Politics The 2016 US Presidential Election

Elizabeth Warren has been very eloquent on the matter. This isn't a fight that Obama can win, though he and Hillary can and will use it to tie Trump to congressional candidates.

Best guess, Merrick Garland is going to look very attractive to conservatives if the option is a Hillary appointee.

 

While I hate polls, it seems like the vote is split 50-50 in Ohio between Trump and Clinton right now. I don't know what the situation is in Iowa, Virginia, North Carolina, or Florida, but I think this race is much closer than the media is reporting. Especially if people stay home because they think that it is a waste of time since their candidate will easily win or doesn't stand a chance in a state.

 

I think this has some of the best comparative numbers.
Trump is doing worse than McCain was this same time and that's saying something.
He'll get a bounce if (and I do mean IF) they pick him for candidate at the convention but it will drop back again.

Donald Trump’s campaign manager is out. Here are the brutal numbers that tell us why. - The Washington Post

 

Hillary Clinton leads Donald Trump in FL, tied in OH, PA - CBS News

Clinton, Trump deadlocked in new Ohio poll | The Columbus Dispatch

It is still early, but I'm not sure how many people will switch parties at this point. It is more, how motivated are the voters on the far right and far left to vote for the current candidates. And how many are there.

 

I would bet Corey Booker or Julian Castro will run for President in 2024, so that is the gamble for them. Being the VP in a successful Presidency helps, but only if there aren't problems.

I would think that Corey Booker, Al Franken, and Bernie Sanders should be on the list too. And I think Bernie would be the best choice for her to pick to win back the progressive Democrats that won't vote or write his name in. He will also bring in the big crowds that are impressive for the cameras and momentum.

And you don't need to worry about the VT senate seat going to the Republicans.

 

The other question is who will Trump pick as his running mate? Who will want to run as his VP? There are a few governors that are enough of an outsider, but still know the process of governments and politics that would be the likely choice. It appears that Rubio isn't going to be it if he is running for the senate again.

 

Who or what is TFA?

Exactly!

 

I have a friend who is on the Bernie campaign (and talks to a LOT of Clinton campaign staff) and he says that Labor Secretary Thomas Perez is the front runner for VP

 

I would think Hillary would pick a blue collar connecting type of VP. She needs help in the upper midwest.

 

Hillary needs a VP that can take on Donald Trump, while letting her act presidential.She also needs to excite the liberal side of her party. They won't vote for Trump; but they may not vote at all.

I can give 100 reasons why Elizabeth Warren is a bad choice, mostly the women don't seem to like each other; but still ... No one seems able to get under Trump's skin the way she can.
If I were Hillary, I'd be asking and offering Ms Warren whatever she wants, including a cabinet position or VP.

 

I actually think none of the likely VP candidates that have been mentioned as frontrunners would serve Hillary as well as Al Franken. He's done solid work in the Senate, he's brilliant and quick-witted and charismatic, he's decently known nationally and got good progressive street cred, and Mark Dayton, the governor of MN, is a Dem, which means that he could fill Franken's vacancy with a Dem appointment.

Probably her second best bet is Sherrod Brown, and he's neither as well-known or as charismatic and quick-witted as Franken, plus his governor is Kasich, which means a vacancy turns red.

Kaine, Vilsack, McAuliffe, Bayh, and Warner would both be poor choices: too white, too conservative, none well-known or charismatic. The Castros are too young and inexperienced. Xavier Becerra is a solid politician with decent progressive creds, but he's nowhere near well-known enough or charismatic enough. Booker isn't well known enough, and he's too conservative. Perez has less than zero charisma-- it's like in negative numbers-- and he's completely unknown outside the Beltway. The others are even less likely candidates.

She probably shouldn't try a two-woman ticket-- as unfair and ridiculous as it is, I don't think that can succeed yet. If she did, probably her best bet is Amy Klobuchar, though she's not very well known. Gillebrand and Shaheen are too conservative; Janet Napolitano is way, way too conservative. Kamala Harris is great, but unknown outside CA.

I think there's too much bad blood between Elizabeth Warren-- whom I love-- and HRC for Warren to be a good VP. If the Sanders movement is smart, they'll angle for HRC to appoint Warren to Treasury, and appoint Sanders himself to HHS or Labor (way too much bad blood to tap him for VP). Other good cabinet picks could include Becerra, Vilsack, Klobuchar, Shaheen, LA mayor Eric Garcetti, Andrew Cuomo, SF mayor Gavin Newsome, Congresswoman Tammy Duckworth (should she not win the Senate seat she's running for), and Rep. Joe Kennedy III.

 

I had another thought about who she could pick, and that is Joe Biden. I'm not sure there are any rules against him serving a third or fourth term.

SF Mayor Gavin Newsom is angling to become California's governor before running for national office I bet.

And I don't think there is that much bad blood between Bernie and Hillary. It wasn't that nasty of a primary. The passionate supporters on either side are the problem. And Hillary isn't doing much to win over Bernie voters through the platform policy positions or her speeches. If she assumes that they will back her because giving the Republicans control of the government would be worse, it can lead to trouble. Ask Al Gore about Nader. But, the smart play would be to pick Sanders I think. It would change the whole race for her if the party united together, instead of having 10-25% of the Democrats vote for the Green Party or write in Sanders name. Or just not show up to vote because it seemed like a rigged election and don't want to vote for her positions on fracking, foreign intervention, Wall St., and trade that are more center-right than left wing.

 

I usually attend the USCM annual conference but had a conflict this year.

I was surprised to see Johnson was invited to speak and suspect that USCM VP Mike Cornett, mayor of Oklahoma City got him the invite. I dont see Johnson playing very well with that crowd but his bigger challenge is getting his poll numbers up.

His numbers and name recognition are higher than 2012 as a result of the dissatisfaction with Clinton/Trump rather than support for libertarian policies. But in order to participate in the presidential debates, he needs to be polling at an average of 15% in five polls.

I dont give him much chance of reaching that threshold.

 

First, the security guides that tell people what should be classified aren't always the best. And it is probably a good thing that a secretary can get e-mails outside of a SCIF.

But, I'm not sure what kind of security she had on her phone or server, and I'm not sure if the "classified" information on it was any worse than the diplomatic cables that Bradley Manning released a few years ago.

It wasn't the best thing, and I know I couldn't get away with doing it, but I don't think it was the end of the world situation that the right wing wanted it to be.