Josh Shapiro Is Kamala Harris' Best Bet for Veep
The Pennsylvania governor's support for school choice and occupational licensing reform is encouraging.

Vice President Kamala Harris is expected to announce her running mate next week. She is reportedly considering several governors who theoretically appeal to moderate voters in the swing states: Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, and Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear. Arizona Sen. Mark Kelly and Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg are also in the mix.
Which of these individuals would be best from a libertarian perspective is not as clear cut as it was on the Republican side, where North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum was obviously better than the alternatives. (Unfortunately, former President Donald Trump selected Ohio Sen. J.D. Vance, whose distinguishing feature is his contempt for libertarian economic policies.) Nevertheless, it's possible to parse them.
First, the national figures. Unlike the other names on the list, Buttigieg is actually a member of the current administration and has been responsible for implementing federal policies. Unfortunately, his tenure as Transportation secretary will not be remembered as particularly libertarian. While he has signaled openness to tearing down bureaucratic "barriers" in the wake of transportation-related disasters, he has not made any serious attempts to grapple with said bureaucracy. On the contrary, when things have gone wrong, he has reserved most of his ire for private companies like Southwest Airlines and Norfolk Southern, rather than the outdated and meddlesome regulators who make their jobs more difficult.
Buttigieg comes across as a technocrat rather than a progressive: He appears to believe that smart, capable people like himself should run the government and make things more efficient. When he pursued the presidency in 2020, liberal news site Vox described him as a "product of the meritocracy" and did not intend it as a compliment. He enrages the left, but this does not make him a friend to liberty, amusing though it is. His foreign policy views also seem somewhat more hawkish than other standard-issue Democrats, which is not an improvement.
Then there's Kelly. As an astronaut and the husband of former Rep. Gabby Giffords (D–Ariz.)—who was grievously wounded after being shot in the head by a deranged gunman—he is certainly an inspiring figure. However, his political positions are mostly in line with his party. He has voted in support of President Joe Biden's approved policies 95.5 percent of the time. On energy and environmental issues, he has deviated from the progressive wing of the party: He opposes the Green New Deal and has voted in favor of increased oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico. On the other hand, he is one of the more outspoken Democrats on gun control.
Arizona's U.S. senators have tended to be more individual-minded, bipartisan, and independent: see Kyrsten Sinema. For those reasons, Kelly might be slightly preferable to some of the other options.
Now for the governors. Walz and Beshear were both elected in 2018 and thus have longer records than Shapiro, who became governor of his state just last year. Alas, their tenures are not particularly inspiring, as both of them overlapped with the COVID-19 pandemic—providing an opportunity to implement policies that were anathema to liberty.
Walz implemented many of the same heavy-handed, liberty-infringing mitigation policies as other blue state governors; he also maintained a government hotline for people to call and report their neighbors for violating social distancing rules. When Republicans complained about it, he replied: "We're not going to take down a phone number that people can call to keep their families safe." This alone should be disqualifying.
For his part, Beshear attempted to keep lockdowns, mask mandates, and school closures in place—well into the pandemic. In fact, he reimposed masks on public school students in August 2021, saying, "We are to the point where we cannot allow our kids to go into these buildings unprotected, unvaccinated and face this delta variant." This is also disqualifying.
It's nice that Walz and Beshear are supportive of legalizing, or at least decriminalizing, marijuana. But it's hard to look past the whole wrestling-masks-onto-5-year-olds thing. The best thing to be said for them is that they are not Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer.
That leaves Shapiro, who has had mercifully less time in office to do things that would offend libertarians. To his credit, he has supported several encouraging initiatives. One of his first actions after taking office was to eliminate the college degree requirement for government jobs. He also made some small progress on reforming the state's occupational licensing system. He is a supporter, to a degree, of school choice; he ultimately vetoed a voucher bill after facing significant pressure from teachers unions, however.
Given how popular he is in Pennsylvania—a must-win state for Harris—Shapiro has emerged as the likeliest veep pick in recent days. Like Buttigieg, Shapiro seems to make the far-left very upset: The New Republic called him "The One Vice Presidential Pick Who Could Ruin Democratic Unity." While that sounds entertaining enough, the main knock on him from the left is that he harshly condemned the recent pro-Palestinian protests on college campuses and is vocally supportive of Israel. For libertarians who would like to see the U.S. become less involved in Middle Eastern affairs and stop spending American tax dollars on costly foreign wars, these are reasonable concerns.
At the same time, it's hard to imagine Vice President Shapiro steering a markedly different course on foreign policy than any of the other options; on most other issues, he is slightly better. All this contributes to a weak—very weak—libertarian preference for Shapiro.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Then there's Kelly. As an astronaut and the husband of former Rep. Gabby Giffords (D–Ariz.)—who was grievously wounded after being shot in the head by a deranged gunman—he is certainly an inspiring figure.
WTF are you talking about?
He is a fucking crook and an actual grifter.
His company worldview brought in Chinese investors for high altitude balloons. He used his political connections in Pima County to get ridiculous tax incentives and county funding (direct cash). His company laid off half their staff in under 2 years.
His balloon company has had multiple hydrogen explosions feel at nearby Raytheon, who does work with explosives in the factory, and the airport.
Just 2 months ago the company had a balloon drift over the Tucson Airport at low altitude.
Kelly is an astronaut. Many people look up to them as heroic.
As opposed to a reality TV star, for example.
Apparently you pedos can't read.
ONE word -- astronaut -- which is an actual accomplishment, is what you focus on, while TFA spends 21 words on something that happened to his wife and he had nothing to do with, except, I suppose, not divorcing her, which is an accomplishment but is not mentioned.
Speaking of personal accomplishments, here's yours:
A few years back you posted kiddy porn to this site, and your initial handle was banned. The link below details all the evidence surrounding that ban. A decent person would honor that ban and stay away from Reason. Instead you keep showing up, acting as if all people should just be ok with a kiddy-porn-posting asshole hanging around. Since I cannot get you to stay away, the only thing I can do is post this boilerplate.
https://reason.com/2022/08/06/biden-comforts-the-comfortable/?comments=true#comment-9635836
You would love a gun grabber.
This is my rifle, this is my gun — that's the kind of gun pedo likes to grab.
Never said I loved him you moron. Just that astronaut is a respectable vocation as opposed to reality TV con man and fake businessman.
An astronaut is just cargo.
Astronaut ≠ good politician
Yes. See Glenn, John.
Just that astronaut is a respectable vocation as opposed to reality TV con man
Remember when Astronaut Jim Irwin, 8th person to walk on the Moon, led several expeditions to Mount Ararat, Turkey, in search of the remains of Noah’s Ark, and was injured during one of them had to be transported down the mountain on horseback?
Remember when shuttle astronaut Lisa Nowak drove 900 miles from Houston to Orlando, Florida, wearing adult diapers to avoid bathroom breaks, in an attempt to kill Colleen Shipman, her romantic rival?
Remember when astronaut Anne McClain was accused by her estranged wife of improperly accessing her bank account from the International Space Station (ISS)?
Shrike is an idiot.
Shrike likes to rape little boys too.
Remember guys. Shrike isn't a Democrat.
I’m a liberal you lying Trumptard. You should identify as conservative but you cannot be truthful.
Read some Hayek some day. Grow up.
He is not conservative. Conservatives oppose progressivism and the administrative state, and defend economic liberty. He’s a Trumpian. They are all on board with the administrative state if it can be used against their enemies, and despise economic liberty.
The GOP has taken a hard left turn while ironically emulating the leftists they hate.
They are not conservative. They hate conservatives. Look how they spit on George Will.
Better still.
Jesse is the opposite of Goldwater. Goldwater would be horrified by Donnie.
You've most likely never read goldwater like you've never read Ayn Rand nor Hayek nor Adam Smith.
Lol.
He can’t even read.
He won't even read his own links, why would he read a book?
He just says what the Soros organizations tell him to. He’s too dumb to have his own opinions on anything other which little boy he would like to rape.
God you leftists love rushing in to defend each others gsslighting.
Tell is more how wars are good, we need to keep giving welfare to illegals, taxes need to be raised all while calling everyone racists, homeophobes and xenophobic.
Pretend you actually understand the views you scream about the conservative past. Like tariffs are so bad, but Reagan is great even though you are too dumb to know he issued tariffs.
You and shrike are enothinf but narrative pushing democrats ignorant to all factual information. It is weird. Lol.
Tell me you don’t approve of Vance’s desire to use the administrative state against your enemies.
Tell me you understand the difference between tariffs for revenue and protective tariffs. Tell me you oppose subsidies and tax breaks for industries.
Thing is, you can’t. Because none of those things are true.
Oh, so you do know what moving the goalposts means, idiot boy.
You know you just proved my entire point right? Reagan tariffs were protectionary retard. You’ve been given the fucking information.
You’ve cheered political use of the state for years here buddy. Vance wants to investigate abuse and NOW you’re enraged. It is fucking amazing.
And that wasn’t very conservative of him. I never said I blindly supported everything he did the way you blindly support everything Trump does. That’s pure projection. There was a big gap between Reagan’s rhetoric and his record. I haven’t cheered anything. That’s you lying as always.
I’m not enraged about anything either. Rage is your thing, not mine. No, I’m disgusted.
And, as expected, you dodged my questions.
Back on mute you go.
Better yet, why don’t you just GTFO? No one respects you here (or anywhere else), and you have zero credibility. Maybe head to WaPo where you’re making your fellow travelers.
As a small-L libertarian, I'd prefer to be rid of the administrative state entirely, but if I cannot be, the obvious NEXT best thing is having it weilded against my enemies and oppressors, rather than my allies, and ultimately myself. That's just rational self-preservation.
I agree. Youre a far left liberal.
Your appeal to Hayek is as laughable as sarc down there. Lol.
You’re a “liberal” who posted links to CP.
That’s for shrike
turd, the ass-clown of the commentariat, lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a TDS-addled lying pile of lefty shit.
Senator Kelly, as a former astronaut, is a national hero. He would clearly be the best Presidential candidate on the Democrat side, since it takes a hero to beat a hero (such as the heroic former President Trump, who narrowly survived an assassination attempt just a few weeks ago.) Independent voters might wonder why he's not on the top of the ticket instead of Harris.
Unfortunately for libertarians, Kelly is also a noted gun grabber.
He's not a hero. But hey do what you can dems. If he was a hero he would fight against socialism and for people. He doesn't. He fights for himself.
Yes, I have work with your 'hero'.
LOL, "natioal hero"
And he was in the military.
I worked with both Kelly's as astronauts.
Scott was friendly, nice, always smiling.
Mark was a jersey. No other way to put it.
It’s hard to look up to someone like kelly in AZ who prioritizes transexaul nonsense over closing the border. Trump has stood up to the bureaucrat machine and isn’t completely for sale like the venal swamp; despite his issues he has taken a bullet for the team.
Shapiro is going to have to address the allegations that he covered up the murder of a young lady who was stabbed twenty times; several times which were in her back; and two of which were post-mortem. Shapiro closed down the investigation stating it was suicide. I believe he had a connection to the prime suspect in her "suicide".
Ahh, the old Clinton playbook.
He’s definitely the right fit for the Dem VP then.
It's amusing to think that a former prosecutor that got her start by sexually servicing powerful men would choose anyone that would have even the smallest stripe of libertarian in them.
The best we could possibly hope for is that they are some type of sexual identity group and call that 'libertarian'.
She had sex with men? Why isn't Trump all over this?
She traded sex for political advancement. That's entirely different from "she had sex with men". But you know that.
I didn't know that. Why isn't Trump all over this? Is it the hush money to porn stars thing? Something else? It's a prurient charge and right up his alley. It's even worse than being only half black. Sex to advance personal interests!
Trump respects whores.
Tell us again how Trump was immoral for fucking a stripper, but literally fellating your way to a DA appointment is presidential material.
"Tell us again how Trump was immoral for fucking a stripper,"
He wasn't married to the stripper. He was married to the lingerie model.
"but literally fellating your way to a DA appointment is presidential material."
Power and its attainment is rarely about morality. It's about street smarts, cunning and using god given gifts to their full potential. Read about the careers of past presidents. I'm thinking of Johnson, having recently read the bio. He was such a suck up it to higher powers it was embarrassing to read.
Exactly. LBJ was a terrible person in every way. And you are OK with that.
"LBJ was a terrible person in every way. "
Not every way. Read the bio. He had great empathy with the poor and down trodden. I'm OK with that, too.
This is irony. There was 1.1M in settlements of harassment paid out to people in Kamalas AG office. All attached to NDAs.
I think she should pick Sam Brinton.
They could share a wardrobe!
And just think about how well it would solidify the new totally grassroots meme that JD Vance is really weird.
Vance is weird. He pulled himself up from a hardscrabble upbringing. Served in the Marines. Got a law degree at Yale. Was a success in business. Wrote a bestseller. And became a Senator.
Thats definitely weird. Weird in the best way possible.
Vance thinks that if you are a parent, you should be able to vote for all your minor children. The more children you have, the more votes you get. So, I guess if a couple has 3 kids, they get 6 votes.
He would steal her wardrobe.
He would not be caught dead in her wardrobe. Sam Sam only does fabulous. Kam kam only does pantsuits.
Don't you find it kind of weird how many people *don't* want to be here VP?
The NC governor is term limited in December and he noped right out.
Cooper is as interesting as a mayonnaise sandwich.
You want weird? I’m told that JD Vance is weird.
Between his eyeliner and the goop Fatass Donnie slops on his mug they need a full time makeup staff.
But they’re not weird men. Just into makeup.
But you posting child porn links here was totally not weird, right?
She’s an absolute train wreck to work for. She’s had 92% turnover of her vice presidential staff. Many of whom leaked that she’s an unprepared idiot who wk t read any information she’s given ahead of press conference. Then she screams at her staff and abuses them when she fucks up. I can only imagine that everyone who has met her wants to be nowhere near her as a subordinate for the next four years.
This retarded Marxist whore cannot be become our next president.
Only 92%?
Between prison and calling him a “fucking moron” Donnie’s cabinet abandoned him at a higher clip.
Cite?
You mean all your neocon faves like John Bolton, right?
Because a VP is useless as bucket of warm spit. Whatever Shapiro’s views, they ain’t Kamala’s, who is fascinated by confiscatory tax rates and banning cars. And those are the sanest aspects of her lunacy.
No. Most of the people backing out weren't under serious consideration. So, it looks better to take yourself out rather than get turned down. Simple rule to follow.
VP isn't always a career advancement.
>At the same time, it's hard to imagine Vice President Shapiro steering a markedly different course on foreign policy than any of the other options
Binion, it's really weird that you would bring up the VP's foreign policy when you know the VP has nothing to do with foreign policy. They exist, literally, for the campaign trail and as backup.
Ain't Binion.
Or is it? Maybe Robby and Billy are the same person, a Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde kind of situation.
They are President of the Senate. Which could be a real job even if it never votes. And that job is completely independent of the Prez with its own constitutional authority.
No, it could not be. It's literally in the job description that it isn't a real job - open the session, then fuck off until there's a tied vote.
President of the Senate could be a real job if, historically, the Senate did not really like having an executive branch officer in their business, which is why the Senate is usually presided over by a pro tem President from the Senators.
Iow - it could be a real job if the VP stopped being such a warm bucket of spit for the prez
Tell me in fewer words that you're a democrat, Robby.
These options all suck and the top of the ticket was selected, not elected. It makes little sense that they would actually run with Harris when they've been talking for almost 4 years about the need to replace her as VP.
Vance wasn't my first choice as VP for the GOP, but your preferred choice shows that your values aren't aligned.
And almost all of them are more qualified than Harris to be on the top of the ticket.
Except Mayor Pete, so it's probably him.
I don't care if Kamala picks Chase Oliver or Robby Soave as her running mate. It's WW3 either way.
If they cheat her in, then the ru'e of law is over, and it’s time for the next step.
Define cheat. If Trump doesn't win, then it is cheating. Is that what you are saying? No complicated benchmarks to check, it simply Trump wins or its is fraud.
https://hereistheevidence.com/
This is not benchmarks. How does this really help?
How does refusing to acknowledge the serious and concerted irregularities of the 2020 election help?
Because you don't really know that what happened in 2020 was that much different than what happened in previous elections? Every serious examination of the 2020 election found no evidence that would change the results. Now if you had data on irregularities from several election before 2020 you could certainly compare to see if it was measurably different, but no one really has that kind of data. The reality is that with the exception of the Presidential election everyone was quite happy with the results. Republicans did better than expected in 2020. What was really different in 2020 as that Donald Trump underperformed other Republicans. Had he simple done as well as his fellow Republican he would have been reelected. And that is not me saying this it is Republicans like Brad Raffensperger and Ron Johnson. And that is a measurable quantity.
You are clearly hopelessly and willfully ignorant on this subject, so further discussion is pointless.
Ignorant, what have I said that was in error. Discussion is pointless as you have no real facts to support your argument.
You mean electing someone who was never voted for in a primary, hasn't done interviews, and is a puppet for someone else. No negative news articles, whitewashing history, and constant lies by media to put a candidate over.
Please tell me how in a democracy that isn't fraud.
You would be OK if the GOP a week before swapped trump out for someone popular and won right? You know that's what your side did since Biden was going to lose. Voters be dammed right? Can't even have an open convention because you know better than the little folks.
All election laws don't and rules don't matter to you as long as you get your result right?
The Republicans can swap Trump out anytime they like. I will certainly give whoever they advance at more consideration that of Trump, a senile old man fired from the Presidency because of his incompetence.
>he is certainly an inspiring figure.
No he’s not. He’s a closet stalker and a solid D partisan who does what he’s told. He's a weirdo.
>Arizona’s U.S. senators have tended to be more individual-minded, bipartisan, and independent: see Kyrsten Sinema. For those reasons, Kelly might be slightly preferable to some of the other options.
Which AZ senator kept the filibuster from being eliminated and which one did what he was fucking TD to do – by people who’ve never been to AZ, let alone vote here?
Sinema crossed the line just enough to give McCain voters who crossed over for her enough to justify their votes.
At least she was independent enough to cross the party to save her own skin.
it was obvious to me this was what he would be considering his entire campaign had no substance at all. they ran him as just some generic guy and relied on McSally being a shoe in to lose
and now we're going to get communist Gallego because once again the red team puts up a god awful candidate in kari lake.
10. if Robby goto Politico
20. Robby
Maybe Robby is angling for a job there.
I suspect libertarian cred is irrelevant to Harris.
If she’s going for a MidWest white male, then she’s looking to win PA, WI, and MI. MI may have already flipped to Harris. Shapiro’s electoral results are pretty weak and don’t translate to any ability to campaign outside big cities in Rust Belt – and he’ll move MI back to Trump/battleground. Waltz has a lot of ability to appeal to the forgotten man part of the electorate (which is where he is competing with Vance) and esp to counter Harris’ total lack of appeal to older white males.
Buttigieg and Bashear – nope
Mark Kelley – if that’s the choice the electoral math is that Harris is going for AZ, NV, GA, and NC. The math may work for that strategy but I doubt there’s a serious strategy that can deliver.
It’s Waltz.
"It’s Waltz."
He's projects the strongest white guy vibes I've seen. (A clip of a couple of minutes.) He seems the best DEI pick. Far better than Vance, in any case.
"Far better than Vance, in any case."
Well of course you feel that way, he's a Democrat.
Nobody's perfect.
Least of all you.
It won’t be Shapiro if Harris wants to carry the pro Hamas Democrat vote. They tend to hate Jews. Even more than the average Democrat anti semite.
She's married to a Jew, so she can't avoid pissing off those who are irrationally pro-Palestinian. Choosing Shapiro won't move that needle at all.
You know who else hates jews? Blacks.
And you know who hates asians? Blacks.
This ticket has about a 25% chance then.
Libertarian cred isn’t really important to Democrats in general. Especially cred that *checks article* is pro-school choice (Pro-Teacher Union Dems absolutely HATE that), and pro-reducing occupational licensing regulations which Dems are a very mixed bag on.
Of course those positions mean fucking dick since the VP does basically nothing, as you pointed out above, and hardly ever proposes policy or brokers deals for these kinds of things.
Walz would also help secure the Minnesota vote.
It would be awfully embarrassing for Harris if she didn't at least match Mondale's Electoral College showing.
His positions on school choice and licensing may be encouraging to people in PA who care about that. But what does it have to do with a vice presidential candidate?
And no one cares about the VP anyway.
Kamala does. Biden:Kamala as Kamala:??? to prevent impeachment.
He checks the white guy Jew boxes.
Isn't that frowned upon among Democrats?
Hold on a second, they haven’t told us who he has sex with.
Especially the pro Hamas voters that the democrats are desperately courting. I imagine ‘The Squad’ will have something to say about that too.
They might be trying to appease some of their traditional Democrat-voting base. The ones who think Harris is already a little bit too anti-Israel.
Yeah, like he's going to stand on stage between Harris and Randi Weingarten and tout his pro-school-choice stance.
^this.
He already caved to the teachers union alone in his state. He certainly aint taking on the NEA and the most radically progressive POTUS candidate on this issue.
And as stated above, why are we knee deep in VP policy discussion? Obama was just telling Joe to shut his trap long enough to keep himself off the news, Trump wasn't getting any real suggestions from Pence on policy, he wont be getting it from JD, and Kamala will be getting her marching orders from the party elites that have been redirecting Biden when he walks off the metaphorical lawn. She certainly wont be taking suggestions from whatever rando she chooses as her running mate.
Why are you giving kamala advice as to whats best for her instead if who is best for the country? I know, i know... dem so all useless authoritarians. But what a weird article at a libertarian mag.
All the Vance articles and Trump VP articles were negative.
Also most sites are saying he won't get it due to a certain religion and support for a certain country.
Sounds like Robby wants to make voting for Harris feel less reluctant.
He (and the media) will bury any twinklings of "school choice" in a grave so deep you won't be able to find it with a tunnel-boring machine.
The Democrats, and the Harris wing of the Democrats specifically are venomously hostile to school-choice. This is non-negotiable to them.
She feels the same about school choice (as do all the big govt solves all caucus members) as she does about healthcare. She wants to do away with any other choice, because big brother has everything you need right here, for everyone, why would you possibly think about another choice? Is there something wrong with you that you wouldn't want what we are telling you to have?
Fatass Donnie obviously thinks President and VP are white jobs. KamKam should find another job more suited for her - a “black job” as Donnie would say.
You dems really don't get embarassed by your bullshit do you.
Reach posted like 2 dozens news reports about black jobs. Democrats are on video constantly talking about black jobs.
Meanwhile you love using every racist caricature you can.
If Shrike felt shame he would have slunk away after he posted his child pornography here. If Reason eventually self destructs, I intend to buy it. Just so I can dox Shrike and get him investigated for his pedophilia.
"KamKam", eh? A little condescending, aren't you, a little patronizing? Pretending like she's your best bud and you guys are on nickname terms. You call her KamKam, she calls you pedo.
A few years back you posted kiddy porn to this site, and your initial handle was banned. The link below details all the evidence surrounding that ban. A decent person would honor that ban and stay away from Reason. Instead you keep showing up, acting as if all people should just be ok with a kiddy-porn-posting asshole hanging around. Since I cannot get you to stay away, the only thing I can do is post this boilerplate.
https://reason.com/2022/08/06/biden-comforts-the-comfortable/?comments=true#comment-9635836
turd, the TDS-addled ass-clown of the commentariat, lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a TDS-addled lying pile of lefty shit.
"a “black job” as Donnie would say."
Just a reminder that despite what he says, Shrike is actually an enormous racist.
Sarah Palin’s Buttplug 2 3 mins ago
Flag Comment Mute User
Uncle Clarence has had his hand out for over 20 years.
GIMME DAT WHITIE MONEY!
That fucking cop lover.
Sarah Palin’s Buttplug 2 2 hours ago
Flag Comment Mute User
Taking on Katanji Brown Jackson for lowest IQ affirmative action hire
Uncle Clarence a candidate.
Sarah Palin’s Buttplug 2 19 mins ago
Flag Comment Mute User
Sandy, I had a genuine fear that a Senator Walker would be shucking and jiving us good liberty-loving Georgians every day.
Sarah Palin’s Buttplug 2 1 hour ago
Flag Comment Mute User
Many have asked for an update to the Buttplug Horse Race:
Tim Scott 400-1 Whuffo Bro? Whuffo is you in dis race fo, bro?
Sarah Palin’s Buttplug 2 2 hours ago
Flag Comment Mute User
Dude, I am from the South. You can’t troll me on race.
Do you remember Spermin’ Herman Cain? He sounded like a slave extra from Song of the South.
Sarah Palin’s Buttplug 2 1 hour ago
Flag Comment Mute User
No, you’re a fucking snowflake who only gets offended when one of your Lawn Jockeys is criticized.
Sarah Palin’s Buttplug 2 28 mins ago
Flag Comment Mute User
Groveling like a shoe-shine boy, Tim Scott humiliates himself for Fatass Donnie.
Sarah Palin’s Buttplug 2 38 mins ago
Flag Comment Mute User
SE Cupp is a conservative commentator who is ashamed of Tim Scott’s groveling ‘Happy slave” act concerning Donnie.
Sarah Palin’s Buttplug 2 3 hours ago
Flag Comment Mute User
Tim Scott’s Vice Presidential Debasement Is Almost Complete
Debasement? Are you for real? This smacks of racism.
Tim Scott’s twerking and jiving is just him feeling that ole-timey religion.
Sarah Palin’s Buttplug 2 7 hours ago
Flag Comment Mute User
Fact checking Tim Scott – Trump’s black friend/shine boy:
Sarah Palin’s Buttplug 2 1 hour ago
Flag Comment Mute User
How many little lawn jockeys are in your yard? I bet it looks like a scene from a Tarzan movie out there.
I've had Buttplug muted for almost the entire time I've been here. Why haven't you muted him? He's as useless as RAK, Sevo, or Frank. Or do you just crave fringe nonsense to complain about?
I’ll take anything your racist ass says about somebody else’s supposed racism with a giant grain of salt.
Shapiro campaigned on support for school choice/vouchers. He could afford to piss off some teachers because he was so far ahead of the far-right trog the GOP put up against him. Once elected, he caved to the teachers' union and vetoed a rather mild bi-partisan vouchers bill. If there is a short list of principled American politicians, Shapiro isn't on it.
This is exactly right. When you're a politician in a purple district, you do what you have to do to get elected. It's not an accident that the *checks Reason style guide* Most Libertarian Governor in the Solar System is in Colorado.
This PA guy may be closer to libertarian than the others, but that's like arguing which is closer to the sun, Neptune or Uranus. Neither one will get you a tan.
When in campaign mode, sure. His actions say bog standard dem.
School choice below.
Here is guns.
https://www.governor.pa.gov/newsroom/icymi-governor-shapiros-proposed-investments-to-combat-gun-violence-and-support-law-enforcement-would-make-a-crucial-difference-and-allow-pennsylvania-to-have-a-mu/
Protectionism.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/30/us/politics/shapiro-vice-president-taxes.html
Abortion.
https://www.governor.pa.gov/newsroom/shapiro-administration-launches-abortion-access-website-after-texas-ruling-reminds-pennsylvanians-medication-abortion-remains-legal-in-the-commonwealth/
Regulations
https://www.pa.gov/en/governor/newsroom/2024-press-releases/governor-shapiro-signs-bills-into-law--.html
Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro will veto his own campaign promise of school choice and abandon his push for private school vouchers in an effort to get the state budget passed through the legislature.
Whoops.
https://www.newsweek.com/pennsylvania-governor-vetoes-his-own-campaign-promise-1811159
Yep. Support for school choice is anathema to childless cat ladies. Shapiro doesn't have a chance.
Reneging on school choice has gotten quite a few people bounced off the taxpayers' teat lately. When's the next opportunity for Pennsylvania voters to can his ass?
-jcr
"While that sounds entertaining enough, the main knock on him from the left is that he harshly condemned the recent pro-Palestinian protests on college campuses and is vocally supportive of Israel. For libertarians who would like to see the U.S. become less involved in Middle Eastern affairs and stop spending American tax dollars on costly foreign wars, these are reasonable concerns."
Yes, we can't condemn racist rhetoric on campus and support a nation under attack by fanatical terrorists, because that might somehow get us involved in wars. Kamala should just pick Tlaib as the VP.
BTW guys, did you realize Kamala was crowned as the Dem nominee without earning a single delegate? Democracy, am I right?
"Yes, we can’t condemn racist rhetoric on campus and support a nation under attack by fanatical terrorists, because that might somehow get us involved in wars."
We're already involved in wars. Want more?
I can't condemn pro palestinian protests on campus is fear of war?
Why would you condemn protests? Are you against free speech? I had you figured as an ardent supporter of 1st amendment. I'm against war mongering and genocide, but you do you.
Condemning people for WHAT THEY ARE PROTESTING is not condemning protesting, retard.
It's condemning some protesting. And worse, it's supporting genocide. But who cares? There's nothing in the constitution prohibiting genocide.
So, only protesters have right to protest? Nobody can criticize their cause?
Then why was Charlottesville so bad? You should not criticize anything a protester is protesting, per you.
And when a group's population is increasing, by default, it is not a genocide. Keep bastardizing the word, though.
"So, only protesters have right to protest?"
Anyone can protest according to the law.
"Nobody can criticize their cause?"
XM was claiming that. He wrote: " we can’t condemn racist rhetoric on campus." You can believe that if you like. I don't.
He also claimed "because that might somehow get us involved in wars," oblivious to the fact that we're already involved up to our necks in wars and are likely to go deeper.
"Then why was Charlottesville so bad?"
I'm not sure. I wasn't there. Weren't people murdered there? Wouldn't that in itself make it bad? You tell me.
"And when a group’s population is increasing, by default, it is not a genocide. "
Not according to the dictionary. It's about mass murder and the erasure of a people. My dictionary doesn't mention about whether overall population is increasing or not. Anyway, I'm not sure what you are trying to say. Do you believe the population of Gaza is greater today than, say, a month ago? What evidence, if any, can you offer to back that up.
If population is increasing, nobody is being erased and mass murder is not occurring.
Tell that to the people of Gaza. The news will thrill them.
Aside from that, do you believe the population of Gaza is greater today than, say, a month ago? What evidence, if any, can you offer to back that up.
Can you tell me the population of Gaza today? How about a month ago? You're claiming the former is greater than the latter. But how did you arrive at the conclusion? Did someone you trust tell you so? Who was it?
And did you get a chance to check a dictionary for the definition of genocide? Care to share your findings with the rest of us?
And what exactly was the problem at Charlottesville. I'm not sure but I think it involved killing people. Am I wrong? Were worse things happening that I'm not aware of. Would you care to tell us?
There is no fucking genocide.
I'm told the population increases with every death.
“For libertarians who would like to see the U.S. become less involved in Middle Eastern affairs and stop spending American tax dollars on costly foreign wars, these are reasonable concerns.”
An interesting use of punctuation. Note the commas or lack.
For libertarians, who would like to see the U.S. become less involved in Middle Eastern affairs and stop spending American tax dollars on costly foreign wars, these are reasonable concerns.
That bit between the commas is called a non restrictive relative clause. It adds non essential information to the sentence.
How about the other alternative. The one with no commas.
For libertarians who would like to see the U.S. become less involved in Middle Eastern affairs and stop spending American tax dollars on costly foreign wars these are reasonable concerns.
That’s a restrictive relative clause. It means that only those libertarians who want to stop spending are concerned, while free spending libertarians aren’t concerned. As the sentence is written, with only one comma, the meaning remains unclear.
Another example for clarity.
Eskimos, who live in igloos, are industrious.
Means: Eskimos are industrious AND they live in igloos.
Eskimos who live in igloos are industrious.
Means: ONLY Eskimos living in igloos are industrious. The rest are lazy.
We can’t speak commas, so when speaking the difference is in pausing and intonation.
That’s all for now.
Where should the commas have gone in this one?
mtrueman 2 days ago
Flag Comment Mute User
And where would you prefer 9 year olds to learn about sex? Are there any porn sites on the web you could point to that you think would do a better, more responsible job? I’m pretty sure most 9 year olds masturbate. It’s easy to do and is a source of innocent merriment.
"Where should the commas have gone in this one?"
You tell me. A misplaced comma can change the meaning. But you want talk discuss sex. You've come to the right place. We're deep into an argument about Harris' sexual history. Fascinating stuff. Come and join us!
What nine year olds masturbate? I've raised a boy and he did not. I was a boy and i did not.
Where did somebody touch you to make you want to masturbate before puberty? Exceptionally odd for a boy.
“What nine year olds masturbate?”
Normal ones.
“I’ve raised a boy and he did not. ”
My condolences. Better luck next time.
“I was a boy and i did not.”
Children, you wanna end up an internet whiner like Damikesc? No? You know what to do.
Now, tell us what you think of Kamala’s sexual history. I’m sure you’ve have much to say on the topic.
mtrue, your desire to watch 9 year olds masturbate is decidedly odd, but not unexpected.
9 year olds jerking off is so far off the norm that you'd freak out psychologists.
Masturbation is not as weird as you think it is. Have you ever tried it? Give it a go. But I urge you to practice discretion. It's a private affair and not something for public consumption.
misconstrueman, you are a sick individual.
Thanks for your attention. Keep reading, it's all I ask of you.
Thanks for admitting you fantasize about sexualizing children.
Children are sexualized from conception. It's got nothing to do with me.
Children are sexualized from conception. It’s got nothing to do with me.
Thanks for telling on yourself again.
"Thanks for telling on yourself again."
I'm stating the facts. Sexuality exists before puberty. Boys and girls have different anatomy and different behavior, even before puberty. I understand the impulse to deny it and preserve the 'innocence' of childhood, but you can't argue with facts.
You admitted to thinking about nine-year-old boys masturbating and you believe they should be sexualized. But a lot of marxist vermin think that, so you're in like company.
"You admitted to thinking about nine-year-old boys masturbating"
No, it was Mother's Lament who posted the comment, and I was responding to it. Just as you responded to mine.
"and you believe they should be sexualized."
Humans are already sexualized from conception. There's no 'should' about it. Find yourself a nice non-Marxist hobby or something.
You can't say "Eskimo" these days.
Does Shapiro have what it takes to be the next Geraldine Ferraro?
-jcr
An Indian Hindu married to a Jew with a Jew VP. The Muslims can't wait to vote for that!
Buttigieg comes across as a technocrat rather than a progressive
And a pedophile.
Yes. Pete Buttigieg is a pedophile. So is his accomplice Chasten.
He has voted in support of President Joe Biden's approved policies 95.5 percent of the time.
Which you then try to imply is somehow "individual-minded, bipartisan, and independent." Riiiiiight.
It's nice that Walz and Beshear are supportive of legalizing, or at least decriminalizing, marijuana.
That's not a good thing.
One of his first actions after taking office was to eliminate the college degree requirement for government jobs.
Y'know, as opposed to eliminating government jobs. No, let's not do that. Let's just fill them with high schoolers. Great. Awesome. Wonderful.
the main knock on him from the left is that he harshly condemned the recent pro-Palestinian protests on college campuses and is vocally supportive of Israel. For libertarians who would like to see the U.S. become less involved in Middle Eastern affairs
Waaaaiiiit wait wait wait wait wait.
"Vocally supportive of Israel" and "involved in Middle Eastern affairs" do NOT mean the same thing. Why are you conflating them?
In fact, Robby, answer me this one question: if it meant zero involvement, zero tax dollars, zero armament, zero intelligence sharing, zero any actual logistical support of any kind - why would you have even the slightest problem with someone being "vocally supportive" of Israel? As opposed to Hamas? (You said "pro-Palestine" earlier. That's not a thing. There IS NO Palestine. What you meant was pro-Hamas.)
All this contributes to a weak—very weak—libertarian preference for Shapiro.
Aren't you voting for the pedophile anyway?
No, not that one. The other one.
ATF is a George Orwell fan. She/He/It has started it several times already, and gets all She/He/It's ideas from role model Ellis. https://www.telelib.com/authors/O/OrwellGeorge/prose/BurmeseDays/chapter17.html
Why do all you pedos and pedo enablers always use the same tired and rehashed lines?
"Someone on the internet doesn't want me raping kids! It's like 1984 man! A true Orwellian nightmare!"
Because Orwell was all about you being a pedophile. Maybe go reread those books, perv.
What should be notable is that both Harris and Trump had pretty good fields of candidates to choose from for VP. There is a lot of talent out there once the old crop of politicians are cleared out. Trump was hampered by his fixation on loyalty to himself, Harris is not so constrained. Looking forward to seeing the pick.
Bonus question, Trump doesn't want to debate Harris so will he also refuse to let JD Vance debate Harris's pick?
They've set a debate date.
Have they? What is the date?
Lol. Harris, who can’t keep her staff around and won’t allow them to make eye contact (allegedly) is “not so constrained” by a “fixation on loyalty to” herself?
Haha. Ok, Mr smart moderate guy. Whatever you say.
You’re a boring retard.
One would hope that Harris picks Buttigieg as her VP. Along with clips of Harris pushing her agenda - eliminating private health insurance, stopping drilling on federal lands, decriminalizing border crossings - they could show her VP and his spouse on Spanish language TV.
"Josh Shapiro Is Kamala Harris' Best Bet for Veep."
Wrong answer.
The best VP candidate Heels Up Harris could make would be either Tlaib, Omar or AOC.
Picking a white male like Shapiro would be considered racist by the very people who point to the republicans as racist.
Now is the time for the democrats to have a female for the POTUS candidate and a minority female for the VP position.
Beshear, Cooper, Walz, Pritzker — complete unknowns nationally, and not really in swing states, except for Cooper. The only reason to take Walz would be if Harris is worried she might not match Mondale’s electoral vote total.
Shapiro — is governor of perhaps the most critical swing state, but could also cost votes in another swing state such as Michigan, which has a sizable terrorist-sympathizer vote.
Whitmer, Newsom — not on the list, apparently. Both are well known nationally (and probably have Presidential aspirations), but are also both heavily reviled.
Kelly — national hero as an astronaut, but would outshine Harris by a mile (and was likely who Obama had in mind when he initially chose not to endorse Harris) and make voters wonder why he would play second fiddle to someone with no notable achievements.
Buttigieg — oversaw several literal toxic train wrecks as SecTrans, and missed a massive supply chain meltdown while on vacation. On the plus side, his disastrous record in office wouldn’t outshine the disastrous record of VP Harris, so he’s the likely pick, plus he checks another identity box.
Kelly — national hero as an astronaut, but would outshine Harris by a mile (and was likely who Obama had in mind when he initially chose not to endorse Harris) and make voters wonder why he would play second fiddle to someone with no notable achievements.
I'm pretty sure it's going to be Kelly precisely for the first one, but that's all. He's not going to outshine Harris in a national election because he's boring as toast, completely uncharismatic, and he's shown during his brief time in the Senate that he'll do what he's told.
He and Harris are both gun-grabbers, and you can expect them to pursue some kind of gun confiscation scheme when in office. Which is good news, because as a California Democrat, Harris is guaranteed to do something extremely marxist that will kick off a constitutional crisis that could provoke secession and the national divorce that's desperately needed.
Soave, nobody addressed your thesis: PA Gov Shapiro is the best choice for VP Word Salad. I agree, because only Josh Shapiro can deliver PA. None of the others put PA into play. If VP Harris loses PA, it is over, she will have lost in many other places.
It isn't policy. It is electoral politics.
It’s flagrant identitarian politics at that. Jewish Democrats are more powerful and influential than the squad and the Hamas street commies. Who I predict will STFU and fall in line the second The Party needs them to.
People keep trying to compare this to the ‘68 convention, but there’s no convention this time. And the only reason the street commies back then kept at it was they were on the hook for going to Nam. No such comparison today.
Anyway, I think it’s a brilliant move on The Party’s part. Just like the Biden coup sucked all the news cycle air out of the Trump assassination attempt. The Machine is something to behold when it really wants what it wants.
only Josh Shapiro can deliver PA.
I'm not sure of that. He fucked over the kids of his state for the teachers' unions.
-jcr
If they pick Kelly, all we'll hear from now on is Gabby Giffords, Gabby Giffords, Gabby Giffords, the poster child for gun regulation.
Lil' MAGAs like the author would love it if Shapiro was picked so that Democrats would lose in Michigan, Virginia, and North Carolina and thus assure the election of Old Weirdo & Young Weirder. Too bad, MAGA author. Ain't happening.
I see Robbie is listening to Hamburger for factual content on girl-bullying mystics. "Republican Gov. Doug Burgum signed legislation banning the procedure throughout pregnancy, with slim exceptions up to six weeks’ gestation." How about a two question Nolan Chart for God's Own Prohibitionists: YES or NO?
1. Women should be forced to have unwanted sex with males.
2. Pregnant women should be forced into unwanted childbirth. All we need now are names for the squares containing No/No, No/Yes and Yes/No responders.
The problem is that the top of the ticket is a terrible chameleon and it difficult to find out what her official positions are. She is the ONLY presidential candidate that DOES NOT have a platform, issues or positions page on the official website. Her television adds are strikingly devoid of substance and chock full of fluff that is meaning less.
It seems that Kamala Harris embodied the nonsense of Nancy Pelosi's comment "We have to pass the bill, so that you can find out what is in it" or George Bush's comment "I've abandoned free-market principles to save the free-market system".
Josh Shapiro is not my cup of tea, but he at least does not have the degree of swamp slime that Kamala Harris has. There are plenty of misguided Democrats that are leaps and bounds better than Kamala Harris.
There should have been a primary process instead of the contrived anointment of Kamala as Queen.
I'm starting to wonder if this turmoil was planned in advance to avoid the primary process and avoid Kamala Harris from having to stake out her positions. It is almost as if she is trying to run to the right of Donald Trump on some issues depending on who she is talking to at the moment.
Donald Trump is not my cup of tea either, but in comparison to Kamala Harris he is a far better option. Donald Trump is still a terrible option, but not to the degree that the dystopian puppet of the ruling elitists, Kamala Harris is.
It's always hard to tell with less tenured officials, but for those of you who don't follow PA or live here, Shapiro has several issues.
The first is electability. The national consensus might not bring this up, but his "landslide" victory was against an abortion hardliner, Doug Mastriano. Even I had qualms voting for him. The 2022 PA R ticket was one of the worst I've ever seen. We even had carpetbagger Oz, who still won ~200k more votes than Mastriano just by not being batshit insane.
This race occurred in 2022 and Wolf was very unpopular by the end of his term. Shapiro was AG for him. Shapiro also had the benefit of Trump not being on the ballot. Other state elections were substantially closer.
A few people mentioned Shapiro is Jewish, and while I wish this wasn't a problem, it is. Every Jew knows about it. Don't need to beat this horse to death, but when you vote for Kamala, her husband is not acquiring political power. If Shapiro is VP, he is. Major difference there. A lot of blacks, muslims and champagne socialist whites will not vote for Harris/Shapiro ticket.
Point of all the above: it's not like he has the Mandate of Heaven. He's had a lot of easy races and barely won when they were remotely challenging. He hasn't been tested against serious competition yet.
Fetterman just sounded the alarm on Shapiro, but one of the issues I had with him as AG is that I felt he pursued high profile cases on purpose. In other words, clout chasing. He's blatantly anti-2A and if you read about his local cases, you can see he constantly injected himself into the national picture and tried to raise his profile. When he ran for governor, I knew he was disingenuous and viewed it as a stepping stone. Keep in mind this is the AG who rubber stamped Wolf's COVID restrictions, despite anything to the contrary. Shapiro has tried to soften his image on the issue and claim he was anti-mandate. He also backed down on drug legalization when it became politically expedient to do so. PA is still in a weird position due to this. We neighbor multiple states with recreational use and PA still has a regressive tax scheme that discourages investment and sends PA residents across the border to shop.
He has done a few decent things. Got I-95 fixed relatively quickly, is cutting corp taxes (not excessively, but enough to help PA compete in the tri-state area), and like you said, he is sort of on board with school choice and licensing reform. He isn't an idiot and he's probably the most competent D I've seen in recent years. The issue is that he's chasing clout. He abandons positions as soon as it advances his political career. He did a 180 on capital punishment (thankfully in the right direction and now opposes it), but you always have to worry about clout chasers because they'll betray you IF you assume that their principles come first.
You can even tell with his recent Wiki editing. He's preparing to 180 on Israel to prep for possible VP nomination: "Shapiro's views on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict have evolved over time." LMAO
tl;dr he's mid and untested. Give him a few more years and reconsider then. Maybe he changes, but right now, you can't trust him for shit.