I'll vote for Bloomberg if he's the nominee. Because of course.

[DanTex]

But I can't imagine it wouldn't hurt turnout. Here we are in a country where most people support things like free college and universal healthcare and a top tax rate of 70% and just about every liberal policy item you can think of. And yet we would find ourselves in an election between a crazy fascist and a pro-choice fiscal conservative.

I'll give Bloomberg credit for what he's done on guns, climate, and public health. But nominating Bloomberg would be telling the liberal base that they need to vote for someone who as a politician has opposed most of what they believe in, and as a candidate still opposes a lot of it, because the alternative is Trump.

Yes, that's a valid argument, and a lot of liberals, like me, will do just that. But it's not the kind of "Hope and Change" motivator that drove the 2008 turnout.

[LonePirate]

1. If Bloomberg is the nominee and chooses Stacey Abrams for his VP, turnout will be sky high.

In fact, whoever our nominee is, choosing Abrams for VP is the absolute best way to juice Dem turnout among all the necessary groups and in the necessary places. VP selection usually matters little; but Abrams is a major exception to that.

[DanTex]

2. I agree she would be a good VP choice. I'm skeptical that it would do much to help turnout.

Nominating someone like Stacey Abrams in the first place, yes, would drive turnout. But like you said, VP isn't really who people are voting for.

[LonePirate]

3. Our white nominee choosing Abrams as VP eliminates major concerns from black and young voters

It also assuages fears from the progressive wing of the party if one of the centrist candidates wins the nomination.

[patricia92243]

6. I just saw her on Colbert - didn't know who she was before. She

is extremely charismatic and knowledgeable.

[honest.abe]

4. We are in much different situation than 2008.. which is obvious.

There was no incumbent and there was no one like Trump running on the Republican side. Trump is a complete asshole but he is very good at campaigning and playing the political game and has alot of money. Bloomberg can beat him on all those points.

[patricia92243]

5. Crazy is the keyword. We already have a crazy in the WH, and we

we don't want any more.