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

[President Johnson]

Just listened to Kasich on Fox. Not only was he adamant that he would not be Trump's VP but clearly said that he would not endorse Trump, even at the Convention in Cleveland, and in response to whether he prefers Clinton or Trump said "those are not very good choices".

So, if Trump is looking to his competitors, it would have to be Rubio.

He continued to say that he means that he won't endorse Trump unless Trump becomes less unifying. That's not "clearly not endorsing Trump" to me.

Didn't Big Don say someone who has not endorsed him yet? Oh lord, please don't let it be Rafael.

If Hillary picks Warren, TRUMP should consider Chris Christie.

I doubt Clinton will announce her pick until after Trump has announced his.

Only if she announces before the convention.

[Mr. Morden]

Just listened to Kasich on Fox. Not only was he adamant that he would not be Trump's VP but clearly said that he would not endorse Trump, even at the Convention in Cleveland, and in response to whether he prefers Clinton or Trump said "those are not very good choices".

So, if Trump is looking to his competitors, it would have to be Rubio.

He continued to say that he means that he won't endorse Trump unless Trump becomes less unifying. That's not "clearly not endorsing Trump" to me.

Didn't Big Don say someone who has not endorsed him yet? Oh lord, please don't let it be Rafael.

Kasich hasn't endorsed Trump.  However, he hasn't ruled out the possibility of endorsing Trump in the future.  I think he's most likely the VP short lister that Trump was referring to re: someone who hasn't endorsed him "yet".

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I doubt Clinton will announce her pick until after Trump has announced his.

[/quote]

Only if she announces before the convention.
[/quote]

What do you mean?  Whether she announces before the convention or at the convention, I don't see her making the announcement until Trump has made his announcement first.

[President Johnson]

Just listened to Kasich on Fox. Not only was he adamant that he would not be Trump's VP but clearly said that he would not endorse Trump, even at the Convention in Cleveland, and in response to whether he prefers Clinton or Trump said "those are not very good choices".

So, if Trump is looking to his competitors, it would have to be Rubio.

He continued to say that he means that he won't endorse Trump unless Trump becomes less unifying. That's not "clearly not endorsing Trump" to me.

Didn't Big Don say someone who has not endorsed him yet? Oh lord, please don't let it be Rafael.

Kasich hasn't endorsed Trump.  However, he hasn't ruled out the possibility of endorsing Trump in the future.  I think he's most likely the VP short lister that Trump was referring to re: someone who hasn't endorsed him "yet".

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I doubt Clinton will announce her pick until after Trump has announced his.

Only if she announces before the convention.
[/quote]

What do you mean?  Whether she announces before the convention or at the convention, I don't see her making the announcement until Trump has made his announcement first.

[/quote]

I mean if Hillary announces before the Republican convention. Then TRUMP would announce his pick after her. But I'm afraid both will announce at their repective conventions, what means, that TRUMP will do first.


Kasich would definitely be the smarter pick, because of experience and Ohio. He is more likely to be considered since TRUMP said, he wants someone who can deal with congress (and we all know, Rafael is not that popular among his colleagues).

[Frodo]

Warren needs to stay in the Senate. Few other Senators sponsor the kind of legislation she does. She is in a position to push Clinton to the left on Wall Street regulation. Hard to do as a loyal VEEP.

I strongly doubt that Elizabeth Warren would be angling for Veep if she wasn't assured in advance that she would be as involved in White House deliberations and decisions as Dick Cheney and Joe Biden were before her. 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Neither did Al Gore in 1992, and yet Bill Clinton picked him anyway. 

[President Johnson]

Warren needs to stay in the Senate. Few other Senators sponsor the kind of legislation she does. She is in a position to push Clinton to the left on Wall Street regulation. Hard to do as a loyal VEEP.

I strongly doubt that Elizabeth Warren would be angling for Veep if she wasn't assured in advance that she would be as involved in White House deliberations and decisions as Dick Cheney and Joe Biden were before her. 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Neither did Al Gore in 1992, and yet Bill Clinton picked him anyway. 

The same with Dick "the warmonger" Cheney.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Under normal circumstances, Kasich, Rubio, and Cruz would be good choices for Trump.  This year, however, these folks have said things about Trump that go beyond the pale, and Trump has said things about them that go beyond the pale.

I can't see how Cruz could accept under any circumstances.  Given how personal Trump's attacks became regarding Cruz and his wife, I personally believe that Cruz's credibility would take a hit if he even said that he was VOTING for Trump.

Kasich's and Rubio's statements are what they are.  They're on the record, and they, too, would lose credibility if they accepted a Trump offer to be VP.

In 1972, George McGovern had the opportunity to choose then-Gov. Jimmy Carter (D-GA) as his VP choice.  Carter was talking out of both sides of his mouth; he was a Henry Jackson supporter (stiffing both George Wallace and Wallace's Georgia surrogate, Lt. Gov. Lester Maddox) who was making pubic statements on how unelectable McGovern was, and how far to the left he was from the average Democrat in Georgia.  At the same time, Carter was secretly pushing himself as a possible running-mate for McGovern.  (McGovern rejected him, and privately referred to Carter as "the biggest p---k in politics".) 

Despite the rift between McGovern and Carter, had Carter been chosen as McGovern's VP candidate, it would have worked out better than what happened.  McGovern would not have lost by as huge a margin, and Carter's presence might have given a moderating influence to the ticket without Carter having to repudiate anything he has said prior to the convention.  That's not the case with Kasich, Rubio, and Cruz.  What they've said goes to the character of Trump, and they've said things they can't walk back.  After all, if Trump really is a "con man" and a "carnival barker" and a "racist", and yada, yada, yada, and you've gone on record as saying so, how can you even credibly endorse him, even timidly?  How can you credibly claim that Hillary would be worse.  In Trump's case, he CANNOT take someone who's let loose with such statements, because it will detract from the credibility of all concerned, and raise the question of "If Trump's THAT bad, why aren't anti-Trump Republicans supporting Hillary?"

[Mr. Morden]

Another name being floated in the Trump veepstakes: Richard Burr:

http://www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/politics-columns-blogs/under-the-dome/article83085657.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Phony Moderate]

He'd be a good pick. World-famous figure. In fact everyone in the pub last night was debating his vast influence. I understand he's a cult figure in North Carolina? Apparently you can't find a single street that doesn't have a statue or a giant portrait of him.

[Badger]

I now believe Trump is likely to pick either Jeff Sessions or Scott Brown.  Neither would help him win over any key demographics or states, but do running mates ever really help much in those respects anyway?  Trump might just need someone who would be loyal to him, has legislative experience, and agrees with him on most issues.  I think they both fit that bill.

Very good point. I think Scott Brown would be the best.

Trump already has issues with social conservatives. disstrusting him and possibly not turning out. adding a pro-choice, pro-gay marriage, general social liberal to the tticket would be toxic and probably spark a convention fight. Sessions does the exact opposite, plus has a tad more gravitas from multiple terms in the Senate compared to Brown's half-term.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Another name being floated in the Trump veepstakes: Richard Burr:

http://www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/politics-columns-blogs/under-the-dome/article83085657.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I actually thought of Burr.  Burr's up for re-election this year, so I don't know if he can run for both offices, and I doubt Burr would do it if he had to give up his Senate seat.  But Trump NEEDS North Carolina, and it's more in play than it ought to be.  Burr will only have to keep being from North Carolina and not make any stupid statements.

[#TheShadowyAbyss]

Trump would be better off picking Kasich, that gives him at least a shot of winning Ohio, plus it will mend some bridges with the GOP establishment.

[Mr. Morden]

Trump would be better off picking Kasich, that gives him at least a shot of winning Ohio, plus it will mend some bridges with the GOP establishment.

Except Kasich won't accept.  There's a decent chance that he won't even endorse him, let alone agree to be his running mate.

[MK]

Under normal circumstances, Kasich, Rubio, and Cruz would be good choices for Trump.  This year, however, these folks have said things about Trump that go beyond the pale, and Trump has said things about them that go beyond the pale.

I can't see how Cruz could accept under any circumstances.  Given how personal Trump's attacks became regarding Cruz and his wife, I personally believe that Cruz's credibility would take a hit if he even said that he was VOTING for Trump.

Kasich's and Rubio's statements are what they are.  They're on the record, and they, too, would lose credibility if they accepted a Trump offer to be VP.

In 1972, George McGovern had the opportunity to choose then-Gov. Jimmy Carter (D-GA) as his VP choice.  Carter was talking out of both sides of his mouth; he was a Henry Jackson supporter (stiffing both George Wallace and Wallace's Georgia surrogate, Lt. Gov. Lester Maddox) who was making pubic statements on how unelectable McGovern was, and how far to the left he was from the average Democrat in Georgia.  At the same time, Carter was secretly pushing himself as a possible running-mate for McGovern.  (McGovern rejected him, and privately referred to Carter as "the biggest p---k in politics".) 

Despite the rift between McGovern and Carter, had Carter been chosen as McGovern's VP candidate, it would have worked out better than what happened.  McGovern would not have lost by as huge a margin, and Carter's presence might have given a moderating influence to the ticket without Carter having to repudiate anything he has said prior to the convention.  That's not the case with Kasich, Rubio, and Cruz.  What they've said goes to the character of Trump, and they've said things they can't walk back.  After all, if Trump really is a "con man" and a "carnival barker" and a "racist", and yada, yada, yada, and you've gone on record as saying so, how can you even credibly endorse him, even timidly?  How can you credibly claim that Hillary would be worse.  In Trump's case, he CANNOT take someone who's let loose with such statements, because it will detract from the credibility of all concerned, and raise the question of "If Trump's THAT bad, why aren't anti-Trump Republicans supporting Hillary?"

I don't understand the logic in not supporting the nominee in an election year such as this when the court balance is at stake. 

Do they really think voters will just die or forget their stub of trump come 2020?    Whats Cruz gonna say " Folks vote for me because the last 4 years of Hillary have been awful".  The voters will be like .. wait a minute in 2016 you didn't even support our chance at defeating her.  Reagan and Nixion stood by Goldwater in 64 and both went on to become president.  Mitts old man  became irrelevant. 

[Bull Moose Base]

To clarify a misconception here:

Despite Massachusetts having a GOP governor and Virginia having a Democratic one, Kaine as VP is more problematic for the Democrats than Warren as far as control of the senate goes. I think there's some dispute but it seems likely a McAuliffe appointment would be for one year before a 2017 special election Democrats would have a fairly hard time winning, and then the regular 2018 one. Warren could announce her intention to resign in July, forcing a special election before the end of 2016, that Democrats would be favored to win (2010 and 2014 notwithstanding). Also, if Trump won, pretty sure Warren could withdraw her resignation.

[Former Senator Haslam2020]

To clarify a misconception here:

Despite Massachusetts having a GOP governor and Virginia having a Democratic one, Kaine as VP is more problematic for the Democrats than Warren as far as control of the senate goes. I think there's some dispute but it seems likely a McAuliffe appointment would be for one year before a 2017 special election Democrats would have a fairly hard time winning, and then the regular 2018 one. Warren could announce her intention to resign in July, forcing a special election before the end of 2016, that Democrats would be favored to win (2010 and 2014 notwithstanding). Also, if Trump won, pretty sure Warren could withdraw her resignation.

Good plan.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

I'll probably hold my nose and vote for Hillary if she picks Warren, tbh.

[Mr. Morden]

While I still think Scott Brown's a longshot because of abortion, he is at least in agreement with Trump on one of his big issues: the Muslim ban:

http://www.newshounds.us/fox_contributor_scott_brown_endorses_trump_s_muslim_ban_061416

I do think it'll be interesting to see how Trump's running mate handles Trump's most outrageous policy positions.  I mean, even if Trump picks someone like Sessions or Gingrich....are they going to say "Yes, I support taking Iraq's oil and killing terrorists' family members"?

Sure, Trump already has the endorsement of most Republican politicians.  But when they're asked about the more extreme aspects of Trump-ism, they tend to say that they don't agree with him on everything.  But when you're the guy's running mate, how much distance can you actually get from him?

[Sir Mohamed]

While I still think Scott Brown's a longshot because of abortion, he is at least in agreement with Trump on one of his big issues: the Muslim ban:

http://www.newshounds.us/fox_contributor_scott_brown_endorses_trump_s_muslim_ban_061416

I do think it'll be interesting to see how Trump's running mate handles Trump's most outrageous policy positions.  I mean, even if Trump picks someone like Sessions or Gingrich....are they going to say "Yes, I support taking Iraq's oil and killing terrorists' family members"?

Sure, Trump already has the endorsement of most Republican politicians.  But when they're asked about the more extreme aspects of Trump-ism, they tend to say that they don't agree with him on everything.  But when you're the guy's running mate, how much distance can you actually get from him?

Two north-easterners? I consider that as very unlikely. And keep in mind that Brown only served in the senate. He has not that much experience.

[Wells]

While I still think Scott Brown's a longshot because of abortion, he is at least in agreement with Trump on one of his big issues: the Muslim ban:

http://www.newshounds.us/fox_contributor_scott_brown_endorses_trump_s_muslim_ban_061416

I do think it'll be interesting to see how Trump's running mate handles Trump's most outrageous policy positions.  I mean, even if Trump picks someone like Sessions or Gingrich....are they going to say "Yes, I support taking Iraq's oil and killing terrorists' family members"?

Sure, Trump already has the endorsement of most Republican politicians.  But when they're asked about the more extreme aspects of Trump-ism, they tend to say that they don't agree with him on everything.  But when you're the guy's running mate, how much distance can you actually get from him?

Two north-easterners? I consider that as very unlikely. And keep in mind that Brown only served in the senate. He has not that much experience.

But wouldn't that be an asset if Trump is trying to run an outsider vs. insider campaign?

[Sir Mohamed]

While I still think Scott Brown's a longshot because of abortion, he is at least in agreement with Trump on one of his big issues: the Muslim ban:

http://www.newshounds.us/fox_contributor_scott_brown_endorses_trump_s_muslim_ban_061416

I do think it'll be interesting to see how Trump's running mate handles Trump's most outrageous policy positions.  I mean, even if Trump picks someone like Sessions or Gingrich....are they going to say "Yes, I support taking Iraq's oil and killing terrorists' family members"?

Sure, Trump already has the endorsement of most Republican politicians.  But when they're asked about the more extreme aspects of Trump-ism, they tend to say that they don't agree with him on everything.  But when you're the guy's running mate, how much distance can you actually get from him?

Two north-easterners? I consider that as very unlikely. And keep in mind that Brown only served in the senate. He has not that much experience.

But wouldn't that be an asset if Trump is trying to run an outsider vs. insider campaign?

The question is whether he wants an insider VP or not. He said he wants an insider. Brown could be neither a total insider nor a total outsider. However, the main factor why I think he won’t be picked is for geography and being pro-choice. But maybe we’re just thinking too logical. It looks like the Trumpster doesn’t care that much about geography, ideology, age, gender or race.

[Mr. Morden]

Fallin is among a group of Republican governors who'll be meeting with Trump in NY today:

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/state/gov-mary-fallin-to-meet-with-donald-trump-on-tuesday/article_2582816d-d5cd-50f8-a08a-d84fe7e9e3a7.html

[Fargobison]

Trump's short list grows shorter....

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[President Johnson]

Trump's short list grows shorter....

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Looks like he's out. Just like Newt.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

Sessions it is, then?

[IceSpear]

Yeah, I think it's between Sessions/Brown/Fallin/Christie. All are buttkissers who would sell their soul for power and would never contradict him.