Clinton VP news LATEST: Podesta now calling the losers to tell them its not them

[Erc]

From the NY Times article:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Trump's VP selection will be very telling. He's made pretty clear his selection criteria.

Trump picking someone who's actually respectable would be terrible for him down the line.  Not only will he look more presidential (echoes of Dukakis/Bentsen) but in the unlikely event he wins the election, Trump desperately needs impeachment insurance.

[Erc]

I've been hearing rumblings about Jim Webb.

No way that doesn't lead to a floor fight at the convention.

[Erc]

FWIW, Gary Johnson named former MA Governor Bill Weld as his VP candidate today.

I may have ended up writing in Bill Weld in the 2006 NY Governor's race.

In any event, this is a choice that appears well-designed to appeal to, uh, me, and probably nobody else in the country.

[Erc]

Well, that pretty much removes the last chance for a consequential (for this year) floor fight at the convention.

[Erc]

But this may not even be the most salient point. Having a progressive in the administration is going to be very important if Clinton seeks to govern at all AFTER the election. If she's confident that she can win in a tight race against Trumpence (a pretty reasonable assumption IMHO) would she rather have a progressive ambassador in the Naval Observatory, or a stuffed centrist shirt who can't do anything?

I don't understand this point of why you need someone who appeals to the Bernie crowd in order to "govern."  Apart from Bernie himself and the ten other folks in Congress who supported him (all of whom willl fall in line except perhaps Bernie), who does she need to win over in Washington?  (Not that I'm advocating that she reach across the aisle, as the prospects are even dimmer there.)

Of course (sample size of two), I'm a Scott Brown-voting Republican who would still vote Hillary even if she picked Warren, and you're a Bernie supporter who might not if she picks Kaine, so perhaps you have a point.

[Erc]

Clinton/Vilsack made some sense in 2008 (when he dropped his tentative bid to clear the way for her in Iowa; that turned out so well, didn't it?).  Makes zero sense in 2016--as, to be honest, does all the talk about other minor cabinet secretaries (Castro, Perez until a few days ago, etc.).

Democrats basically always pick a sitting Senator as a VP, and I see no evidence that they're going to break with tradition this time.  The exceptions (since 1928, before that we go into Klanbake territory):

1984: a lot of pressure for a woman but no Democratic Senators were female; didn't exactly turn out well.
1940: closest analogue to Vilsack, I suppose, with Roosevelt running for a third term picking his Ag Secretary he trusts.

[Erc]

Betting markets have Kaine at around 70% odds of being VP. Do you guys think that's reasonable?

More generally, is the hype around Kaine justified?

That seems excessive.  I'd say he's definitely the favorite, but I don't know if I'd give him more than even odds at this point, if that.

[Erc]

It's true that Republicans would temporarily get a senate seat if Warren is the VP choice. Still, it's Massachusetts, we're talking about a brief loan here. It's my impression that the Massachusetts Democratic Party isn't the Florida Democratic Party. They won't nominate Coakley a third time... will they?

It's also Charlie Baker, one of the three remaining sane Republicans in the country, making the choice in the interim. Not ideal for her, but whoever it is will likely be better than Scott Brown (who was elected in what could be viewed as a referendum on Obamacare).

[Erc]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Doesn't really give us anything new....

Unless we knew this already, this means we shouldn't be thinking it's Warren just because she's the only person in Florida at the moment.

[Erc]

Think we've missed this, if I'm wrong and this was posted before, my apologies:

New York Post story "Elizabeth Warren gives up hope of being Clinton’s VP"

http://nypost.com/2016/07/22/elizabeth-warren-gives-up-hope-for-clintons-vp/

Because the Post has a great track record when it comes to this.  That Cheney-Gephardt debate in 2004 was really something.

[Erc]

Announcing on Friday night is as close to take-out-the-trash as possible.  Is she super-embarrassed by the pick, or what?

She's got about an hour to announce it before she definitely needs to put it off until tomorrow.