Everyone I know who did heard it first on via Internet.

get the early text announcement, decided not to, and am now glad I didn't.

Just heard on CNN re: VP nominee's stance.

He's pro-choice politically, but in his personal life (due to his religion) he's "pro-life". That's what he means.

He wouldn't interfere with the rights of others.

liberal on the matter than Kucinich was when he started out, before he "evolved" to the same position. Harry Reid is in the same boat. Their personal views do not impact public policy.

I will still vote for her, but I don't think this was the wisest choice of a running mate.

She's made this campaign about breaking that glass ceiling.

And, instead of grabbing a young latino, another woman, anything BUT a pasty, old white guy to bring along under that broken ceiling, she chose SAFE.

This pick was a chickenshit move, lacking in courage. She pulled that ladder up behind her with this choice.

Is there something about her pick besides race, age and gender that you do not like?

If so I will respect that. But your only three state reasons for opposing her pick do not seem very progressive.

That's my plan.

coward because she isn't climbing that almost unscalable cliff and attempting to smash that Marineland-thick -glass ceiling with, say, the nation's first Hispanic VP candidate on her back?

You can just say things like that on DU if you want, and obviously you do, and of course no courage at all is required.

Why you feel the need to jump in and deflect my question to a poster that is attacking our VP pick based on nothing but his Race, Age and Gender.

But I am glad you picked something of substance. I work for a corporation and use several banks. I do not want candidates that will destroy them, but regulate the hell out of them.

Because I believe that the most prosperous societies are based on heavily regulated capitalism. Do I think Hillary is the best in the nation for that...no I do not. But she is a hell of a lot better than republicans. And because I happen to be an old, white guy I realize that we never get the perfect candidate.

And while I liked Bernie, he would lose in an epic landslide. Most Americans and most democrats are not socialist.

I doubt we will agree about many things. But thank you for responding with a 'concern' about of to our candidates based on policy issues, not race, gender nor age.

I trust you will be voting for her?

Have a great weekend.

...would win in a landslide.

So, you're disqualified.

....Hillary Clinton is our candidate.

Finally, this is one of the rules here at DU: "Don't keep fighting the last Democratic presidential primary". Thank you.

He has already said he will go along with her stance on TPP, I would assume the same could be said for her stand on banking regulations.

It's BIG to have the first woman...let's not be greedy. If Obama had picked an African American as VP he probably wouldn't have won. By the way...Kaine was one of his choices too but he went with Joe who also is not Mr. Excitement.

I'm beyond disappointed.

He's got executive and legislative experience, he's spent a lifetime working for the poor and disenfranchised, and he's fluent in Spanish.

You might want to learn a bit about him before you start flinging the "chickenshit" comments.

She didn't choose "safe." She chose "smart" and "prepared."

of Clinton's candidacy in the first pace are now WHINING that she didn't make her ticket "historic enough."

Give me a fucking break with this shit.

I'm still voting for Hillary. I'm just not inspired by her choice of a VP, that's all.

Balls anyone?

They're going to compete with Trump for moderate Republicans.

The real base always was going to vote for Sec. Clinton. Any so-called "Democrat" who would toss away a vote on a far left fringe candidate like Stein or a monster like Trump was not a real Democrat to begin with.

Kaine is a great choice and helps bring in many more votes than he costs.

My first thoughts were pretty much along the same lines-- that she can reasonably count on Sanders' supporters, or at least enough of them, to vote Democrat regardless, so why not fight over Republicans who don't want to vote for Trump.

But the more I think about it, the less sure I am. I mean, the primary season was dominated by 'anti-establishment' sentiment, and Kaine is just as establishment as Hillary. He could be perceived as some kind of finger to Democrats on Hillary's left, and the Clinton campaign could be overestimating her potential to win over Republicans. I mean, she's not just a 'moderate Democrat', she's Hillary Clinton. She's basically Cruella DeVille to the right.

The biggest pool of voters in the US is in the middle. They are not politically consumed ideologues. Obama is a moderate Democrat. Look at his 8 years. He inherited a nightmare from Bush and has done an outstanding job turning around a devastated economy. Sec Clinton had one way to actually lose the middle. That is if she was painted as a closet socialist who would go hard to the left. She is avoiding this trap, and Kaine cements this. I have a large piece of ammunition to show you why Sanders was NOT the strongest candidate to win in the GE, and why a far left VP would also be a weakness with that huge pool of voters.

The effect of his tax plan on the middle class. They would have run away in droves.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=8037085

... that a lot of thought went into who Hillary felt she could work well with, who she thought would be a good partner in pursuing her agenda, who would execute the duties of the vice presidency responsibly and well; someone of intelligence, experience, and integrity.

It's sad to see people thinking of the VP pick as a campaign "crowd pleaser", simply a name on the ticket who will draw votes, without seeming to give any thought to the fact that this will be a four-to-eight year partnership that needs to work well long after the votes are counted in November.

BTW, "the left" are with Hillary. Implying that she needs to somehow be more "concerned" about them, or has to appease them in some way, is to ignore the fact that she already has their support. I know it's been a popular meme here throughout the primary that her appeal is somehow limited to a certain stripe of Democrat, but it is apparent to those paying attention that she already has the support of Dem voters across the spectrum.

No matter who she chose for the VP slot, there were going to be those who were disappointed, disagreed with the choice, preferred someone else. That's politics; that's life - you can't please all the people all the time.

But there were many who were going to be displeased no matter who she chose because, quite frankly, they are displeased about everything she does.

He or she is not a co-president. They're a backup president.

The post has, in modern history, been used almost exclusively as a political marketing tool. The claim that she chose Kaine because he's someone she can 'work with' is a little naive.

... is in thinking that a VP pick is exclusively a marketing tool. No one said anything about a VP being a co-president. It is, nonetheless, a position that has certain responsibilities, and filling that position should be given more consideration than just a name or face that will pull in votes on election day.

But as I said, some people were going to find fault with HRC's choice no matter who it was.

Both Bill Clinton and Barack Obama have put their VEEPs to work. So will Hillary.

The Republicans who are the right and the wrong.

Looks like Hillary played it as safe as possible. Such a shame. A Clinton/Warren ticket would have truly broken the mold.

We need people who we can trust and will do a good job. Who the hell cares whether they are "exciting" or not!

This bland ticket increases the likelihood of führer Trump.

How the hell do you think Pres. Obama got elected? He was cool. He was different. He was edgy. He had brains!

He ignited people to get out and stand in line.

This is a real mistake.

Mark my words.

But what is more important? Losing the WH or replacing a senator in a few months?

This is going to make the election way too close.

Herr Trump has more of a chance.

....to say crazy stupid things. He is such an idiot that many of his own party aren't endorsing him. Clinton/Kaine by contrast are going to look better and better everyday.

This will end up being a race between Clinton/Kaine and Johnson/Weld.

Some friends from Nebraska who voted for Obama last 2 elections have drunk the Kool Ade and have a Trump sign in their yard. Hate Hillary. Have gone back to watching Fox for their main news source. Spout talking points from the propaganda they watch. No hope for them. I tell them they are watching lies. The are afraid. They are afraid of the brown people moving into their neighborhood. They obsess on any crime around them. I tell them, you think it's bad now, wait until your social security and medicare get cut. They don't think it'll happen to them.

I'm thinking they are not alone. It's scary.

For Obama.

It's my experience.

Bye.

Thanks for the permission.

for President Obama?

Right. Nebraska is the bastion of Democratic power

VA in the dem column doesn't hurt either.

GOTV for the occasional younger voters who only seem to make it to the polls when they get turned on by a candidate.

With the voter suppression laws and the general ennui of likely democratic voters, it makes the election a closer contest.

Serious and solid does NOT turn on the voters that turned out in numbers for President Obama. They want cool and different and edgy. This is not that.

Flavour of the moment poof is a shambolic way to run a nation. Look at what happened here for us with BREXIT.

And you know that.

I find it distasteful for people to assume that younger voters need to be wowed with flash and shiny bits 'n bobbles in order to get our vote.

have it well in hand.

Not all young people are dewy-eyed dreamers. Some mature earlier than others, and understand that qualities like competence and intelligence and thoughtfulness and pragmatism are, in fact, desirable traits. And those mature younger people are usually the ones who take the time to register, and to vote.

in 2008. I voted for him in 2012, and plan on proudly casting my vote for Sec. Clinton in November. My wife is not a US citizen, but if she was, there would be 2 votes coming from our household for Hillary.

I was one of those "early maturing" types. Started university when I was 16, and now have a PhD in Cultural Anthropology. Worked for one year for a private firm in London, then we stared our own business in advertising/consulting (my wife's background) a little over a year ago. It has been doing very, very well, but now i truly fear the downdraft from the Brexit. We have dozens of employees from all over the EU and the uncertainness of their status has already cost us 6 people, who took positions back in their home countries or other EU states since Leave won.

We quite possibly may end up relocating to the US if conditions truly turn shambolic here. IF Trump wins (he will not), NO WAY would we return.

Also, as Inishturk is looking for families with children, I am afraid we do not have much to offer there, unless we adopt!

What if you relocated to Scotland and Scotland voted to LEAVE the UK? Would you be allowed to plant your flag in Aberdeen or wherever, and become Scottish? Or would it be a "Where you're born" type thing as they sort out who's who?

Do you think LEAVE is going to actually happen, or do you suppose there will be another vote to pull back from the brink? No one has pulled the trigger yet on Article 50, does anyone at all seem eager to so do?

We have extensive ties in all 3 cities, and I really do not care to live in Scotland.

As for the Leave, that is quite a tough nut to crack. I do NOT see a 2nd vote. I do see one of 3 things happening.

1. Parliament is forced through law rulings to get involved, in which case they probably will not leave.
https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2016/06/27/nick-barber-tom-hickman-and-jeff-king-pulling-the-article-50-trigger-parliaments-indispensable-role/

2. The UK, after (or even before) Article 50 is invoked cuts a deal for "limited" stay, sort of like Norway and Switzerland have. The other EU nations are very adamant this will not happen until Article 50 is triggered, and even then it's choppy waters ahead.

3 Article 50 is invoked, and after 2 years, the UK truly leaves, which will trigger Scotland leaving the UK, and probably N.I. as well. God help the us on getting a decent trade deal out of that. The US and the Commonwealth would have to really be focused upon in that route goes forward.

I want to CHOKE so man in my age bracket who voted Leave as a sort of "taking the piss". I know at least 20 like this. I also am gobsmacked that millions bought into the divvy shite coming from the Leave camp. Fools!!!

Now we all pay.

seems like the smoothest result that would resolve everything without a lot of brouhaha...but ya never know, do ya?

I used to live in UK years ago during the John Major years. Those were tough times, too, not as tough as the Maggie days, but still...~!

little did we know what a war criminal he would turn into

I mean, really...who knew?

Blair tacked from left to right with a great deal of alacrity. Rather ruined his legacy.

The majority of those that voted for Bernie will be voting for Hillary

I know a lot of millennials who have to be REAL motivated to vote.

said they will be voting for Hillary

Also, African Americans, Hispanics, Women, and other demographics will be coming out strong for Hillary

Midterms are terrible for us. Now we have a boring ticket. Good luck, I say.

I hope you realize that your opinion is not necessarily shared by everyone.

She did have a fight on her hands, as you might remember.

her.

The millennials will vote for Hillary, they are not as superficial as you suggest, and know what the stakes

They didn't in the '14 elections.

I don't think millennials are gonna switch over and vote for Trump, but I DO think they might just stay home.

This was the primary, not the general. Keep that in mind.

Why waste time, effort and money trying to get the most unreliable voters to show up?



Hillary needs a Dem Congress and she needs to hold onto it, so why in the hell would she waste her time going after people guaranteed not to show up in 2018 when it really counts if she can go after demographics that reliably vote in election after election?

As of 12:24 a.m. Central Time...7/23/16...it has 3 recs.

WOW!

The state he was governor and now senator. I like him. He's a solid progressive and I think he'd be an excellent president someday. He really adds to the ticket.

Frankly, we just stole a whole lot of the center with a progressive. I'm impressed with this choice strategically as well as impressed with the candidate's politics. He's the nightmare the Rs didn't want picked also, because he is young enough to be the incumbent in 2024, after Hillary's terms run out.