I think Clinton should pick someone that would energize and excite rank and file Democrats. Cory Booker would be an excellent choice, but so would any other young Democrat not associated with the Clinton machine.
Politico now has an article on Perez as a solid pick, for the progressive vote, Latino vote, labor vote, African America vote and Obama loyalists. He speaks Spanish (unlike the other progressive Latino possibility, Julian Castro), is known for giving fiery speeches, and seems to already have the full trust of Clinton on the campaign trail.
I think Clinton-Perez '16 has a nice ring to it.
I could go for that.
So could I. The oppo file on Perez is as much a target rich environment as Clinton’s. Only his will be new to most voters.
Realpolitik here.
The GOP standard bearer is highly probably going to be trump or maybe Cruz. While I fear that a protracted race with Sanders going hard negative on Clinton up to the end can damage her for the general, my hope is that few progressives given a choice between the actual liberal that Clinton is, and one of those two, would need to be bought off with a VP nod else they’d sit it out. But granted, a few will, and a few more the longer the nomination battle goes on, especially given the increasingly negative angle Sanders is taking. And some would refuse to vote for Hillary even with a true full throated progressive on the ticket. Sanders as the nominee or nothing.
Still those numbers who will sit that race out without their VP pound of flesh will be fairly few, even then.
On the other side of the calculus are the much larger numbers of moderate and centrist voters, especially those who have gone GOP before, but who are unhappy with the authoritarian thug Trump. Realpolitik is that in this general you need to not drive those voters away and into holding their nose for and pulling the Trump lever.
Pandering to the extreme Left with a VP nod would be a mistake. IMHO.
You keep saying this. Other than the fair housing stuff in Minnesota, what do you got?
Tom remains coy about speculation. Oh, Tom, you coy dog!
Rubio says he’s not interested in being Veep: Republican Marco Rubio not making a play for 2016 vice presidency
I predict that Trump would not pick a vice president, based on this:
I’m warming to him. Trying to find that to which addie alludes I find very little of substance, and while I do still strongly believe that outreach to rural America and being a place that does not repel those repulsed by Trump will be critical, I also think that building the bench for 8 years from now is also critical. Perez and Castro both do that while Vilsak obviously does not.
But dang, I still want some rural cred.
Your point about appealing more to moderates has gotten me thinking and largely removed my desire for a true progressive to balance her ticket. I was seriously pining for a Clinton-Sanders ticket. Now I’d be happy with something bland yet solid to counter the Berzerker on the GOP side. Perez may be a nice balance between radical lefty and true moderate. Plus I like the idea of a someone who hasn’t been such a hard-core politico their whole adult life like many potential candidates. Sure, Perez has spent much of his life in political positions, but looking at his resume, you don’t feel like he’s always had his eye on “The Big Time.”
Throwing out the idea of Gary Locke
- ex Governor, ex Commerce Secretary, ex Ambassador. He’s got a great story. He has experience on many levels of government. He’s a member of one of the faster growing demographics that hasn’t fully flexed its political muscle. He adds geographic diversity (yes, the west coast will go for the Democrats, but it would nice to not be ignored).
He is older, though. And he is not the most dynamic person out there.
I’ve followed Locke’s career for awhile and like him very much. He’s a young-looking 66, and would be a quite plausible first Asian VP or even POTUS: Gary Locke - Wikipedia
Washington State, and the Pacific Northwest generally, is safe blue territory for November, though, as you note.
That doesn’t mean he won’t pick a VP, so much as the VP is likely to be an old-school VP who doesn’t do anything beyond his constitutional duties of presiding over the Senate and staying alive.
Locke would be awesome, although a very unexpected pick.
Semi-serious suggestion: Trump picks Bernie Sanders as his running mate. The ticket appeals to those on the left as well as those on the right.
May I suggest you put down whatever it is you are smoking and go take a nap?
Sanders would never agree.
True. There are some ways that such a ticket makes sense, but Sanders finds Trump too reprehensible to ever agree to it.
They’re both populists and outside the mainstream. Plus, not to be morbid or anything, but as much as Obama has a target on his back, a President Trump will have a much bigger one. So there’s the possibility of a President Sanders.
I’d say Trump has more of a target. If people were genuinely pissed off about a black President we’d have seen violent demonstrations of the type we see with Trump rallies.
Although given the history of Presidential assassinations, they seem to be pretty random. Widely reviled Presidents never get close to being killed and beloved Presidents get knocked off. I have to wonder if unpopular Presidents never get shot at is because everyone who is thinking of doing it figure that there’s already other people working on it, so why ruin your life?