2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumwho would YOU pick for Hillary's veep, and why
I think it will be crucial, especially if the GOP picks someone like a Fiorina or Carson to "look diverse."
I would like a Julian Castro, if nothing else to counter Jeb's fake Latino stance. He could make Texas a lot less solid for the GOP.
As much as I hate it, Cory Booker could also play the part, even though I find him sleazy.
Kristine Gillbrand would be a strong one, especially as she could help scent this campaign which hints of Kennedy Camelot.
As far as absolute NOS
This is NOT anti Semitic, but a dislike of people who have defined their politics a certain way...NO RAHM, NO DWS. Putting them in is a big middle finger to the left, period.
No Evan Bayh, No landrieu, no Tim Kaine!, because they have defined themselves as backstabbers.
BainsBane
(53,035 posts)It won't be a woman.
O'Malley would be good, though I'm not sure he adds to the ticket like Castro does.
delrem
(9,688 posts)But I don't think he fits the ticket, quite yet.
He isn't exactly onside with Hillary Rodham Clinton, on many critically important fronts.
Maybe he needs some "evolving", or something.
BainsBane
(53,035 posts)and moreover you don't care. All you do is repeat the falsified version created by the GOP and so-called "progressive" internet warriors.
I intend to exercise my democratic rights independent of your opinion and everyone else who thinks they get to control how others vote. In fact, the more people like you complain about it, the moire I KNOW my decision is the right one.
You are off topic in this thread. You comments show you don't know the first thing about the role of the VP in American elections. They never pick anyone who is identical to them on issues. There is no fucking point to that.
You just couldn't stand the fact that somewhere on DU someone might be having a positive conservation, so you had to come in and fling feces.
Thanks for convincing me to make another donation to Clinton. I'll be sure to make it in your name.
Tikki
(14,557 posts)Tikki
Gothmog
(145,303 posts)I am in Texas and the Castro brothers would help down ballot races
thelordofhell
(4,569 posts)Having someone with high military credentials will destroy the republican Benghazi-Gate bullshit, as well as putting the pukes in a position to attempt to smear a decorated 4-star General and show what shallow incomplete jerks they are.........
brer cat
(24,575 posts)thelordofhell suggested Wesley Clark. That would be an interesting choice.
lunamagica
(9,967 posts)OKNancy
(41,832 posts)Either one is fine with me.
safeinOhio
(32,688 posts)Best on the issues and help with Ohio.
DonCoquixote
(13,616 posts)especially since Ohio is key. Though frankly, the idea the Brown's former opponent in the elections, who works for Fox News, Mr. Dennis K. might eat his guts out to think Brown beat HIM to the VP slot
Scuba
(53,475 posts)Hillary Clinton Praises a Guy With Lots of Blood on His Hands
In lauding Henry Kissinger, the possible Democratic presidential nominee goes far beyond her usual hawkish rhetoric.
Hillary Clinton often plays the hawk card: She voted for the Iraq war, dissed President Barack Obama for not being tough enough on Syria, and compared Vladimir Putin to Adolf Hitler. This is to be expected from a politician who has angled for a certain title: the first female president of the United States. Whether her muscular views are sincerely held or not, a conventional political calculation would lead her to assume it may be difficult for many voters to elect as commander-in-chief a woman who did not project an aggressive and assertive stance on foreign policy. So her tough talk might be charitably evaluated in such a (somewhat) forgiving context. Yet what remains more puzzling and alarming is the big wet kiss she planted (rhetorically) on former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger this week, with a fawning review of his latest book, World Order.
Sure, perhaps there is secretary's privilegean old boy and girls club, in which the ex-foreign-policy chiefs do not speak ill of each other and try to help out the person presently in the post. Nothing wrong with that. But former-Madam Secretary Clinton had no obligation to praise Kissinger and publicly participate in his decades-long mission to rehabilitate his image. In the review, she calls Kissinger a "friend" and reports, "I relied on his counsel when I served as secretary of state. He checked in with me regularly, sharing astute observations about foreign leaders and sending me written reports on his travels." She does add that she and Henry "have often seen the world and some of our challenges quite differently, and advocated different responses now and in the past." But here's the kicker: At the end of the review, she notes that Kissinger is "surprisingly idealistic":
Even when there are tensions between our values and other objectives, America, he reminds us, succeeds by standing up for our values, not shirking them, and leads by engaging peoples and societies, the sources of legitimacy, not governments alone.
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)Fearless
(18,421 posts)NYCButterfinger
(755 posts)Roemer was the Ambassador to India under Obama, was an Obama 2008 surrogate, and former Indiana congressman from '91 to 2003. Served on the 9/11 commission. Good Democrat on the issues. Elijah Cummings would be a good choice for VP too. He's tough, no nonsense.
sufrommich
(22,871 posts)has already moved to the Clinton campaign.
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)I feel duped by her latest statement about the TPP.
I don't mind if she want to be VP candidate, but I'd prefer the heartbeat of a strong leader between her and the west wing.
MBplayer
(73 posts)I liked him, but my Hispanic BF thought he was fake after about 15 seconds into his DNC speech. Then again, he's pretty tough when it comes to judging authenticity.
If it's Castro, we gotta make sure he resonates with the correct people.
Proud Public Servant
(2,097 posts)Hillary's going to run a campaign on being more than ready to be POTUS on day one. Castro's been mayor of a city where all the executive power is actually held by a city manager (so, basically, he's been the San Antonio's version of the Queen of England) and head of an inconsequential cabinet department. Seems like a good guy, but no way should he be a heartbeat away from the presidency just yet.
Personally, I've long felt that Hillary's biggest problem going into this race is that she's the consummate DC insider at a moment when people loathe DC far beyond the usual bounds; it'll be doubly a problem if the GOP runs a governor who can pound away at her as "DC Hillary." So I'd wonder about the wisdom of picking another DC player (like a senator) for the ticket. She'd be way better off with a popular Dem governor, but we're not exactly overflowing with those. Before Bernie upended the race, I would have bet a bit of money on Steve Beshear, especially after KY's incredibly successful implementation of Obamacare -- but he's a bit of a blue dog, and she's going to need someone more progressive than that. Devil Patrick is certainly a possibility, but a two-northeasterner ticket is probably a bad idea. Hickenlooper, maybe?
DonCoquixote
(13,616 posts)the fact is that Hillary will have to do two thing: A) either appeal to the Bernie Sanders so that they can hope to put someone closer to the presidency, or, the minorities who hear the GOP saying "we are gonna put da white people back in charge."
If I was to raid democratic governors, I would raid Kathleen Sibelius or Janet Napolitano. Both of them are Blue Politicians that worked in RED country. Both of them could easily be sold as Obama's picks as well.
However, she needs to keep certain people away. She does NOT need someone who stinks of DINO. Alison Lundergan grimes will be remembered for denying she even voted for Obama and her fake ass Sarah Palin gun toting, something that will rightfully piss off the Obama voters. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, if Hillary depends on HER to win Florida, then she has knocked looked at the election, and that goes double for Charlie Crist.
The real kicker will be if the GOP picks Susannah Martinez. If she runs, she will pull out all the stops.
Proud Public Servant
(2,097 posts)unless Rubio's their nominee.
And I see your point and agree. Hillary can't afford a moderate veep, not with the progressive wing of the party so animated by Bernie. And given that Hillary has abandoned her own 2008 strategy (pull in GOP-leaning white guys) in favor of Obama's (deepen the base) she may not be able to field an all-white ticket.
But I really think an obviously-calculated, borderline-cynical choice like Castro will backfire, especially since Hillary's already fighting the (deserved) reputation for being a calculating, cynical politician.
The real problem here is that the party's bench isn't deep enough -- or diverse enough -- to get her out of this dilemma.
DonCoquixote
(13,616 posts)What needs to be added is:
it is not deep enough or diverse enough thanks to the fact that the Clintons have been sucking all the air out of the room for years.
It started when they allowed Kerry to be swift-boated, continued through the Mid terms when they supported white center-right types and discouraged liberals, continued in 2008 with all the dog whistles, in 2012 with their mid-term (where they chased off Ashley Judd in favor of Alison Grimes, which let the Turtle King stay in.) and it easily can happen now, especially if they go for a real cynical pick like a Tim Kaine. However, if nothing else, she has several reliable cards to pull, like Cary Booker, who could sell himself as being the continuation of Obama, and the person that criticized Obama.
I also would love to think borderline cynical would backfire, but nobody sells that like the Clintons. AS much as I think BLM has a genuine point, the way Hillary's people manipulated them into attacking Sanders tells me that the Clintons can sell shit sandwiches, pour grey poupon on the turd, and sell it as a gourmet fad for ten dollars. Yeah, Castro's name might as well be "we know we better put a brown person up because the GOP got themselves some people who habla Espanol", and you know what that will really mean, jack diddly. Sadly, many of my fellow brown people will polish him till he shines.
Proud Public Servant
(2,097 posts)ibegurpard
(16,685 posts)Oh someone already beat me to it.
Retrograde
(10,137 posts)Congresswoman from California (not mine, alas): lengthy history of public service, and, as an aide to Leo Ryan, almost got killed at Jonestown. Too liberal, though.
Gillibrand's right out - Hillary's not going to pick a fellow New Yorker (at least that also eliminates Cuomo). Jerry Brown's too old, Gavin Newsome's too young and unknown outside California, as is Harris. If I had to bet I'd go with one of the Castro brothers.
Yupster
(14,308 posts)The best campaigner in the party.
ericson00
(2,707 posts)Last edited Sun Aug 9, 2015, 04:47 AM - Edit history (1)
on the ticket "big middle finger to the left???" Or is it referring to stances on the Jewish State of Israel?
6chars
(3,967 posts)I assume it is referring to stances on the state of Israel, criticism of which is not anti-semitic.
DonCoquixote
(13,616 posts)and the fact that said candidates have been very very critical and nasty to the left. Did you forget who called them retards? Did you forget who has hamstrung every liberal that dared run in Florida because they hurt her "friends."?
Uben
(7,719 posts)....I'd like Bernie to consider the job. If he's nominated, I would hope she would consider it. Don't know what kind of team they would be, but we'd have two good people leading and making decisions.
LuvLoogie
(7,011 posts)Definitely not Castro. She needs a heavy hitter. Someone on Joe Biden's level. Neither Castro is there.