never even held an appointed government post. He defeated someone who had been in the Senate for 8 years and had been secretary of state for 4 years.

Obama had less than 1 term in the Senate under his belt when he took on a war hero who had spent 20+ years in the House and Senate.

George W Bush had been governor of Texas for 5 years, but everyone agreed that Texas governor was a pretty weak position as governors go. His opponent had been 8 years as VP and was a longtime members of congress and the senate.

Given that we love to elect Presidents who are vastly less qualified than their opponent, I don't see how some gaps in experience would be disqualifying for all these potential Biden VPs.

-Jason "and, as previously noted, history is full of VP picks who were not even close to qualified to be President on day one" Evans

Bush not only had been governor of Texas but also was a member of the Bush clan, a political dynasty. His grandfather Prescott Bush was senator from Connecticut. His Dad had every government job imaginable. His brother was governor of Florida W himself served on White House staff.

You did not mention Bill Clinton, W's predecessor. Sure he had been governor of Arkansas for 12 years. But Bill Clinton was widely, widely connected, not only in America but around the world -- amazing ability to stay in touch with people he had met at Yale Law, Oxford, etc. Very useful experience for an American president.

[luvdahops]

As I posted way back, I like Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms as the VP on the Democrat ticket. Her speech on the death of Mr. Floyd was a home run. She has been a Judge, a City Council member and now Mayor of Atlanta. She's the Chair of Community Development & Housing Committee for the US Conference of Mayors. Yes, she has not held a high government office other than Governor but Obama didn't have much experience either. She's a graduate of Florida A&M with Doctorate from Georgia State University. In this climate of unrest, she would be a great addition to the ticket. Plus she's the daughter of R&B singer, Major Lance. That get's my attention as I loved Major Lance.

Did not know that. I love Major Lance, too, and will likely be humming "Um Um Um Um Um Um" the rest of the day...

[jv001]

Did not know that. I love Major Lance, too, and will likely be humming "Um Um Um Um Um Um" the rest of the day...

Along with: "Hey little girl"..."Ain't it a shame"..."You don't want me no more"... "It's all right" and many more.

[duke79]

OPK I agree with most everything you write on these boards, plus you're a Deadhead, but sorry I just don't see what Harris brings that Biden needs, and there are some serious downsides to her. The young people that Biden would like to get out to vote are not going to be happy with a former prosecutor, and she was the chief prosecutor of California, recently. I think the criticisms of her in that role are unfair, but they're there. Nor will those angry about George Floyd and the larger issues that awful event has highlighted, be real happy about a prosecutor. Then you have the fact that she is from San Francisco. The Willie Brown connection. Whether she is or not, she comes across to many as wine and cheese, big city elite. Ripe for attack from the right as a limousine liberal. Oh and California itself is in the bag, obviously.

Yes, she is of color. But for the love of God if Joe Biden needs to have an African-American on the ticket as the VP in order to win African-American votes, or even to motivate African-Americans to get out and vote, in this climate, with this opponent, then he has gigantic problems anyway. He simply has to feel confident that he will dominate the African American vote, even without an African-American VP on the ticket with him. That's not to say he should be complacent. He needs to continue to speak to the concerns and aspirations of those voters, but he has other constituencies that he needs to shore up much moreso than Af-Ams, in my opinion.

The rest of the field, in my view, shapes up like this:

Klobuchar: would've been my pick personally but I think the George Floyd atrocity in her state, when she was a former prosecutor in that very state, which by the way has a terrible history of police abuses against Af-Ams, essentially eliminates her. Too bad as she would've been excellent in those upper midwestern states that could essentially clinch this election for Biden. And she's clearly prepared to be President.

Warren: No way can you have two white Alta Cockers on the ticket, especially when one of them is easily viewed by many (and easily tarred by Trump) as a Bernie Sanders clone/socialist. I dont think she is that, but she is an easy target. Very polarizing person. Not a "lay up for an easy par" kind of candidate.

Lujan Grisham: Solid candidate, but what does she really bring you? Would help in Arizona. Fine. What else? Not in the midwest. What other swing states would she help in? And the bigger issue with her, to me, is this: the idea with her I suppose would be to generate excitement and turnout among Hispanic voters. That would be great for Biden if it happened. But what evidence is there that Hispanic voters will turn out in big numbers if a Hispanic candidate is on the ticket? Maybe they would. Maybe they wouldn't. But it's an awfully big risk to take. If she doesn't motivate Hispanic voters to come out in large numbers, there is a huge opportunity cost there. Big opportunity lost that another VP candidate might've helped in another important area or with another important constituency.

Abrams: Simply not experienced enough. Would she even be able to deliver Georgia? I'll believe it when I see it. I can think of a couple of positions in a Biden Administration that would be terrific for her, but not VP.

Demings: This one intrigues me. Yes, she is a former police chief. Some won't like that. Some will. But unlike Harris, she projects as closer to the ground, closer to the people. She's from the south. She's a beer and a BBQ. Harris is avocado toast and Chardonnay. And of course she's from the I-4 corridor. Many commentators are saying that if Biden can somehow untie the Gordian knot that is Florida, this race is over. I think it's safe to say that the Democrats would win California - Harris's state -- if they ran a trained seal against Trump. Or an untrained one.

I know there are others that are being speculated upon, like Susan Rice or the Mayor of Atlanta, and Biden could go there I suppose. (of course the pipe dreams are Michele Obama and Oprah. Pick either of those and the race is over.) Or he could otherwise go off the board.

But to me, if it's not going to be Klobuchar, it should be Governor Whitmer of Michigan. Biden wants to project, above all else, reasonable, middle of the road, adult, rational, and competent. That's the contrast he wants to draw. Whitmer brings that to the ticket. She has executive experience. She's ready to step in if necessary. And of course she clinches Michigan, and would put Biden in a very strong position in the other upper midwest states that, if he can win, leaves Trump with VERY little margin for error in the other swing states. Yes, she's white. That simply can't be a disqualifier. The object is to win the election. Yes she's taken some heat for how she's handled the virus and the shutdown and all of that. But from what I've read, she's actually gotten very high marks from Michigan residents, as a whole, on her handling of the whole issue. So what exactly would be the downside of Whitmer?

Summing up, again assuming Klobuchar is out, my preference list would be:
1. Home run Hail Mary either Michele or Oprah
2. Whitmer
3. Demings

And then a pretty big gap between them and everyone else.

Thanks for your long and detailed analysis! I think you're (more or less) correct about almost all of the VP candidates. The one statement on which I might argue with you, though, is the one highlighted above. Maybe I'm completely wrong, but I really think that if Joe B does not choose a WOC, then the African-American communities across the country are going to be very disappointed and very angry (given what has happened in the last two weeks and the fact that A-A voters in South Carolina SAVED his candidacy) and it would not surprise me at all if many A-A's did not vote at all. Maybe Joe can still win in the electoral college with a reduced A-A vote (and no doubt he will win 90% plus of those that do vote) but I'm not sure I would take that chance, if I were in his shoes.

I don't know much about Gov. Whitmer but, in other times, I could see where she would be a good choice.

Maybe Demings is the best choice (and I had never even heard of her before).

As I have said before, I think it is a tough choice and there really is no "slam-dunk" or perfect candidate out there.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Thanks for your long and detailed analysis! I think you're (more or less) correct about almost all of the VP candidates. The one statement on which I might argue with you, though, is the one highlighted above. Maybe I'm completely wrong, but I really think that if Joe B does not choose a WOC, then the African-American communities across the country are going to be very disappointed and very angry (given what has happened in the last two weeks and the fact that A-A voters in South Carolina SAVED his candidacy) and it would not surprise me at all if many A-A's did not vote at all. Maybe Joe can still win in the electoral college with a reduced A-A vote (and no doubt he will win 90% plus of those that do vote) but I'm not sure I would take that chance, if I were in his shoes.

I don't know much about Gov. Whitmer but, in other times, I could see where she would be a good choice.

Maybe Demings is the best choice (and I had never even heard of her before).

As I have said before, I think it is a tough choice and there really is no "slam-dunk" or perfect candidate out there.

If a large portion of folks out there protesting translate to the ballot box, it won't matter who Biden nominates.

Voter turnout might be higher than you expect. A lot of people aren't very happy right now.

[luvdahops]

Along with: "Hey little girl"..."Ain't it a shame"..."You don't want me no more"... "It's all right" and many more.

And let's not forget "The Monkey Time", either

[lotusland]

Thanks for your long and detailed analysis! I think you're (more or less) correct about almost all of the VP candidates. The one statement on which I might argue with you, though, is the one highlighted above. Maybe I'm completely wrong, but I really think that if Joe B does not choose a WOC, then the African-American communities across the country are going to be very disappointed and very angry (given what has happened in the last two weeks and the fact that A-A voters in South Carolina SAVED his candidacy) and it would not surprise me at all if many A-A's did not vote at all. Maybe Joe can still win in the electoral college with a reduced A-A vote (and no doubt he will win 90% plus of those that do vote) but I'm not sure I would take that chance, if I were in his shoes.

I don't know much about Gov. Whitmer but, in other times, I could see where she would be a good choice.

Maybe Demings is the best choice (and I had never even heard of her before).

As I have said before, I think it is a tough choice and there really is no "slam-dunk" or perfect candidate out there.

Joe needs more than Luke warm African-American support. He needs Obama level turnout in Milwaukee, Cleveland, Detroit and Philadelphia. He needs college educated women to turnout in greater numbers. He also needs someone who won’t scare away the moderate HRC voters from Wall Street and private industry both of whom are rightly scared to death of Elizabeth Warren. Kamala Harris seems to check all those boxes. There may be others but Joe probably has the rust belt/union vote covered pretty well himself. The problem with the young voters is they don’t vote in high enough numbers. My son is a senior in college and very interested in politics but he’s never voted because he doesn’t plan ahead to request an absentee ballot and he’s not registered in his college town. He never thinks about it until it’s too late. I’m sure I never voted in college either.

[bundabergdevil]

Joe’ official.

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaig...tic-nomination