A veep for Hillary

[NYCButterfinger]

This is an updated version. I reposted this.

Who do you think would be good choices for Hillary Clinton as vice president? Who would you NOT want to see on the ticket? I personally would want to see Virginia Sen. Tim Kaine; Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack; and Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julian Castro as her VP choice. Other choices could be Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar, Missouri Sen. Claire McCaskill, former Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell, DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson, Atlanta Mayor Kasim Reed, and a dark horse: Former Indiana congressman and former Ambassador to India Timothy Roemer. Who can you see Hillary Clinton picking as her running mate?

[ericson00]

1. If Bill Richardson just hadn't betrayed the Clintons a few years back

then he'd have been perfect. from a swing state and swing area, Hispanic, experienced, etc. But since he's not a contender, I'd go with Steve Beshear, gov of Kentucky. Even if Hillary doesn't win there (Bill did twice tho by small margins tho a win is a win), she'll have some proximity to Missouri and Arkansas as well as Ohio and Indiana. He's also next to WV, which Bill won by a mile twice. Yes its true Obama got blown out there but I think skin color in a state like WV did not help.

Castro, idk, because he's got no swing states in his proximity but he could boost Hispanic turnout in other swing states.

[NYCButterfinger]

7. Clinton/Beshear, Clinton/Kaine good choices

Beshear brings KY, OH, WV, he's better than Manchin.

Kaine brings VA, MN, and MO to Hillary. Kaine grew up in Kansas City, and if you have Kaine campaign there in August and September 2016, it can make a difference by October. Democrats should try to compete in Missouri. Jason Kander and Chris Koster would benefit from Hillary and Kaine campaigning there.

Kaine has working class roots that would play well in Ohio. People say that VP picks don't matter, but sometimes they do.

[SheilaT]

19. Richardson is 67 years old.

Am I the only one who thinks that all of these senior citizens are not such a good idea?

Don't misunderstand. I'll be 67 myself next month, but after one of the youngest Presidents in history, we're well on track to a fairly old one, no matter who gets nominated, who wins.

[AtomicKitten]

25. Bill Richardson "betrayed" the Clintons by endorsing the candidate who won the nomination.

"Betrayed" - such hyperbole. Hillary had already blown it by the time Bill Richardson left the contest and endorsed Obama when it was clear he would win and, in fact, did end up winning the nomination. The Clintons are whiny children, really rotten sports, expecting those around them to go down with the ship. They will never make it back into the White House regardless of their bullying politics, so speculation on Veep is a pointless exercise. Proceed.

[NYCButterfinger]

28. Booker, Kasim Reed?

They're both rising stars and can do well governing. They're executives. They ran cities.

[AtomicKitten]

29. Goldman Sachs? Kissinger?

[840high]

39. We have a winner.

[VanillaRhapsody]

42. No but when she gets nomination

We will have one

[ericson00]

45. The primaries weren't over when he endorsed. Also, show some appreciation for

the Clintons. Before them, the Democratic Party lost 5 out of 6 presidential contests. Since the Clintons, the Democrats have won 5 out of 6 popular elections (and 5 out of 6 elections given that 2000 was stolen). In the electoral college, Democrats averaged 113 electoral votes from 1968-1988. Since 1992, we've averaged 327. In the same periods, the GOP went from averaging >400 to 210. From 1968-1988, IL, NM, CA, NJ, VT, and NH went Republican 6 out of 6 times, MI, DE, ME 5 out of 6 times, PA, CT, ME, MD 4 out of 6 times. Those states alone add up to 161 EVs. These states (except NH in 2000 and NM in 2004) have all gone Democrat 6 for 6 since Bill and Hillary Clinton came along. (and no Republican excuses please)

A party and cause cannot survive by eating their own. Ask Donald Trump and the GOP.

[AtomicKitten]

67. Most of the 2014 candidates the Clintons stumped for lost.

This being the most current measure of their clout, and it ain't all that anymore.

Link: http://www.politico.com/story/2014/11/2014-elections-clinton-candidates-112559.html

Candidate Alison "I'm a Clinton Democrat" Grimes was coached by Bill Clinton to reject Obama and she lost too, garnering fewer votes than Obama did in Kentucky.

Link: http://www.politicususa.com/2014/11/08/running-president-obama-costs-big-time-kentucky.html

[ericson00]

68. much of the 2014 Democrats in general lost.

whether they associated with Clinton or didn't. Overall it was a bad year for Dem congressional candidates everywhere.

[AtomicKitten]

69. Don't strain your back moving those goalposts.

[stevenleser]

70. Richardson himself acknowledges he didn't handle that whole situation very well.

Sad all around.

[Thinkingabout]

2. It is very nice to see a large and capable veep available for Hillary to choose, I have also seen

Last edited Fri Jul 31, 2015, 11:15 PM - Edit history (1)

Julian Castro name come up. Looks like there are lots of good picks.

[dsc]

4. I hope that is a typo

otherwise you are being very sexist given your avatar.

[Thinkingabout]

16. It was, the h and b are next to each other, sorry, please forgive.

[dsc]

17. I figured that was likely it

It was hard to imagine that sexist of a post coming from an Ann Richards avitar.

[Aerows]

32. I don't agree with Thinkingabout very often

But she's good people. That was absolutely a typo.

[dsc]

3. Given the probable closeness of the US Senate, she needs to avoid any Senator from a state

with a GOP governor. That eliminates Brown, Warren, Booker, Durbin, and a few others. House members would be fine as would current or former cabinet members. Either Castro brother would work. Deval Patrick might be an interesting choice. Martin O'Malley could work. She will have to go young given her age and probably can't do a woman unless it is a woman of color.

[gwheezie]

5. I've already picked one for Bernie

Barbara Lee for Bernie. Sherrod Brown for Hillary. Amy Klobuchar for OMalley.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

8. Aghh, no no no, not Amy Klobuchar for anybody!

She has the backbone of a jellyfish and she's the epitome of a convenient centrist. You can't get a straight answer from her or her staff about anything - she's a human windsock.

[NYCButterfinger]

9. Klobuchar can help O'Malley with the Rust Belt vote. He's a Northerner.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

10. So is she. Minnesota is about as north as it gets.

She's one of my senators, and the only good things I can think of to say about her is that she interviews well and that she generally votes the Dem party line. But she has absolutely no discernible spine. She is definitely no progressive. Also, Minnesota has never been part of the Rust Belt. It's high tech and medical and a lot of agriculture - there's never been that much heavy industry.

[gwheezie]

11. That's what I thought

Although I don't know how much it really matters where the VP comes from

[SheilaT]

20. I do think Sherrod Brown is an amazing person.

But it doesn't really look as if he has higher ambitions.

Keeping in mind that many here said that the main reason Elizabeth Warren should not run is how much she can accomplish as a Senator instead, I think that would go double for Brown going from the Senate to being Vice President. However, if it comes to that, only he can make the decision.

[VanillaRhapsody]

43. Nd what constiuency does he help with..

I think its Castro

[JaneyVee]

6. O'Malley.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

12. Julian Castro

eom

[moobu2]

13. I second him.

[leftofcool]

14. Ditto

[NYCButterfinger]

15. What about Tim Kaine or Tom Vilsack?

Julian Castro would be great too, he can help with swing voters, Latinos and African-American voters, but he may be seen as Palinesque. He's more experienced than Palin, but the media would ask him "Are you ready to be president on Day One?".

Kaine and Vilsack are my favorite choices, right now. Vilsack is , but he is a good man, and was a good governor of Iowa and is a good Agriculture Secretary. They can help Hillary with Independent voters.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

18. Sarah Palin didn't have a B A from Stanford and a JD from Harvard Law.

eom

[DCBob]

49. Yes.. I think he is it unless he doesnt want it.

And I think he wants it.

[NYCButterfinger]

21. Tom Vilsack would be a good, safe choice.

Vilsack could help Hillary in the crucial Midwest, states such as IA, OH, MO. He's a good administrator as he was in Iowa.

[villager]

31. Just let him go straight to his lobbyist job for Monsanto.

No Vilsack, please.

[NYCButterfinger]

34. I like Secy. Vilsack.

He's done a good job working with farmers of the United States. Monsanto is a stupid company, but it seems like Agriculture Secretaries love there.

[villager]

37. He's a lapdog for the usual suspects

http://www.motherjones.com/blue-marble/2015/03/tom-vilsack-2015-dietary-guidelines-sustainability-environment

[ram2008]

22. O'Malley would be HRC's veep

Or Julian Castro if Rubio is the nominee. Although I don't think he has enough experience.

[elleng]

27. Because WHY?

Their approaches to Wall Street are so similar? and War?

[ram2008]

30. Because they complement each other

He complements Hillary's weaknesses.

HRC not personable, O'Malley is

HRC a little too cozy with Wall Street, O'Malley is not

HRC too hawkish, O'malley a little more dovish

HRC is an insider? O'Malley an outsider

Also O'Malley is not someone who would go off script, has executive experience, and isn't too far out the mainstream that he's not electable. He checks off all the boxes, and I can't think of anyone else who does the same.

[elleng]

36. I don't see him going along with her closeness to wall street at all.

She's not just 'a little too cozy with Wall street,' imo, but hugely and irretrievably so, which will color all her decisions, and affect the well-being of the U.S. for a LONG time. This is my #1 reason for NOT supporting her and for supporting him; his valuable executive experience is my reason for supporting him rather than Bernie.

[VanillaRhapsody]

44. Not personable???

WTF are you reading that tells you that? Why do you think you she has such high polling all this time? GMAFB

[ram2008]

47. Have you actually read the polling?

Her lowest numbers are her trustworthiness and 'caring about people like us'-- those are indicators of personalibility.

She's leading because she's been running for years, has the entire democratic establishment behind her along with Wall Street, and has 100% name ID and is considered almost a historical figure with women.

Also her best traits (in polling) are her strength, ability to lead, and to get things done. Doesn't mean she's personable though.

[VanillaRhapsody]

48. Why yes I have.....and she has consistently been so....which proves my point

that you are wrong...

There is NO WAY a woman who WASN'T "personable" would make it as far as she has....do you know how quickly women are labeled such things as "battle axes" at the first whiff of any thing less than "personable".

[ram2008]

50. You can't prove your point by just saying so, use evidence

Here's the evidence she's not personable-- aside from the fact that she has had to change her press strategy multiple times, and how her numbers go down everytime she's in the spotlight...

All these are from the most recent polls from each respective organization:

Quinnipiac Poll: Trump and Clinton have the worst scores among top candidates on honesty and caring:

Clinton is not honest and trustworthy, voters say 57 – 37 percent, and doesn’t care about their needs and problems, voters say 52 – 45 percent.

Fox News Poll: Do you believe Hillary Clinton’s natural instincts lean toward telling the truth or toward
hiding the truth?

Telling the truth - 33% Hiding the truth - 58% (Don’t know) 8

NBC/WSJ : Which of the following best describes the primary reason you would feel (optimistic and confident/satisfied and hopeful) if Hillary Clinton were elected president? (RANDOMIZE)+

Among Optimistic: Her experience: 59%, Her positions 18%, leadership 13%...personal qualities 2%

Which of the following best describes the primary reason you would feel (uncertain/pessimistic or worried) if Hillary Clinton were elected president? (RANDOMIZE)+

Among Uncertain/Pessimistic: Her positions 27%, her leadership 23%, personal qualities 21%

If she were personable, these numbers would not continue to go down the longer she's on the campaign trail. Roping off the press, not answering questions fully, etc is not an example of someone who is open and personable. Sorry.

[VanillaRhapsody]

51. I can prove my point by being a woman and saying what I just said....there is NO WAY

on God's green earth that a woman with as fine a career as Ms Clinton's would have made it this far with out being labeled a "B" or some such term for it if a woman is ever anything LESS than "personable"....thats what I KNOW!

[ram2008]

52. So nothing

Great.

[VanillaRhapsody]

54. So experience....and reality...

[ram2008]

56. No your experience and your reality...

Does not qualify for the the reality of Presidential politics on a national level, or you know, actual DATA which says the opposite of what you claim.

Hillary is not personable, at least as perceived by the electorate at this point. That is the reality. That is what the data says. That is what the media says, and that is what the voters are saying.

[VanillaRhapsody]

58. ask other women....they will tell you....

its just not YOUR reality....you were thankfully spared that one! If you are less than "personable" people find that a positive trait...its expected at times....but for women.....its a very different world.

[Alfalfa]

53. Hillary Clinton isn't just any regular woman

She's the wife of a former president. I'm sure that didn't hinder her career.

[VanillaRhapsody]

55. How does that prove she is not "personable" exactly?

We never had "personable" First Ladies before? Does that somehow exclude one?

[Alfalfa]

59. Well it means there are alternative explanations for the success of her career

Her successful career, if you want to call it that, isn't proof of her personable personality. We've had personable First Ladies before, but we've also had ones that weren't.

[VanillaRhapsody]

60. It doesn't explain how she IS less than personable...when any woman with any position of power

who ever exhibits behavior less than "personable"is ridiculed mercilessly for it. Particularly THIS woman....who has been vetted and dragged over coals for the last 30 yrs! Trust me when I tell you there is NO WAY a less than "personable" woman could tolerate all she has and STILL come out smelling like a rose otherwise!

[ram2008]

63. The original comment was talking about how she is perceived by the nation

She might very well be personable when she is at home, with her friends or family etc, just like Mitt Romney could've been. However, that does not mean that she is perceived that way by people who will be voting. Right now her "personability" is considered a weakness, and going back to my original point which has been derailed, O'Malley would be a good complement to that perceived weakness.

[oasis]

74. Hillary's been chosen "Most Admired Woman" numerous times. You don't

reach that kind of status being a potted plant.

[ram2008]

75. Shrub was most admired man 2001-2007

I think W was the very definition of a potted plant.

[olddots]

23. I'm not going to say Diane Feinstein for Hillary

see I didn't say it .

[nsd]

24. Mark Warner /nt

[NYCButterfinger]

26. Warner would be good too.

Yes, he's a DINO, but he can deliver Virginia. For some reason, he barely won reelection over that sleaze Ed Gillespie.

[lunamagica]

33. Julian Castro. That may turn Texas blue!

Last edited Sat Aug 1, 2015, 01:22 AM - Edit history (1)

[NYCButterfinger]

35. I can see Hillary's VP choices like this

Castro brothers (Julian and Joaquin), Tim Kaine, Tom Vilsack, Martin O Malley, Martin Heinrich, Evan Bayh , Mark Warner, Timothy Roemer, Kirsten Gillibrand. NO Rahm Emanuel. NO Andrew Cuomo. NO Joe Manchin (nice guy, but I don't see him doing well in VP debate).

[NYCButterfinger]

38. What about Tim Roemer?

Former Indiana congressman from 1991 to 2003. Was a member of the 9/11 commission, endorsed Barack Obama in 2008, was rumored to be on Obama's VP shortlist in 2008, he was confirmed as Ambassador to India in 2009 and served until 2011. With Midwestern appeal, Roemer can be a good dark horse choice.

[Peregrine]

40. Paul Krugman

shows the economy is important and he is awesome.

[Charles de Gaudless]

41. Booker

Cory Booker, stirred, not shaken.

[hollowdweller]

46. I would like to see someone much younger, that came up after the Cold War was mostly over.

One reason that I voted Obama over Hillary was that in people in her age group, and slightly younger, all foreign policy is filtered thru the idea of the Cold War. A grand struggle of two powers against each other.

Even the younger republicans are like this because being angry against some enemy, whether Russia, or ISIS, or people less fortunate is part and parcel of their appeal.

However one thing that really appealed to me about Obama was his NOT operating out of the Cold War paradigm even though multiple groups have tried to get him to. He's even worked really hard to resist Putin, who operates and benefits politically from that idea from drawing him in.

I really think as long as we operate from that perspective we will be spending way too much on wars and the military, and way too little on the things we really need to beef up the infrastructure and society we need to hold our ground on the new economic war that's going on.

[peacebird]

57. Tom Vilsak is monsantos minion. A horrible choice for Ag, worse for VP

Tim Kaine just sold us out voting for TPP so again, not my choice.

I see her picking Castro or O'Malley

[NYCButterfinger]

62. Vilsack brings Iowa

Hillary Clinton needs to win Iowa. I like Vilsack . He doesn't have any downsides. He brings the Midwest to Clinton.

[peacebird]

66. He's for GMO's and against labelling them, and proMonsanto.

[winter is coming]

61. A life-sized marionette stuffed with cash.

Why bother with pretense?

[NCTraveler]

64. Castro. Nt

[Sunlei]

65. Sen. Sanders or Joe Biden again, they both run for president, so they'd probably be fine with VP

position.

[Motown_Johnny]

71. Santa Claus, since he doesn't exist and neither will a Clinton VP. n/t

[lovemydog]

72. Cory Booker, Julian Castro, Barbara Lee,

Elizabeth Warren, Martin O'Malley, Bernie Sanders, Michelle Obama, Ronda Rousy, Zoe Saldana, Lana Del Ray, Ice Cube, Jack White, The Drive-By Truckers, Mo'Ne Davis, Alex Morgan, The guy who is paying employees a minimum of 60k per year, Susan Rice.

[nsd]

76. Clinton will only get down to choosing a VP nominee after the primaries.

By then, she won't have to worry about the liberal/activist base.

The base may love Warren and Sanders, but neither person is likely to be an asset as Clinton faces the general electorate.

O'Malley is plausible only if he shows up well in Iowa/New Hampshire. Nobody else is plausible (not Booker, Castro, Lee, or the other names you put on there for some reason).

[lovemydog]

77. But I love Ronda Rousey.

I was just picking people I like. As I got going it got more funny to me.

[NYCButterfinger]

73. What about Sen. Bob Casey?

Could help with Pennsylvania, Ohio. He has legislative skills.

[oasis]

78. Depends on who the GOP has on their ticket.

O'Malley would be a fine veep. If not him, former LA mayor Villaraigosa.

[marmar]

79. Jamie Dimon

[NYCButterfinger]

80. Hell no. Dimon is boring.

If she wants an economic VP, pick a young professor from Harvard.