Here is what I think Hillary's VP final list will be and SHOULD be:

[RBInMaine]

TIM KAINE: Remember, we need someone READY to be president. That is the first and most important criteria. Kaine is, having been a governor and now a Senator. He is seasoned. He is from a swing state. If Hillary wins VA, she most likely wins the election. He also has a great relationship with the Hispanic community and speaks Spanish. The question is, can he be TOUGH enough on FrankenTrump? He needs to gin himself up a bit. But in many respects, he is a very good pick.

SHERROD BROWN: He also is seasoned and is from a key swing state. Win Ohio and GAME OVER! He is also a strong progressive. The drawback is that he is a strong presence in the Senate and it would allow his R governor to appoint an R to his seat when we want to take back the Senate.

TIM RYAN: Again, he's been in Congress a long time but is still quite young. He's also from OH, a very key swing state. His drawback is his past employment as an aide to James Traficant, a nutty former congressman who went to jail.

XAVIER BECCERA: Long experience and ready to be Prez. Brilliant man who brings some regional balance. Hispanic so would obviously help with that important voting block. However, he's from CA, a Dem lock. And he's pretty mild mannered. Can he be tough enough on FrankenTrump? Can he gin himself up?

____________________________________________________________________________________

Much as I absolutely love her, it will not be WARREN. With all respect, Warren as VP doesn't bring gender balance to the ticket and political reality in this country is what it is. Is she really ready for the presidency with only so much time in the Senate? She is STRONG in the Senate. We need her there. Also, she is from very blue MA and not a swing state. There is no regional balance there. I have no doubt it will NOT be Warren, but she will be out there working like crazy to BASH and defeat FrankenTrump which she does so beautifully.

BOOKER is also not quite ready to be Prez. He is also from a state with a pig R gov. who will appoint an R to replace him in the Senate. He also doesn't bring regional balance, and NJ is a Dem lock. I like Booker a lot, but don't think he's ready.

[leftofcool]

1. Why do we need gender balance on the ticket?

What gender balance have the men been giving us for 240 years? Also, Warren's replacement will only have 80 days until an election so we could still pick up her seat.

[RBInMaine]

2. I hear you, but political reality is political reality. Also, no regional balance. We'll win MA.

I love Warren, but looking at the whole picture she isn't the best choice. Others bring more when you consider the whole picture.

[TheCowsCameHome]

10. That should piss off the "240" feminists. Nice job.

Get ready, dude.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=2161120

[RBInMaine]

15. No one is out to piss off anyone. This is reality. And regardless of the gender factor, there are

many other reasons not to choose Warren. She has fairly minimal national leadership experience and brings
no regional balance.

[TheCowsCameHome]

42. Try telling that to them -

You'll get your ass handed to you for suggesting there has to be gender balance. lol.

[Hortensis]

19. Why are you so sure "gender" and "regional" balance

are so important? Is they written in stone somewhere? We lacked gender balance when Obama and Biden ran and they won. This is a very unusual election year when people across the political spectrum are ready to say good-bye to the same-old/same-old.

I know regional balance is a standard concern, but which region is Hillary so poor in that she needs this kind of help there? The mountain west, maybe, but there aren't that many voters there anyway. Picking up a key state, perhaps. Brown - Ohio.

This year above all others I wish I were a political scientist. Fascinating! But if I were, I would be questioning all my assumptions.

[RBInMaine]

22. You're comparing apples to oranges. Here is why:

Think about Biden. Obama picked Biden because he brought racial balance, generational balance, and regional balance, Obama being from the midwest and Biden being from Delaware close to PA and being ORIGINALLY from PA with very close ties to it and being able to speak well to working class folks from the swing states like PA and OH. And he was ready to be President immediately. He brought tons of experience Obama didn't have.

Let me ask you, should Obama have chosen another African American? A Hispanic? A Woman? I am not for one second saying there weren't qualified wonderful African American, Hispanic, and Women possibilities, but such demographics have to be considered. Obama made a good choice considering the whole picture. That is just the hard reality. I so wish it was a perfect world, but it isn't. Why do you think McCain chose Palin? Do you think her being a woman had nothing to do with it? He was looking for gender balance as part of the decision.

I love Warren, but she is too limited in what she brings. Simple as that. This decision can't just be about you want emotionally and as an individual. We have to think the whole picture and the entire country in a general American election.

[Hortensis]

23. McCain losing with Palin does not explain

Last edited Fri Jun 17, 2016, 12:07 PM - Edit history (1)

why gender balance is critical to the Democrats in this election. Do we feel men are underrepresented in politics so that some balancing is needed?

I agree racial and/or ethic reaching out would always be important to Democrats, and that absolutely includes this election; however, our party already has broadly diverse support. Our biggest problem right now that I can see is what numbers the various Hispanic groups come out to vote in, so it's likely a Hispanic candidate would pay a good return.

BUT, how about ideological spread, or "balance"? We need all those who were excited by Bernie to get out and vote. We also need centrist and moderate conservatives to vote Democrat. Which of those men you listed would appeal to both groups as strongly as Elizabeth Warren, a strong economically conservative/socially liberal progressive with an inspiring and well known record of successful fighting for reform?

I believe that what America really needs right now is a reawakening of centrist and conservative progressivism, the belief their parents had in using government to advance society and tackle problems too large to fix any other way. Democrats are a majority and we still don't have the numbers to do it alone. It requires majorities in government. It requires broadening our ideological appeal.

[immoderate]

29. Mixed gender tickets never win here.

--imm

[Hortensis]

35. Interesting thought. They "don't." :)

Not for president, anyway.

[John Poet]

26. Men are not going to vote for Hillary because there's a guy in

the Veep's slot, if they weren't going to vote for her anyway.

If she wants to put a woman there, more power to her! Might actually help bump her turnout with the millennial women.

[Adrahil]

32. I agree with this.

Any He-man Woman-hater is already not going to vote for her. A man as a Veep won't attract anyone who who is reluctant to vote for a woman.

[LoverOfLiberty]

28. Don't be convinced we can hold Warren's seat

in liberal MA. The last time it was unexpectedly vacated it was won by a Republican.

[Mike Nelson]

3. Almost agree...

...at first, I thought she would not consider Warren due to gender balance. But, Warren brings progressive-minded voters and plays the "woman card" to the hilt. I think Hillary is keen on doing that, if she could... The other younger considerations are going to be around for years, which is great for the Dems!

[ucrdem]

4. One point to consider is who Clinton feels she can work with.

Another is that she's already got gender balance by having Bill in the campaign and administration. So I guess if we got used to Hillary we could get used to Hillary and Warren. But I also think it's probably not going to happen.

[BeyondGeography]

5. Kaine is a dreary choice, and I wouldn't worry about the map this time

Warren mobilizes voters across the country who are not excited about Hillary. There are drawbacks to her as she would send some moderates who are appalled by Trump back into his column or off the field entirely, but they would be far outnumbered by the voters who would be energized by her.

That said, I would be at least slightly surprised if Hillary picks her as it's the gutsy choice. I have a lot of respect for HRC, but gutsy when it comes to political choices is not her style. Kaine would be much more in line with what I expect from her. But if Trump remains the nominee, we have a chance at a game changing election and, to make the most of it, Tm Kaine is not the way to go.

[RBInMaine]

13. Always have to be concerned about the map. Warren excites the left wing but doesn't bring much else.

[RBInMaine]

21. Kaine is very smart, very qualified, from VA, and has strong ties to the Hispanic community. But,

gotta gin him up. He is very, very smart. Watch him in Senate hearings. Just gotta fire him up some. In most respects he's a very good choice.

[BeyondGeography]

24. He's a safe choice

Let's face it, these picks are usually only important if they're very bad. I could live with him, I just think we have a chance to shift the long-term national conversation in our favor ideologically with Warren.

[Lord Magus]

34. He's also the most conservative choice on her list.

And President Obama did pretty good with a VP from a solid blue state, so not really sure we need a swing state VP in order to win swing states.

[brooklynite]

6. Won't be Sherrod Brown; we won't risk the Senate.

[Hoyt]

7. Understand the analysis, but not sure conventional wisdom matters this year.

[glennward]

8. Is there a union leader our there with background and business experience?

One who has strong union backing from the average working person, whom the media likes, no ties to organized crime, great charisma, and no progressive albatrosses? Is there a corporate big wig who previously worked with and for unions who runs a business that is pro union, pays good wages, non-discriminatory in all its operations, with demonstrable record of social conscience and behavior? That kind of person would help the Dems ensure victory over the GOP in almost every state.

[LLStarks]

9. Perez. Kaine and the others would guarantee a +1 R Senate pickup in 2017. eom

[RBInMaine]

18. Maybe. But he's had some controversy. I'd sooner go with Beccara.

[LonePirate]

31. Becerra is my choice but being from CA diminishes his chances.

He is fluent in Spanish so selecting him and keeping him focused on AZ, CO, FL, NV and TX (if she thinks she can cause Trump headaches there) would be a wise use of his time.

[Lord Magus]

36. Kaine has a Dem governor that would appoint his replacement.

Which seems to be his main selling point, making him a pretty boring pick.

[geek tragedy]

11. Kaine and Ryan are terrible on abortion nt

[RBInMaine]

12. You can't get perfection. Think big picture.

[geek tragedy]

14. Ummm, women's civil rights is definitely part of the big picture nt

[RBInMaine]

16. And Hillary already brings plenty of that. We need a more balanced ticket. There are other voters.

[YouDig]

17. I'd go with Sherrod Brown if not for the fact that Kasich gets to replace him.

Swing state progressive, good call, strong on labor issues, fighting for those white working class rust belt votes. But hate to lose him in the Senate.

I dunno who else though.

[RBInMaine]

20. Yeah, Brown's a good choice but for that Senate vacancy problem.

[cali]

25. Sherrod Brown would be replaced by a repuke.

And Ohio is not a sure bet in any ensuing election. Bad, bad idea.

Kaine is also a poor choice. He's boring as hell.

<snip>

He also has the misfortune of having been a pre-Obama Democratic governor in a purple state, with a not-so-liberal record to show for it. During his Senate campaign, he bragged about cutting the budget by more than $5 billion and eliminating the Virginia estate tax — not things the Democratic base will generally consider worth celebrating.

But the biggest problem for Clinton would likely be Kaine’s record on abortion, which is, from a pro-choice vantage point, close to abysmal. While Kaine has become more vocally pro-choice as a senator, he identified as personally pro-life while running for governor in 2005.


<snip>

http://www.vox.com/2016/6/16/11954878/hillary-clinton-vice-president-veepstakes

I think it's absurd to say Booker- who I definitely would not like to see be her choice, isn't ready.

Of those you listed, I think Perez is the best.

[SheilaT]

27. I honestly have never had a VP choice sway my vote.

In 2000 when Al Gore selected Joe Lieberman, it made me NOT want to vote for Gore, because I thought Lieberman was such a crappy choice.

For what it's worth, I've never heard of Xavier Beccera before reading this post.

The one thing to be certain of is that whoever Hillary's VP choice is, that person will fill all the ceremonial duties of the office and face into oblivion.

And all who are no rooting for Warren as VP, how many of you a year ago were saying she should absolutely not run for the top job because she's needed in the Senate? And why did you change your mind, if you did?

Booker strikes me as corrupt and dishonest as they come.

[NurseJackie]

33. New Jersey would have a special election... not a permanent appointment.

There may (or may not) be a temporary appointment depending on what the governor wants to do, but it wouldn't be for a full term.

https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_special_election_in_New_Jersey,_2013

[Lord Magus]

38. Booker really turned me off with his defense of Bain Capital in 12.

Everything else about him seems good, but does Hillary really want a VP who really is as friendly to the bankers as she's accused of being?

[NurseJackie]

40. It will be difficult for Hillary to please everyone.

[eastwestdem]

37. Brown is my choice. While I like others better, he is the best choice politically. nt

[Lord Magus]

39. Delaware was a solid-blue Dem lock, but Biden still worked out very well for President Obama.

Having a VP from a swing state is overrated. The important thing should be what they bring to the ticket nationally.

[DonCoquixote]

41. as much as I love Sherrod and Elizabeth

The senate will be crucial to keep as is, because the House is firmly in the hands to the GOP, which means the Koches, Addelsons, etc. Xavier would be a great strength, especially as would be the ultimate thumb in trump's eye, and bring brown voters (like myself) into play in places like Florida.

If warren is picked, it will be seen as what it is, an attempt to mollify the Bernie or Bust crowd.