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

[SteveRogers]

So Corker recommended Ivanka Trump as VP today.

And something completely anecdotal - a guy on another forum I frequent used to work on the Cruz campaign, and one of the people he got to know there now does polling for Trump. This Trump guy is apparently saying that they're going to be polling a Donald/Ivanka ticket tomorrow.

Is she even qualified for the VP position? She's 34.

According to Wikipedia she'll turn 35 on October 30. I wouldn't be shocked by anything Trump does at this point.

[SteveRogers]

Of course you'd have the problem of both Donald and Ivanka residing in New York. Not really an issue since Trump won't win New York, but he supposedly really thinks he'll win New York, so that'd have to be a consideration.

[SteveRogers]

This story suggests that Trump is keen on Gingrich in part because he shares his love of going after the media.  Apparently Trump’s decision to tweet the Frozen star of David grew out of a conversation he had with Gingrich(!):

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-and-gingrich-connect-as-outsiders-who-live-on-the-inside/2016/07/07/4524f52c-4489-11e6-bc99-7d269f8719b1_story.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Those two really are made for each other.

[SteveRogers]

Really? I've always interpreted the 17th Amendment to mean that a legislature can either give a governor the option to appoint a temporary replacement or not. The notion that that appointment power could be given in a restricted manner is novel to me.

Tell that to Hawaii, which requires the governor pick a replacement from a list provided by the former Senator's party.  Or Arizona, Utah or Wyoming, which require an appointee be from the same party as the former Senator.

I've gotta be honest, I've never really bothered to look into any of that before. Still, I have to wonder whether or not that would hold up in court if a governor ever challenged it.

A decade ago, the sitting GOP Senator in Wyoming died and the Democratic governor was forced by that law to pick a GOP Senate replacement (IIRC it was the state party submitted three names and the governor had to pick one of the three).

These laws have been used before, they're not just hypothetical.

Without sidetracking this thread too much, I will say that I agree with darthpi that there is a very legitimate question about whether such laws would hold up if challenged.

As for Massachusetts, the democratic legislature could certainly pass such a law right now, but their reason for doing so has to do with how ridiculous and overtly partisan they'd look if they flip-flopped on this issue a third time (Removing the power to appoint when Mitt Romney was governor, restoring the power to appoint when Ted Kennedy died, and now removing or constraining it to keep Warren's seat in Dem hands).

[SteveRogers]

Trump announcement will be Friday.

Time to start stalking airplanes

[SteveRogers]

I swear, if this is all an elaborate fakeout to announce Ivanka ...

[SteveRogers]

Possibly Clinton camp just throwing that name out there to counter buzz about a Trump vetting generals?

[SteveRogers]

How likely is it that all the scrambling is because Pence is having second thoughts about taking the plunge?

[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?

[SteveRogers]

I really don't understand why everyone is so down on Vilsack?  It's clear from polling that Clinton is having more trouble with the Midwest swing voter than with the Southeast swing voter and that if she loses VA, she will have already lost the EC elsewhere.  She could use a boost in Iowa and in similar parts of other Midwest states more than she could use a boost in VA, right?  I'd be a lot more concerned about Perez or Warren saying something off-the-wall left wing and hurting her powerful stability argument with college-educated moderates

Well for starters there's not really any evidence that Vilsack would do anything to clinch midwest swing voters.

[SteveRogers]

Booker would be a good choice. He voluntarily lived in a housing project in the worst part of Newark when he was on the council, which is a good story to tell about commitment to public service.

He would also ignite the Obama coalition.

He would ignite the Obama coalition, but with all of the tensions in our country, I don't know if America will want a African American vice president. Some people have "Obama fatigue".

See, comments like these make your obsession with "soothing midwesterners" and "middle-American values" seem less like an endearing quirk.