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

[StateBoiler]

I'm actually surprised Jeff Merkley didn't make the shortlist for VP. It would be a great way to satisfy the left, without the potential pitfalls of the other options (age, gender, and Senate seat, for Sanders/Warren/Brown respectively.)

I'm surprised Franken didn't

Well, I like Franken, but it's not exactly hard to see why he wasn't considered (SNL baggage.) I have a hard time thinking of an explanation for no Merkley.

Once saw an SNL skit where Franken after getting outed as gay by his partner in a skit proceeded to go backstage and "shoot himself".

/stuff that would not be done today

[Bakersfield Uber Alles]

Clinton will be in Orlando on Friday, followed by a rally in Tampa later in the day:

http://orlando-politics.com/2016/07/18/hillary-clinton-in-orlando-on-friday-during-vp-pick-window/

My guess would be that she might announce her VP choice in Orlando, but we’ll see.

Interestingly, as that story points out, Elizabeth Warren is scheduled to speak before the National Conference of La Raza in Orlando on Saturday, one day after Clinton is likely to announce her VP pick in the same city.

Hmmmmm...two women on the ticket would be a bold move

Having two southern Dems was deemed bold at one time.

[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.

[libertpaulian]

Clinton will be in Orlando on Friday, followed by a rally in Tampa later in the day:

http://orlando-politics.com/2016/07/18/hillary-clinton-in-orlando-on-friday-during-vp-pick-window/

My guess would be that she might announce her VP choice in Orlando, but we’ll see.

Interestingly, as that story points out, Elizabeth Warren is scheduled to speak before the National Conference of La Raza in Orlando on Saturday, one day after Clinton is likely to announce her VP pick in the same city.

Hmmmmm...two women on the ticket would be a bold move

Having two southern Dems was deemed bold at one time.

I think there's a huge difference between the two scenarios...

[Holmes]

Everything Clinton has said about her running mate selection process has indicated that she takes this choice seriously and wants someone who can govern (in stark contrast to Trump). If she picks Warren, I trust that she will have done it not with the intention of winning votes, but rather what she has seen and heard from Warren's portfolio and their one-on-ones has led her to believe she can do the job.

[Mr. Morden]

If you guys haven't yet investigated the URLs for various Clinton running mates, you're missing out:

http://www.clintonbiden.com
http://www.clintonbooker.com
http://www.clintonkaine.com

[MK]

So If Hillary picks Castro the slogan can be " I am crooked with her" 

[Mr. Morden]

Politico’s sources of “multiple people who are in regular contact with [Clinton’s] inner circle” are focusing on Kaine, Perez, and now Vilsack as the current leading contenders:

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/vilsack-stock-rises-as-clinton-nears-vp-pick-225789

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I think it's pretty clear Castro had been violating the Hatch Act for months now. I'm surprised it became an issue so late.

[Gustaf]

All very true. But you're missing the "first, do no harm" part of any VP pick.

Now, I am very far left, but to me picking Kaine signals that Clinton plans to run (and govern) as Republican lite. Even moreso than Obama.

That is pretty unacceptable to me and raises my chances of staying home or "throwing away my vote" astronomically, even if it may mean Trump winning. If significant numbers of likely voters share me views on this Kaine becomes a risky pick.

Not voting for Clinton is a vote for Trump. I respect your feelings on this, and I share them in a way. But you have to realize it's going to be either her or Trump; no matter how well a third party *might* do, it will not be enough to win. So would you rather have her or him?

Clinton is not a perfect candidate, and she is not the most ideal choice for president. But she is leagues beyond Trump.

I rest my case .

Eh.

I think Clinton rallying around the base causes substantially less harm than picking a moderate.

Left wingers who are currently not convinced (who DO exist) will not be convinced by more comparison of Clinton to Trump, with no positive reason to vote for her. They're leaning towards staying home.  Moderates currently picking Clinton as the lesser of two evils will either continue to do so, or simply not vote. Trump gains no votes if Clinton picks Warren,  and Clinton loses votes if she picks Kaine.

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?


EDIT: This is of course colored by the fact that I'm in the population of people watching Clinton's VP pick to see if I can vote for her. 

All of Sanders' work in getting that progressive platform (the most progressive ever!) meant nothing to you?

[Doimper]

All very true. But you're missing the "first, do no harm" part of any VP pick.

Now, I am very far left, but to me picking Kaine signals that Clinton plans to run (and govern) as Republican lite. Even moreso than Obama.

That is pretty unacceptable to me and raises my chances of staying home or "throwing away my vote" astronomically, even if it may mean Trump winning. If significant numbers of likely voters share me views on this Kaine becomes a risky pick.

Not voting for Clinton is a vote for Trump. I respect your feelings on this, and I share them in a way. But you have to realize it's going to be either her or Trump; no matter how well a third party *might* do, it will not be enough to win. So would you rather have her or him?

Clinton is not a perfect candidate, and she is not the most ideal choice for president. But she is leagues beyond Trump.

I rest my case .

Eh.

I think Clinton rallying around the base causes substantially less harm than picking a moderate.

Left wingers who are currently not convinced (who DO exist) will not be convinced by more comparison of Clinton to Trump, with no positive reason to vote for her. They're leaning towards staying home.  Moderates currently picking Clinton as the lesser of two evils will either continue to do so, or simply not vote. Trump gains no votes if Clinton picks Warren,  and Clinton loses votes if she picks Kaine.

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?


EDIT: This is of course colored by the fact that I'm in the population of people watching Clinton's VP pick to see if I can vote for her.  

All of Sanders' work in getting that progressive platform (the most progressive ever!) meant nothing to you?

He's the kind of special snowflake that gave us Bush.

[syntaxerror]

Perez, Kaine and Vilsack apparently the frontrunners. All great and bring different things to the table. Personally can't choose one from them.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

The VP would be symbolic gesture, I don't see why some of our Berniebots seem so determined that this is a deal-breaker.

[Illiniwek]

I have such a hard time believing that those are the three, but if they are, I think I would personally like to see Vilsack get the nod. I don't know if he is necessarily better than the others, but I think he will come across very well to independents. The only thing that worries me is Clinton-Vilsack comes across just as clunky as Dukakis-Bentsen, and that doesn't have a good ring to it.

[Mr. Morden]

Vilsack for VP has a Twitter account called "Feel The Sack":

https://twitter.com/FeelTheSack

[Sir Mohamed]

Castro's a lawbreaker: 

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-07-18/hud-s-castro-found-in-violation-of-law-against-campaign-activity

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sounds like no action will be taken against him for this though.  Sebelius did the same several years ago, and nothing happened to her.

Even if nothing will be done against him, he’s likely out. Too sad, I have to change my sig. Who endorse now for VP? I think I’ll go with Kaine.

[SteveRogers]

Where is this Vilsack buzz coming from? Why is this happening, and why are people pretending this is a normal thing? Have I awoken in some sort of bizarro world where bronz4141 is running the Clinton campaign?

[Mr. Morden]

Where is this Vilsack buzz coming from?

It's coming from the same place the buzz for the other possible veep choices is coming from: People in and around the Clinton campaign, leaking things to the press.

[IceSpear]

Where is this Vilsack buzz coming from? Why is this happening, and why are people pretending this is a normal thing? Have I awoken in some sort of bizarro world where bronz4141 is running the Clinton campaign?

Yeah, next she'll be vetting Dick Gephardt and Sam Nunn. Hillary needs to stop catering to the bronz vote.

[Citizen (The) Doctor]

Politico’s sources of “multiple people who are in regular contact with [Clinton’s] inner circle” are focusing on Kaine, Perez, and now Vilsack as the current leading contenders:

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/vilsack-stock-rises-as-clinton-nears-vp-pick-225789

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This entire story reads red herring.

[Illiniwek]

This entire story reads red herring.

That sounds about right. Hillary wants to surprise on Friday. Could be setting up a Warren pick when everyone is thinking that she is not a finalist.

[The Other Castro]

I feel like Clinton is just trying to make it seem like she didn't decide on Kaine weeks ago, which she probably did.

[PeteB]

I feel like Clinton is just trying to make it seem like she didn't decide on Kaine weeks ago, which she probably did.

This.

[PeteB]

If you guys haven't yet investigated the URLs for various Clinton running mates, you're missing out:

http://www.clintonbiden.com
http://www.clintonbooker.com
http://www.clintonkaine.com

Hilarious .

[edmund]

I am leaning toward the liklihood of Vilsack because the other names mentioned from swing states, Kaine (Virginia) and Hickenlooper (Colorado) Clinton will likely carry anyway whereas Iowa is more of a question mark, while Clinton leads there now it is the narrowest and the most likely to possibly flip.