Two names emerge from Clinton’s VP deliberations: Kaine and Vilsack - The Washington Post

 

Hillary's turn to pick number 2. Tim Kaine and Tom Vilsack are the top two contenders.

So Hillary is looking at two guys from swing states, while Trump picked a guy from Indiana....Sounds about right.

So Hillary is looking at two guys from swing states, while Trump picked a guy from Indiana....Sounds about right.

So once again Hillary is pandering? Or are these the most qualified options...if the only reason to pick them is because they are from a swing state, it is just more pandering from her.

 

Trump doesn't need help in Indiana, his pick really only helps him with the Republican National Committee.

Of the two, I like Vilsack better.

So once again Hillary is pandering? Or are these the most qualified options...if the only reason to pick them is because they are from a swing state, it is just more pandering from her.

 

Trump doesn't need help in Indiana, his pick really only helps him with the Republican National Committee.

 

It may be pandering, it may not be. Doesn't matter. Hillary is going with someone that can help her in the handful of states that decide an election whereas Trump went with someone who won't sway anyone in the states that matter...

It may be pandering, it may not be. Doesn't matter. Hillary is going with someone that can help her in the handful of states that decide an election whereas Trump went with someone who won't sway anyone in the states that matter...

 

I think Pence matters in Iowa. And maybe, because of his connection with Ryan, a tad in Wisconsin but I think that may be too far gone. I think those are the only swing states impacted. Vilsack would help with Iowa which I truly believe is up for grabs. I think Virginia is farther blue.

It may be pandering, it may not be. Doesn't matter. Hillary is going with someone that can help her in the handful of states that decide an election whereas Trump went with someone who won't sway anyone in the states that matter...

 

So its not about picking who you think will be the best VP, it is about picking someone who will potentially pick up more votes?

So its not about picking who you think will be the best VP, it is about picking someone who will potentially pick up more votes?

 

For the most part yeah. That or someone who's strengths match your weaknesses.

 

It's not the way it necessarily should be, but that's the name of the game. You pick the person who gives you the best chance at winning come November.

For the most part yeah. That or someone who's strengths match your weaknesses.

 

It's not the way it necessarily should be, but that's the name of the game. You pick the person who gives you the best chance at winning come November.

 

Its kind of sad honestly. Although not a surprising move by her.

So its not about picking who you think will be the best VP, it is about picking someone who will potentially pick up more votes?

 

Always has been.

 

Kennedy chose LBJ for the South and unity.

 

Reagan chose Bush to unify party.

 

It's long been a policy.

Always has been.

 

Kennedy chose LBJ for the South and unity.

 

Reagan chose Bush to unify party.

 

It's long been a policy.

 

Not really a policy. I would say if anything it would be considered a practice.

Its kind of sad honestly. Although not a surprising move by her.

 

You call it sad. I call it smart. The name of the game is to win. IMO, either of these picks help her in that regard.

So none of you have a problem with her picking someone not based on merit, but based on who might be more popular, as her potential replacement?

Elizabeth Warren should be her pick. She has all the tools to be an excellent VP.

Edited July 20, 201610 yr by TexasRanger
Add text

You call it sad. I call it smart. The name of the game is to win. IMO, either of these picks help her in that regard.

 

The name of the game is to get the best administration in office that we have to offer. When was that lost?