Clinton/Kaine 2016
I’m thrilled to announce my running mate, @TimKaine, a man who’s devoted his life to fighting for others. -H pic.twitter.com/lTVyfztE5Z
— Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) July 23, 2016
She’s made it official via social media. As comments in our thread earlier stated, feelings on this pick are all over the spectrum. He will probably help her in Virginia. He may help her in the Rust Belt (he’s a Midwesterner) and he does speak fluent Spanish. To me, this is her “safe” choice. Senator Kaine is definitely not the end of the world; together they have to work to prevent the end of the world. I’m curious to see him on the campaign trail and hear him speak. The tickets are complete.
Clinton/Kaine 2016.
Tags: Democrats 2016, Hillary Clinton, Tim Kaine
Booooooooooooo
Not my first choice. Not my second. Not my third. But he’ll do. I’m watching Chris Hayes right now, and am learning some stuff, like he is anti-death penalty, pro-choice, 100% Planned Parenthood Action Fund rated, and he is actually pretty liberal in terms of his voting record. More liberal than Bernie Sanders because of the gun control votes.
It’s boring though. Safe choice. And there is the TPP issue, but the only candidate who was anti-TPP would have been Warren. But then again Pence was pro-TPP and now all of sudden he is against it. I suspect you see a change here too.
So be disappointed if you want. But really, with Sherrod Brown, Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders as Chairpersons of various important Senate committees, Hillary will be held accountable from a progressive point of view better than if one of them were her running mate.
The more I’m thinking about it, the more I’m pretty good with keeping Sanders, Brown, and Warren in the Senate, just like you said DD. They need to wield the liberal/progressive sword in that chamber, and hopefully the Dems will take it back in November.
Safe choice is right. My hope is “safe” was the right move here.
Should help in Virginia and in heavy Spanish speaking states, like Florida, right? A safe pick, but I can see why she made this choice. It could swing states she needed.
DD wrote “Hillary will be held accountable from a progressive point of view…”
LMFAO.
And there it is: Kristin Welker just reported that Hillary told Kaine in their meeting last Saturday that she opposes TPP and he would have to back that up, and Kaine agreed.
Hey, Disappointed, guess who writes legislation? Committee Chairpersons like Warren, Sanders and Brown.
Not my favorite by a long shot; lousy party chair! But a a solid choice for succession if necessary, a decision for our country, not for politics. He is a solid, uninspiring liberal. Great voting record. Dull as they come. He will not lose her votes. May get us Virginia and some Hispanic votes. A plodding, rational, though uninspiring decision.
Now watch Terry McAuliffe appoint himself to the senate to replace Kaine.
In fact… That may have been part of the motive in choosing Kaine.
McAuliffe will do a Manchin and appoint a placeholder so he can then run in the Special. And shockingly, McAuliffe has been rather progressive as Governor.
Hey DD, when was Hillary (or Bill, for that matter) ever “held accountable from a progressive point of view?”
Correct answer is “Never.”
She was nominated because of her brand name and her vote buying, not her competence or any kind of record of true progressive accomplishments. (And simply being elected or appointed to a position is not an accomplishment.)
It took her ten years to admit her vote for Bush’s war was wrong. Get ready for 8 more years of war.
As DNC Chair, Tim Kaine lost the House Majority in 2010. That alone is enough to disqualify him for higher office. But not in the DLC-loving Clinton world.
Here’s my shocked face. I stand by all my earlier outrage and disappointment.
I’m going to abstain. This is bullshit.
Not that they’ll miss me. The Clinton campaign cares a lot more about winning the votes of moderate Republicans than it does about my vote.
In a year full of drama, I’m ok with safe. Her campaign slogan should be “we’re not batshit crazy.”
“guess who writes legislation? Committee Chairpersons like Warren, Sanders and Brown.”
Remember when the Pelosi House wrote and passed progressive legislation, Obama stood down and let Joe Biden walk more Republicanized versions through the Senate and then forced them back on the House (ACA, Bush tax cut extension, middle class tax cuts).
You know who we haven’t heard from in a while? Bill Clinton. If reports are true that Kaine was Bill’s choice, that gives an indication of how much of a silent influence Bill will be on the campaign and the administration.
Here’s why “safe” is important: this is a unique election because the GOP choice now represents nihilism on a level not contemplated since Sinclair Lewis wrote “It Can’t Happen Here” or Michael Kurland wrote “The Last President.”
So while I understand the progressive anger, this is the deal: anything at this point that reduces the chances of a Trump victory is on the table. (Yes, I know he’s already a long shot, but basketball players in the NBA and WNBA make shots from way outside the three-point arc every day they play.)
So Cory Booker can’t deliver anything more in terms of the minority vote than Clinton stands to receive now. Tom Vilsack is a complete unknown outside of wonk circles. Elizabeth Warren can’t deliver enough progressive votes to arguably win a single battleground states.
None of these possible Veeps give Secretary Clinton a chance to increase her support among middle class and blue collar white men, some of whom have to be ripe to be peeled away from Trump, because not all of them (no matter how conservative) are completely fucking crazy.
I don’t believe that Hillary Clinton was ever fate to be a progressive president. Like Barack Obama, and like her husband, she’s a centrist, pragmatic Democrat policy wonk who wants to tweak and reform the system rather than change it. So a progressive VP pick doesn’t work for her, but if it increases her support among White men by even 1-2% points, then he’s the correct pick.
What’s it like being so grown up?
He is ‘personally’ Pro-Life (strong Catholic). He is pro big bank. He has been middle ground on guns. and Yes McCauliffe has a hidden agenda. Nothing really progressive here with Kaine…
Sherrod Brown would have given HRC a progressive leader. Now all we get is a guy who will be a good, quiet lap dog and team Clinton player. No boldness and no REAL change if Hillary gets elected.
Matt Yglesias details the winners and losers in the Kaine pick.
This seems about right to me.
Progressives are running out of cheeks to turn.
I’m with you Jason. Screw the dnc. I’ll support congressional races to keep Trump in check. We deserve this.
@DD “McAuliffe will do a Manchin and appoint a placeholder so he can then run in the Special. And shockingly, McAuliffe has been rather progressive as Governor.”
No. He will simply resign and then get appointed by Northam.
Virginia doesn’t hold a special election for senate vacancies.
What I hate is this mincing, timid 50% plus one electoral college strategy. It doesn’t build a mandate, it doesn’t deal with big issues and it is exactly how Gore gave the White House to the worst President ever.
Gore gave the White House to Bush because he did not have the incumbent President campaigning for him. It really had nothing to do with Lieberman. Lieberman actually helped Gore win Florida. Hillary will have Obama campaigning for her.
@LE, are you sure about that? I have a friend in VA politics and he mentioned a special in 2017 but I haven’t looked into it myself.
Well, for everyone here acting like petulant children and voting Trump, I ask you to watch Kaine in the coming week first, starting today. That is what I am doing.
“Hillary will have Obama campaigning for her.”
In other words, it’s OK if one tire is flat because we have people to help push the car.
Still not voting for Trump. Just wont be shocked when he wins.
Well, if you are not voting for Hillary then you are voting for Trump.
Just give it a week and watch Kaine instead of making ridiculous pronouncements you will be embarrassed of later.
you mean like how a Colbert video was an indication of the VP?
Look, my core beliefs will still probably drive me to Clinton, but for many of the people I was trying to convince, there’s no argument left to make from a progressive standpoint. We have SCOTUS and dumb things like “maybe she’ll put warren at treasury”… which no one thinks will happen.
Kaine is staunchly anti-abortion. Kaine is staunchly women’s choice. I have a lot of respect for people who don’t see the world in binary terms. Generally he meets my qualifying conditions. He is not a binary, he is pragmatic, and he is experienced. Charisma would be nice, but it’s not a requirement for effective governance. A safe choice which won’t impact winning Congress as well.
While the White House is the primary goal, I’m hoping the DNC focuses sufficient resources on Congressional races because we need a Congress that actually works and perhaps accomplish something, including SCOTUS appointments.
I’m not sure when we started turning everyone into caricatures. Kaine was not my pick, but I’m not upset over it. Steve Newton’s comment makes sense, and I’m sticking by my comment from yesterday – This is the year of the angry, white man. Everywhere I turn I can’t escape this narrative.
And I’m not so sure picking a progressive as VP would help her with a progressive base who, every day, is threatening to not vote for her over something.
Yesterday, people were praising Tom Perez (who I think is great, btw) without pointing out that, not only did he support TPP he still supports it. So, I’m a bit confused over what positions are disqualify.
A VP pick only really matters if they’re unqualified. See: Palin, Sarah
“Just give it a week and watch Kaine”
Kaine’s support for TPP and bank deregulation undermines Hillary’s claimed priority to reverse income inequality and the decline of the working and middle class. DD are you suggesting that Kaine can glib his way out of that? That he will make himself so appealing that those priorities can be overlooked? Or will he recant his positions at the convention?
Or are you suggesting that Hillary can lower her claimed priority of those issues and that will be OK somehow?
I really don’t need to keep asking these questions because I expect the press will be relentless on looking for policy differences between Hillary and Kaine.
The bank deregulation in particular bothers me. Kaine knew he was being considered for Veep. Yet he lent his support to further deregulating huge banks this very week.
No wonder Wall Street is happy.
Actually, El Som, you are wrong. He did not lend his support further deregulating HUGE banks this very week. The banks the letter referred to were small community banks. Now, I am not saying that as a positive, but at least get the facts right.
“So, I’m a bit confused over what positions disqualify.”
@Pandora The ones articulated by the Commission on Progressive Purity of course!
“My pessimism extends to the point of even suspecting the sincerity of other pessimists.”
Jean Rostand
How is Kaine who doesn’t reflect the spirit of the Democratic Party platform the “safe choice?” As far as progressives are concerned, he is a disenfranchising choice.
Here is Hillary’s message the Kaine choice sends: “corporate donors keep sending money my way. I chose someone just like me.” She intends to win this election by money and not by high principle. She’s not a progressive and won’t run in the general or govern as one just like many of us predicted. Her veep pick is exhibit A.
I got the facts right, DD. He signed two letters, both pushing for deregulation. The first was for community banks and credit unions. The second? From Politico:
“Kaine also signed a second letter that called for changes to the rules governing how larger regional banks have to set up capital cushions to protect themselves against failure.
Written to the heads of the Federal Reserve, Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. and Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the missive asked regulators to reconsider how they apply safeguards to the activities of regional banks — meaning those that are bigger than the smallest, community lenders but smaller than international mega-banks such as JPMorgan Chase and Citigroup.
Kaine was one of four Senate Democrats signatories on the letter, including Sen. Mark Warner, a fellow Virginia Democrat. Kaine and Warner have a strong constituent interest because Capital One, the tenth biggest bank in the country by assets, is based in McLean, Virginia.
The senators asked regulators to reconsider aspects of two sets of rules designed to ensure that large banks have enough financial resources to withstand another crisis. Kaine did not endorse dramatic de-regulatory measures, but asked for changes for “regional banks that do not share the same risk profile or complexity as their larger, systemically important brethren.”
Unless you consider Capital One “What can we take from YOUR wallet?” a small community bank, my point stands.
Maybe you should go somewhere other than Hillary.com for your talking points.
No matter who the VP choice is, that person is not going to be setting policy unless the president dies. What Kaine would do himself is irrelevant, because he’ll do what Hillary wants him to, not what he wants to do.
From the reaction here you’d think he was Joe Manchin.
“No matter who the VP choice is, that person is not going to be setting policy unless the president dies. ”
Were you not paying attention in Obama’s first term when Joe Biden was the hatchet man for progressive bills coming out of the Pelosi House and giving Obama plausible deniability? No doubt he was doing Obama’s will, but it was Biden’s will as well.
The first letter has many signatories, mostly Repub. The second letter (urging exemption of big banks) has only four signatures and one of them was Kaine.
@puck: Biden wasn’t a “hatchet man.” He was the liaison to Congress because he was liked by people on both sides of the aisle. Just like Kaine:
http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/7/22/1551229/-Praising-Kaine-How-Clinton-s-choice-of-a-widely-respected-senator-drives-a-deep-wedge-into-the-GOP
It may well be that Kaine was chosen not for what he brings to the campaign but for what he’ll bring to the administration.
He’s not Joe Manchin. He’s not even *gaack* Evan Bayh, who might well be back in the Senate by year’s end.
But, if you wanted to reinforce the message that banks and corporate interests will flourish over the next four years at the expense of everybody else, then Hillary couldn’t have done any better than Kaine.
“Biden wasn’t a “hatchet man.” He was the liaison to Congress ”
Tomay-to, tomah-to. If it walks like a duck…
You don’t get anything from the opposing party by wielding a hatchet. And you won’t illustrate it well by claiming Joe Biden is more liberal than Barack Obama, which happens to be untrue.
I completely respect other people’s priorities. If bank regulation and TPP are what matters to you (still not sure why Perez got a pass on TPP yesterday, tho) that’s fine. What I struggle with is characterizing Kaine solely by these issues.
No surprise that reproductive rights matter to me. Kaine has evolved on these issues and I believe him. I believe people can evolve. And I really don’t understand why we don’t let them. They come over to our side and instead of declaring victory we say they’re lying, or insincere. I don’t get it. I think I need to read I Hate Your Politics” again – the part about liberals.
“They come over to our side…”
Really? Let’s hear him retract his positions and speak for increased bank regulation and against TPP from the stage in Philadelphia. Hillary apologized for some of her past positions; now it’s Kaine’s turn.
“You don’t get anything from the opposing party by wielding a hatchet. ”
Obama got nothing from the opposing party. Pelosi’s progressive bills were defeated by Senate Dems and Biden was the messenger boy who went to the Senate and said… “Psst… hold the phone; we’re going to give you a less progressive option and declare victory.”
“Hillary apologized for some of her past positions”
Yeah, and I saw how you guys believed her. This is why some progressives always end up unhappy. They never give credit. They simply do not subscribe to positive reinforcement. Even if a candidate does something they agree with they’ll pull support the second the candidate does something they disagree with. They aren’t reliable voters, and that matters. Because if you’re constantly yanking your support away then why would anyone put you in their column?
Politicians can catch my ear with a speech but to win my solid support they have to act on that speech.
I voted for Obama in 2008 because of his speeches.
I wished for a primary of Obama in 2010 because of his actions in his first term.
I now solidly support Obama because of his actions in his second term.
See how that works? That doesn’t make me fickle; it makes me rational.
Hence, a weathervane behaves rationally. Hard to tell that from the word’s connotations, though.
Supporting politicians isn’t for better or worse, richer or poorer. If things get worse and aren’t fixed the relationship is over.
Weathervane.
Sorry. With a setup like that, instinct took over.
If I was a weathervane I would have been a Republican 2000-2008. The weathervanes were the Dems in Congress. When the wind blew from the right they headed straight for it.
True dat.
You got that the previous comment was a joke, right?
“eah, and I saw how you guys believed her. This is why some progressives always end up unhappy. They never give credit. They simply do not subscribe to positive reinforcement. Even if a candidate does something they agree with they’ll pull support the second the candidate does something they disagree with. They aren’t reliable voters, and that matters. Because if you’re constantly yanking your support away then why would anyone put you in their column?”
Notice how in this entire analysis not one bit of it is concerned with what can be done to maximize the well being of the American people. It’s as if that shouldn’t be a factor in gauging the intensity of support you should give to a candidate. It’s entirely concerned about maximizing the margin of victory for the favorite team. That’s the pragmatic status quo position in a nutshell.
And it’s correct in a way. Unless and until elections become about maximizing the well being of the electorate, don’t expect fervent support from progressives. Elections are about people’s lives and not allegiances to political sport teams.
Kaine is a safe choice because he alienates the fewest people. 23% self identify as Liberal. Out of that percentage a good number of them probably identify as progressives. However, that means 77% identify as conservative (34%) or moderate (38%). It’s not personal. It’s just math. If a majority of Americans identified as progressive we would be have a different discussion. But the majority don’t. It is what it is.
@Dana – Your correct. It is all about Tribalism.
If a Trump-like candidate won the Dem nomination, 90% of the Dems would be supporting him, regardless. Hillary is one of the least-liked major party candidates in history, yet Debbie Water-Sports and the DNC clearly worked to rig the nomination for her (see new reports on leaked emails), and still the Dem tribe supports her unquestionably. She is a war-hawk, a $200,000 per hour Wall Street employee, and accomplished nothing as a Senator or Secretary of State.
The selection of a failed former DNC Chair as VP is just another slap in the face by the Dem establishment against progressives.
Look at leaked DNC emails. Shows Wasserman Schultz and company were in the tank for Hillary all along. No shocker there!!!!!! just exposed for the truth.
“Wasserman Schultz and company were in the tank for Hillary all along”
And this is news? DWS should be banned from any official party duties and left to the mercies of Miami voters.
So opinions on the speech? I didn’t think he was boring. LOL.
@c “Look at leaked DNC emails. Shows Wasserman Schultz and company were in the tank for Hillary all along. No shocker there!!!!!! just exposed for the truth.”
BS… (and I don’t mean Bernie Sanders).
1. The analysis is severely flawed
2. These are the emails that went through Putin’s greasy little fingers.
His delivery is pretty boring, or maybe understated is a better word. I liked the way he personalized his support of stronger gun control legislation, though. Especially how he reacted to the shootings at Virginia Tech when he was governor of Virginia.
Kaine studiously avoided mentioning Wall Street, trade, or banks. So asking me what I thought of the speech is like asking me “Apart from that Mrs. Lincoln…”
Kaine did say this: “We will rewrite the rules so that companies share profits with workers rather than shift jobs overseas.” Sounds good until you actually parse it and think about it.