Michael Maiello's picture

    Tim Kaine Freak Out Thread

    Please reserve space in the comments below for Hal to make fun of me if Hillary Clinton picks Tim Kaine as her running mate this afternoon.

    The rest of you do not have to wait, though, and can make fun of me now.

    Happy Friday!



    Man up, Maiello. If you're going to post a VP thread, at least kick it off with your two-cents.

    PS And I leave it to you to moderate...

    As I'll be out of town this weekend, Maiello moderation rules are in effect. Meaning, I'm fair game, nobody else is.  If you want to call a fellow Dagger a dishonest, conservative, corporate stooge, just aim your comment at me!

    As for my VP preference... I'd love it to be Warren. But I'm not holding my breath.

    Okay, one thing I'd love even more than her picking Warren, and this would be for sheer entertainment value, would be for her to pick Bill Clinton and, at the same time, vow to nominate Obama to the Supreme Court.

    What about Kaine?

    I don't really know. He supported TPP, but so did Clinton. Priorities change.  He doesn't think one size fits all regulation is good for smaller banks.  Not sure I do either. In terms of tone, though, it seems to signal a pivot towards the center in the general and maybe, running against Trump, she doesn't need to do that? It's not like Trump competes for the fabled moderate in the way that McCain or Romney did.  That would seemingly free Clinton up for a bolder move here, Hope she takes it.

    Typical political obfuscation Maiello. Do a Friday news dump then go out of town for the weekend.

    I am basically a scum bag.

    Wow, normally I wouldn't vote for a scum bag. But that was really straight talk, you said what you believe, and you weren't politically correct. I think you have real potential as a presidential candidate. At least in the republican party.

    "I am basically a scum bag" will also make a good bumper sticker!

    Go for broke - "Complete scum bag", or "America - where the scum rises to the top". Rile your base - scum of the earth. They'll follow you anywhere.

    Jet flying, limo riding, kiss stealing, wheeling and dealing... son of a gun!


    I liked him better when he was pretending to be on vacation.

    Everybody says Kaine is decent, honorable with middle America roots. Not sure the first two qualities are still relevant in American politics, when the other side receives raucous standing ovations when they say they want to lynch you on the capitol mall. 

    One conslusion we can draw...

    Kaine's got a bald spot, top rear.  No comb-over, no hat/ball cap.

    We can take from this small indicator that he is by nature an honest man.

    I think Warren and Booker are out because Republican Governors would, at least temporarily, appoint Republican Senators as replacements.

    Kaine gets a Dem replacement, but there would be a special election in 2017. Swing state in an off-year election? Chances are that it will go Republican.

    The guy who says he wants Kaine's job if Hillary taps him is the Tea-Partier who replaced Eric Cantor.  He is nice looking, taught at the college level, and would be an absolute disaster.  I am unaware of any Dem in the queue who would be a good challenger.  But there is another Republican (Hurt) who is not running in the next election, so who knows?

    The woman is likely to do the same thing the black man did. Choose a bland centrist white male so the white males won't be too threatened by a black man or a women being president. None of us are likely to be happy about it.

    If the Democratic Party captures the Senate, I like the idea of Warren and Booker being there. Imagine Warren as opposed to Harry Reid.

    Warren will be influential where ever she is. She's built a power base she can call on for support. She'll be powerful in the senate. But I like the symbolism of a 2 women ticket and the message of a party moving left.  Warren as opposed to Harry Reid is a fantasy. Imagine Schumer as opposed to Reid is the reality. Schumer is likely to be the senate leader if we take the senate and I think he will not be as good as Reid. Reid was smart about using procedural rules to control the legislative process and a bare knuckles fighter even if he was not as left as I'd like.

    Given that we are ushering out an African-American President and the standard bearer of the Democratic party is a woman, I agree with O-K that for many Americans having two women or a woman and a non-white man at the top of the ticket might be a tough sell.  Terribly sad and wrong but true.

    I fear that Kaine is the wrong man for the moment. He seems like a throwback to the Bill Clinton era--a charming southern centrist--not someone who will lead the party forward or change the status quo.

    Exactly. The rise of both Trump and Sanders should have been a clear signal that U.S. politics changed this year. But Clinton has shown she is tone-deaf to the real challenge she faces. Maybe she can win one last old-style election; she will have the money and the organizational advantage. The country better pray she can pull it off.


    You miss one thing - white people, especially men, are feeling left out - that political correctness is ignoring the majority. Kaine will balance that plus appeal to thw Hispanic base a bit (Julian Castro was damaged goods). I think it's a smart pick, avoids a lot of Trump's attacks. She can govern as need be - first hurdle is to get elected. Trump is spookily dangerous - peolpe are still backing him despite full on krazy.

    Clinton's No. 1 priority had to be winning the trust (and the enthusiastic support) of those who felt the Bern. If it's Kaine or Vilsack, she has totally failed to do that. Instead of rallying the entire party behind her, she's made the supposedly "safe" choice to mollify campaign donors and keep one Democratic Senate seat for a year. It's been said Kain's one liability is that he's boring. She could have restored her progressive cred by choosing Warren or Franken, and fought the fight she needs to beat back the Trumpian tide. Instead, she's done a Clintonesque calculation, and decided to treat her victory as a done deal. I still think she can defeat Trump, but the odds just dropped.

    Clinton can select any VP she wants. Trump just scared every sane minority to vote for her. He scared enough white people to vote for Hillary. She will get over 300 electoral votes.

    Your faith in the American electorate is touching.

    There are not enough white people to elect Donald Trump. Right after the Democratic convention, GOTV swings into high gear. The other component occurring in minority neighborhoods  are setting voter suppression hotlines to use if voters have problems registering or at polling places.

    If Hillary's campaign does put its focus and its money on energizing minority voters, you may be right. And if so, that would be a long-term bonus for the party and the entire country. Still, I think it's serious, risky error to have left the progressive wing of the party out to dry. We'll see.

    Congress is going to be more important in getting legislation passed.

    Aside from the crazy Benghazi4ever contingent, the GOP's big hope is the "Hillary's too liberal" crowd. There will be a huge number of Republican crossover voters to vote for Clinton/Kaine. A Clinton/Warren ticket would have been the most exciting, but there's seriously no way we can risk a Trump presidency. He's run a disastrously mean convention, yet is getting more popular. Sure, the choice and question is how many can pull in from the right-center vs the left and whether she can send the right signals to do a bit of both.

    I don't think the terms you use to describe the choice are accurate. I don't think Hillary's calculation is the liberals versus the donor class. It's the liberal voters versus the moderate voters. If she picks Kaine it's because she  needs the moderates and she thinks she has a more difficult path to get their vote.

    Dagblog doesn't represent the national demography in any way. The democratic left doesn't either. While Warren would probably get a 100% favorability rating here her national favorability rating is usually slightly underwater.

    Hillary already has moderate Democrats sewn up, right? And it's not the "moderates" among independent voters that Hillary needs to win over; it's those angry with politics as usual -- people who largely split between Trump and Sanders. By playing it safe, Hillary is blowing those people off. Some of them will react by voting for Trump. How many I can't estimate.

    Aside from running, there's also how they would govern. Having Gore run various task forces was a big plus to the Clinton years, better than running arms like poppy Bush and Cheney.

    I expect Warren to be closely attached to this administration, but I dont think an attack dog counter to Trump was a successful route, so she went with the more "here are the grownups" approach, especially foreign policy. (No offense to Warren, but her card was becoming tweet attacks, not financial reform)

    Well put, Ocean Kat.


    Hey ACunuck...

    7/22/16 - MSNBC Video

    Sen. Al Franken on Clinton VP Pick Tim Kaine

    Sen. Al Franken (D-MN) joins MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell to give his thoughts on Hillary Clinton's vice presidential pick, Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA), and whether he thinks it will help unite progressives and Democrats around the party's presumptive nominee. Duration: 6:17


    Thanks, OGD. I have no doubt that Kaine is a thoroughly nice guy, and it's reassuring that Franken thinks he is more progressive than he seems at first glance. He knows Kaine way better than I do, and I have a lot of respect for Franken's smarts and judgement (I still believe he would have been a great VP pick).

    What annoys me is that if it weren't for those pesky German murderers, we would probably know her choice by now.  First, Nice interfering with the Pence announcement, and now THIS!  Doesn't anyone recognize American Exceptionalism anymore?  

    Maiello, you obviously have no pride.  But more importantly, Are You With Us Or Against Us?  Inquiring minds want to know.

    Never mind.  You left town.  Loser!

    Well, Kaine it is. [Long forlorn sigh]

    To acanuck and o-k's debate, it's not Democratic or even independent moderates that she's going for. They'd vote for her over Trump no matter who she picked for VP. I think it's Republican refugees fleeing the Donald blitzkrieg, particularly Wall Street fiscal conservatives and internationalists. What this means is that she's decided to reject populism and double down on technocracy. It may possibly be the right choice for her in this election, but it also has very profound implications for the Democratic Party. If the Republicans continue to go populist while conservative technocrats join the Democrats, we may see a reversal of the 20th century order. Democrats may be become the party of the elite; Republican may become the party of the working class.

    She's not going to be ignoring the left (the way Obama frequently did). She wont have a trash-mouth Rahm running interference for her. Relax, dont worry. Be happy.

    Thank you for that, Bobby McFerrin. I feel so much better.

    It's the rasta in you that brings out the namaste in me.

    In any case, do you think she'd tolerate a Rahm type telling her own camp they just flushed their election money/effort down the toilet, working against unions or trashing the antiwar  left a la 2004? I get a different vibe. Even in her 2002 speech she was careful to acknowledge the opposition and note we might be getting it wrong.

    Koch, Adelson et al and Murdoch Inc. go 'populist'? Go all out for the poor and exploited? Raise taxes on the rich as Obama and Clinton did? Expand the safety net?

    Seriously doubt the GOP will do a damn thing  ever for the working class except exploit their fears, cut their social security, gin up hate, take zero responsibility for anything and make empty promises at campaign time. They've been doing it for 40 years.  The Tea Party caucus can barely agree to keep the government open not to mention develop the motivation, skills or determination to do something progressive with it. They want to drown it in the bathtub. They will not change.


    "Except exploit their fears." You have to admit that they're been pretty damn good at it though. And those pesky Tea Partiers kiboshed Obama's legislatve ambitions and made a right mess of the country.

    But nothing to worry about, I suppose. The Democrats have everything well in hand (at least in the 7 states they dominate).

    They will keep it up until their Party is drown in a bathtub. Which, as you point out, does not seem imminent, nationally, but has happened in California.

    That the MSM always says both sides are at fault for any failures or obstruction, and that the vast majority of Americans cannot even  correctly name who controls both branches of  Congress, does not make a progressive revolution an easy project.

    Ha. People said that when Goldwater won the nomination in 1964, when Reagan won it in 1980, when Pat Buchanan delivered the culture war speech in 1992, when Newt Gingrich's rebels seized Congress in the 1994, when George W. ran on "wedge" issues in 2004, when the Tea Parties raged in 2010.

    For half-a-century, people have been predicting that the Republican Party's rightward shifts would destroy the party. Over that time period, it has gone from a perennial minority party to the dominant party in American politics. So pardon me if I lack your conviction that the GOP is about to drown in a bathtub.

    The Republican Party, scarcely stopping to lick its wounds after a national defeat, today enters a period of protracted, intense--and possibly destructive--civil war.

    -- Robert Novak, 1960

    The Republican party, Governor Rockefeller asserted, would "destroy itself" if it adopted what he said was being "seriously proposed" as a 1964 campaign strategy.

    -- New York Times, 1963

    Trust the zany right-wingers to work themselves into a perfect lather...Today, the GOP is a conservative party, with less diversity than exists within Britain’s Labor and Conservative parties, and more ideological uniformity than any major American party has had in this century.

    -- George Will, 1978

    They are silencing the more moderate elements in their party and seeking an ideological purity from the right. A marginalized, right-wing Republican Party will be less competitive with Bill Clinton in 1996 than a more inclusive and centrist Republican Party.

    -- Democratic analyst, 1992

    There were a bunch of, like, 75-year-old cranky white guys, mad at everything. It just couldn't have been a better event for the Democratic Party. I hope they come back and tea bag some more.

    -- James Carville on the Tea Parties, 2009 (predicting 40 years of Democratic legislative dominance)


    Pardon me, I said they will have to be drown in a bathtub, not that they are holding their rubber ducky and about to leap or be flung into the Potomac. I said nationally, it does not seem imminent.

    You may be right that she's going after the tattered remnants of the Republican establishment.Those could be pretty slim pickings, however; look at their inability to field a credible presidential team since Bush fled town, much less wrangle their congressional rank and file into any kind of disciplined order. Anyway, adding the discredited GOP elite to the reviled East/West Coast elite skews your policymaking, lowers party unity, and may not actually win you that many votes. Better to have embraced the progressives that are already within your party (and a growing proportion thereof).

    One last thing about Tim Kaine: He may be a nice, hard-working, honorable guy, loyal to the party. But for me his name will forever be tarnished by his role as DNC chair in 2010, when the Democrats inexplicably mishandled the special election to fill the Senate seat left vacant by the death of Ted Kennedy. A safe seat for half a century, but the DNC managed to dishonor Kennedy's legacy by losing it to Scott Brown and tossing away Obama's 60-seat majority in the process. I haven't yet seen or heard mention of that fiasco in the media, even though it was only six years ago. For me, that kind of political incompetence should bar anyone from consideration for high office.

    Romney/Ryan lost by 3 1/2%. A shift of 2% could have meant President Mittens. It's a scarily conservative country - forget at our peril.

    Blaming Kaine for Coakley's disastrous campaign?I'm not sure...'

    Coakley may have been a terrible candidate, but chairman Kaine had one crucial task on his watch: hold on to Obama's super-majority. Maybe he was distracted by events in his home state, but by the time the DNC woke up to "Oh shit, we could really lose this one," it was too late. That's how I remember it, anyway.

    Ac, I'm not endorsing the strategy, just pointing it out. And in some ways, this is out of Clinton's hands. If Trump and Cruz types maintain control of the GOP, it's inevitable that Wall Street Republicans will eventually flee and become Democrats, which will then push Democrats toward fiscal conservatism.

    So you're suggesting the Dems could become more fiscally conservative?

    I think it's a distinct possibility. We're in a period of ideological realignment. If the GOP truly becomes the populist party, Democrats will become the elitist party.

    Really?  The GOP is becoming the "Fake Populist Party."  Don't you think that even the densest of the dense will figure it out?  

    And yet...

    I will not criticize Clinton for picking Kaine.  There was no obvious choice to my way of thinking.  I recommended Senator Bob Casey, Jr., from PA who is superficially quite similar to Kaine but more pro-union and anti-choice.  From what I have heard, however, Casey is not the brightest bulb in the drawer and he is certainly not as well-known.

    Would I have preferred a more obviously progressive candidate?  Yes but who?  Elizabeth Warren and Sherrod Brown are problematic for various reasons.  Bernie is old and, like Warren, polarizing.  The Latino-Americans Perez and Castro aren't truly national figures and Castro has a big bank black mark against him.

    Even if Clinton had run with Warren or Bernie, she'd still be who she is - a moderate Democrat - and the Bernie or Busters would still be deeply suspicious of her.

    Choosing Kaine means she will have to reach out to progressives to a greater degree than she might have otherwise.  But Kaine can cover her right flank. 

    I'm sure her team weighed everything and decided an overt appeal to Republican moderates made the most sense in light of the demagogic nature of Trump's campaign.

    Largely agree. His religion/missionary work and Spanish fluency/time in Honduras add to the PR effect.

    Check and check.

    Hal, you are going to injure yourself trying to spin HRS's  expected swing to the right. It only draws more  support from the  elite neocons because there is none to be had from anywhere else no matter what sweet lies she whispers to the rubes.

    I read at HP that about a thousand Sanders delegates are organized, pissed and ready to revolt about this choice and there may be more fireworks at this convention  than at Trumps and they aren't the Bernie or Bust people. The Clintons only seem to be able to move further and further to the right as they have always done and this time  their triangulation calculations may fail

    Peter - I don't see the Kaine pick as a swing to the right.  I don't think whom a candidate chooses as a running mate tells us much about how a President will govern.  It does appear that many Sanders' supporters are very angry and upset.  I implore them and you to hold their noses and vote for Clinton.

    Having only paid attention to Kaine the last 24 hours, he's looking to me like a great pick both for various messaging across the board and with Kaine's exec experience and attention to detail - e.g. ability to govern.

    Hillary's building a big tent. It'll be okay. I'm pretty sure it'll accommodate the left - not every aspect but a good place at the table.

    Sorry, Hal but too many people have held their noses too many times with too many betrayals and the people some liberals denigrate as low information voters are very well informed about who and what the Empress of Incompetence will always be.

    Kaine is pushing for all out war against the IS, with a congressional mandate, HRC and her bros at state are planning shock and awe for Syria and this dynamic duo can't wait to get their big hands on our war machine. As we have seen before when big handed liberals get to making war most of the bleeding heart liberal issued at home are neglected in favor of the security state that is mandatory during a permanent state of war.It's no coincidence that the latest freedom gifted to gays and women is the freedom  to use their big hands to murder for the hegemon on the front lines of the never ending war.

    Trump even with all his warts is at least questioning the sanity of this madness couching his arguments in economic terms that anyone can understand and the enabler/profiteers  of the war machine  are as hysterical as some people are about his imagined or real prejudices or fascist tendencies.

    We don't have a representative republic and the so called democratic voting system is completely corporate controlled and opaque so i doubt the voters will be allowed to actually make this choice. Most of the PTB are firmly in the Clinton camp that they know will protect their interests as the Kaine choice clearly illustrates.

    What is your suggested solution to ISIS and growing lone wolf terror attack problem? (80 killed today in Kabul, 9 killed yesterday in Munich, bunches in Nice, etc). I'm sure you're on top of this one.

    If you are really interested in a 'solution' that doesn't entail a 'final solution' an honest analysis of the root causes of the problem is required. Reactionary liberals and their political allies reactionary neocons don't seem to be able or want to examine what our endless hegemonic war making produces, all our bombs have rainbows painted on them and they only bring peace and modernity. With these blinders firmly in place there is only one path, straight ahead and more peace bombs and rainbows will surely convince the natives to rejoice and welcome our modernity or die because of their backwardness. This madness doesn't appear to be working and more madness will bring the war back to where it originated where everyone can taste the fruits of hegemony.

    Most of our so called  western intelligentsia can't seem to fathom that the Islamic State and the larger political Islam that is growing stronger in the ME is an idea and ideas can't be killed with bombs that only reinforce the idea. At least most of the media and authorities are now calling the Islamic State by its chosen name something you don't seem capable of yet.

    Peter - FWIW this from Salon may alleviate your concerns about Kaine somewhat.

    • Kaine supports strong action on climate change, decrying both climate change deniers and what he has termed “leadership deniers,” politicians who believe in climate change but don’t believe the U.S. should take a leadership role in reducing the world’s carbon footprint. “They say look, even if we reduce U.S. emission to zero, it wouldn’t offset world emissions unless China or India did something, and so let’s just not do anything,” Kaine said. “That is just not the American way, folks, for us not to lead on something important like that."

    . . . . . . .

    • Kaine is a member of the Senate Armed Forces Committee, and opposed the Obama administration’s efforts to use the existing Authorization for Use of Military Force to expand action against ISIS in Iraq. At the time, he wrote in the Washington Post, “Ultimately, the allocation of war powers is based on a value. The nation should not send U.S. service members into harm’s way unless there is a consensus among the civilian leadership — executive and legislative — that the mission is worth it. Ordering people to risk their lives without Washington doing the work necessary to reach a political consensus is immoral.”

    Hal, Peter came here long before you and before the primary. Peter's views don't come from a comparative analysis of the value of individual politicians. Back then his schtick was that the only option to make the needed changes was to withdraw our consent of government by not voting. The theory is that not voting would somehow usher in some sort of   anarchistic utopia. When the primary started he stopped discussing that and began attacking Hillary. If Sanders was winning or if he had won Peter would not be on your side. He'd be attacking Sanders because his goal is to get people to not vote.

    O-k, pls focus on the topic, not your opinion of the other dagbloggers. Thanks.

    I don't think I commented or expressed an opinion of peter at all. I think that was a pretty fair summary of his views as he posted them here. Of the general bent of the views here there are the Hillary supporters, the Sanders supporters, and the third way represented by peter, don't vote at all. But if you think that summary was an inappropriate attack, ok

    I don't consider your comment a ToS violation, but it is disparaging of Peter. The less we talk about each other's behavior and psychology, the better the discussion. Or to put it another way, this thread is not about Peter. It's about Kaine.

    Hal, i fear the Borg Queen's tentacles are penetrating more deeply into your brain and causing hallucinations or at least false visions. What Citizen Kaine is   pushing in the SAFC is a declaration of all out war in the ME because Obama has  pursued too limited a conflict and the demand for political consensus is window dressing because it already exists. Hillary and her minions at the state department are pushing the same agenda only aimed at Syria but once that task is completed they will lead the larger program. Kaine is a lawyer and a politician which makes him a doubly good and practiced liar,  his immediate flip on the TPP to match the Red Queen's lies on that subject just shows how he rolls.

    His boilerplate statement on GW is just part of the Washington Kabuki. His use of the platitude ' American Way' is telling, it's a cleverly veiled  promise to protect our right to consume and overconsume because that's the Amerikan Way.

    Sorry, did you tell us your solution for ISIS's and its lone wolf followers' continuing attacks? And you realize "all-out war" means bombers, tanks, etc?

    Deleted by poster as superfluous.

    The solution is to start providing as much humanitarian aid as we can to the people in the Middle East, to pressure Israel to take its foot off the throat of the Palestinians, and to get our military out.  Regarding concerns that Kaine is a neocon, if Clinton is elected, her Secretary of State will have far more influence over foreign policy than Tim Kaine.  Consider how the hawkishness of the Obama administration during Clinton's tenure as Secretary of State has given way to the more peaceful Kerry years.

    Does anyone else decode this sentence from Peter as a belief in Trump as the sole hope for America?  Trump, fighting persecution from all sides while he strives to unclench the republic from the maw of the Red Queen and liberal war profiteers and sinister liberal cabals?  Representing nothing less than Peter's only endorsement ever made for a candidate for public office?

    Trump even with all his warts is at least questioning the sanity of this madness couching his arguments in economic terms that anyone can understand and the enabler/profiteers  of the war machine  are as hysterical as some people are about his imagined or real prejudices or fascist tendencies.

    Vice-President Kaine.

    You got it!

    Of course, God might move the universe and Trump wins.


    We could do worse Mike.

    The religious vote. Just got Hillary's announcement email, and it's clear she wants faith-based voters. She also phrased it as an anti-Wall Street, pro-people choice as he skipped a law firm to go to central america. Whether you buy it, reasonable strategy - the religious right is bereaved and feels under attack 24x7.

    Seriously? A youthful stint as a missionary in 1980 makes him anti-Wall Street? Does she take us for morons?

    Sigh he is definitely not who I would select, nor a guy I agree with much. But as you said above, I do believe she selected him to get more republicans to vote for her. I'm just going to suck this up and hope for the best. 

    Oh for fuck's sakes, Obama's 4 years as a kid in Indonsia and his non-Wall Street post- Harvard work in Chicago is the stuff of legends. Doesnt count if a white guy does it?


    Kaine practiced law in Richmond for 17 years, specializing in fair housing law and representing clients discriminated against on the basis of race ordisability.[11] Kaine was an adjunct professor at the University of Richmond Law School[12] for six years, teaching legal ethics.[11

    Peracles... Good points there...

    Also. Kaine was a mayor, a Lieutenant Governor, a Governor and Senator. Mayors and governors know how to get things done by being inclusive and reaching out to all who have a stake in the game.


    Yes, and I'm also concerned about the crazies out there, between Trump-encouraged loonies, open carry right wingers, ISIS proxies and the police violence-black response along with normal school massacres and disgruntled employees.... If there was a year to have a capable 2nd-in-command, this is it, so yeah, the executive depth looks good.

    Add on stickler for details and someone who listens to his team's advice.


    Yeah, there were plenty of silly assertions about Obama too.

    Thanks PP for really good links. The more I read, the more I think Kaine is a really solid choice. He's got a good sense of humor too.

    Al Franken, tonight raised a point I haven't seen discussed above. He described Kaine as  a "progressive catholic."   After College went  to Honduras rather than Goldman Sachs, And did charitable/religious work. Is personally anti- abortion on religious grounds  but  pro choice because he feels that is  Constitutionally required.

     I think I'm being objective now   writing  that  with respect to choice we might actually be safer to rely on someone who has had to go though those mental steps than on a person brought up in a pro choice environment.

    My reaction is shaped by a personal  process that began  early  in my Jesuit High School  years when someone-maybe me- asked the home room teacher (a priest in training )  if when Catholics controlled a government  they should permit all other religions to  be completely free .Whether or not I asked the question I expected the answer to be "off course"  . But instead  he answered slowly and clearly  uncomfortably "No Error  can't be given equal right with the truth".

    For me that began a long process ending in very different place religiously . And knowing how I got there.


    Let's not over react. Hillary just did what Obama did. I've always been convinced Obama picked a centrist white male because he was the first black who won the nomination for president. I think he was wise to make the careful choice. It seems Biden earned Obama's respect. All reports say he became Obama's trusted adviser and friend. It's good that happened but that's not where they began. Obama had his own agenda and his own ideas. He's intelligent and thoughtful,  he made up his own mind whatever Biden, or Hillary, told him.

    Hillary is going to do what Hillary is going to do as president. She's been thinking about it for a long time. Warren wasn't going to push her further to the left. Kaine won't push her right. She has her own ideas and her own agenda. Kaine will only be able to influence her if he does his homework and is smart enough to make convincing arguments for his views. Hillary is just as intelligent and thoughtful as Obama. She won't take advice from a fool. Imo Hillary is going to be a strong president. She will take charge and for good or for ill the decisions will be her's

    Hillary is going to do what Hillary is going to do as president. She's been thinking about it for a long time. Warren wasn't going to push her further to the left. Kaine won't push her right.

    I think you win the thread.  It's not as if she hasn't considered what she'd do were she ever president.

    Hey Maiello...

    Yeah. She knows what she's doing and what she's going to do.

    I know you've see this... Right?

    Released on Jul 14, 2016



    Of course Obama made his own choices, but are you suggesting that Biden had no influence on them?

    PS Ignore Maiello. He abdicated his authority to choose the winner of the thread when he skipped town.

    Under the TOS (my reading of it, anyway) I cannot be ignored!

    This isn't some silly competition to see who wins a thread. Because, as Maiello noted, I so clearly won, no competition at all.

    I agree that commenters here are overthinking this to an extent.  As you mention here and I mentioned earlier in the thread Clinton is who she is, her Vice Presidential pick won't change that.  But Kaine is not to Clinton what Biden was to Obama.  Biden was Joe from Scranton.  To a significant degree, he offset Obama's Ivy League elitism.  Also, he was more liberal than Kaine.  Biden's decades in Congress and foreign policy expertise contrasted with Obama's freshness and his inexperience in foreign affairs.  Kaine does not complement Clinton to the same degree.

    He's similar to her rather than complements her.

    I agree with you that a VP choice doesn't indicate how someone will govern, but just as Biden influenced Obama with his counsel, Kaine may do that since, as I have learned, Hillary is a good listener.  I don't know why you think Kaine is not liberal.  He was a Dem governor with a GOP legislature and I think he did as much as possible.  

    His life outside of government has been an example of what a liberal professional would do (see Pericles' post above).  As others have shown, he is able to take over if needed.

    Hal, what are you thinking about the Dem Convention?  I want it to be positive, but I am worried.  I see Bernie supporters who now call Elizabeth Warren a "stooge" and worse.  What are you expecting to happen?

    CVille - A) I didn't write Kaine wasn't a liberal.  I wrote he wasn't as liberal as Joe Biden.  That is my sense and I think the various analyses of their votes in Congress - especially on economic issues - will bear this out.  I believe it's fair to point out though that as a Virginia Democrat he faced constraints that Biden from a somewhat less conservative state did not.  B) I think the Dem convention will go relatively smoothly and as choreographed.  Debbie Wasserman Schultz though will get booed.  But, I have no inside knowledge and things could go as you fear but I kind of doubt it.

    Joe not too liberal


    http://m.dailykos.com/story/2015/3/31/1374629/-Hillary-Clinton-Was-the-1... (Biden around the high 20's depending on which Senate year)

    Kaine is listed as #41 here, so probably less liberal (though analysis might distinguish issues and circumstances):


    Yeah really. Given that Delaware decided to be the state with the lowest standards for registering LLC's and the least regulation of their behavior,  their senator has always been on the side of the banks and credit card companies. Add to that Biden"s despicable behavior toward Anita Hill during the Thomas hearings. The more I got to know Biden the more I disliked him. Imo he's to the right of Bill Clinton, to the right of Kaine, to the right of Obama and to the right of Hillary. The only vp choice democrats have made that was worse than Biden was Lieberman and only by a hair.

    I can't believe that some progressives were calling for Biden to run. Biden would have been a terrible president. He only looked good because as vp he was subordinate to a pretty good president.

    Obama made the safe choice of a center right white male as vp and progressives shut up about it because we supported Obama. But I'll take Kaine over Biden any day.

    I think the bit about Kaine not helping with the Left is true, if we only mean the white Left.

    Getting Kaine to campaign in Spanish on Univision might be a bigger deal. If his Spanish fluency is only used for PR, then it's just a bit if PR. If he's sometimes sent out to campaign in Spanish, or does Spanish-language media, that may be a much bigger deal.

    Kaine's anti-abortion-at-heart-but-votes-100%-pro-choice position (not so different from Joe Biden's or Mario Cuomo's) may turn off people in Burlington, Park Slope, and Berkeley, but it will sound logical as hell to a Latino Catholic audience.

    Hey DOC...

    Very good point. And not only the Latinos.Tim Kaine is all inclusive.

    Kaine practiced law in Richmond for 17 years, specializing in fair housing law and representing clients discriminated against on the basis of race or disability. LINK


    Kaine and his wife have been congregants of the St. Elizabeth Catholic Church in Richmond, a mostly black congregation He and his wife, in a poor part of town, for 30 years. LINK



    The more I hear about Kaine, the more OK I am with Hillary's choice. If he's as fluent as claimed, he could be a great surrogate -- especially if backed by a solid, well-funded Spanish-language GOTV push. Hell, force Trump to invest in keeping Texas. (OK, maybe that's a bridge too far.)

    I agree acanuck, the more I read about Kaine, I feel so much better about  his selection, and thanks to PP for some excellent links.

    This is a really good point. Only with the the white left. His speech was excellent I am really liking him more than I thought I would.

    Well, I hope everyone is watching Kaine right now.  I believe he is hitting it out of the park.  He has touched on everything, including giving kudos to his (Republican) father-in-law for having the courage to integrate schools when he was Virginia Governor, against great barriers.  He comes off as truly sincere, friendly, and confident.  He also has a sense of humor.

    I am hoping that Terry McCaulif (our current Gov) will choose someone to replace him who is electable.

    Latest Comments