[Mick]

...along with 6-7 other people.  The Bern is not being vetted.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/bernie-sande...1466032811

Looks like Elizabeth Warren is the frontrunner.  Others are Labor Secretary Tom Perez; HUD Secretary Julián Castro; Senators Tim Kaine of Virginia, Sherrod Brown of Ohio and Cory Booker of New Jersey; Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti, and Reps. Xavier Becerra of California and Tim Ryan of Ohio.

[Mick]

...along with 6-7 other people.  The Bern is not being vetted.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/bernie-sande...1466032811

Looks like Elizabeth Warren is the frontrunner.  Others are Labor Secretary Tom Perez; HUD Secretary Julián Castro; Senators Tim Kaine of Virginia, Sherrod Brown of Ohio and Cory Booker of New Jersey; Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti, and Reps. Xavier Becerra of California and Tim Ryan of Ohio.

[OutsiderFan]

Cory Booker is too nice and well-mannered to be on the ticket in this election.

[OutsiderFan]

Cory Booker is too nice and well-mannered to be on the ticket in this election.

[BigEasyCard]

Julián Castro and Xavier Becerra are also Stanford graduates.

Geaux Cardinal!

[BigEasyCard]

Julián Castro and Xavier Becerra are also Stanford graduates.

Geaux Cardinal!

[stupac2]

Cory Booker is too nice and well-mannered from a state with a Republican governor to be on the ticket in this election.

FTFY. Unless NJ has a special election mandate like MA there's just no way Hillary can in good conscience pick him. Control of the senate is on a knife-edge and letting Chris "Trump's new best friend" Christie pick his replacement would be a ridiculous unforced error.

[stupac2]

Cory Booker is too nice and well-mannered from a state with a Republican governor to be on the ticket in this election.

FTFY. Unless NJ has a special election mandate like MA there's just no way Hillary can in good conscience pick him. Control of the senate is on a knife-edge and letting Chris "Trump's new best friend" Christie pick his replacement would be a ridiculous unforced error.

[French Rage]

I also wonder if a NY/NJ ticket is too geographically limited (and same thing with Warren with NY/MA).  Someone like Castro from Texas offers better diversity there.

That said, are we past the whole era of worrying about things like that?  We definitely seem past the era of "adding a VP from a state will help you turn that state".  Are all of those things relics from when the world was much more regional and parties had better control over their machines is each state?

[French Rage]

I also wonder if a NY/NJ ticket is too geographically limited (and same thing with Warren with NY/MA).  Someone like Castro from Texas offers better diversity there.

That said, are we past the whole era of worrying about things like that?  We definitely seem past the era of "adding a VP from a state will help you turn that state".  Are all of those things relics from when the world was much more regional and parties had better control over their machines is each state?

[BostonCard]

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/a-fi...eculation/

Fivethirtyeight has a good article about factors that go into picking running mates.  On the question you asked:

Do vice presidential candidates help a ticket win their home state? Not really. A new book by two political scientists — “The VP Advantage: How running mates influence home state voting in presidential elections” — finds that these effects are “conditional and rare” and uses American National Election Studies data to demonstrate that even famously strategic picks, such as John F. Kennedy’s selection of Lyndon Johnson in 1960, did little to influence election performance. This is all consistent with previous research,2 which points to an unsurprising conclusion: Presidential elections are about presidents, not vice-presidents, and that goes even for residents of the running mate’s home state. Beware stories claiming a vice-presidential nominee will put his or her home state in play.

BC

[BostonCard]

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/a-fi...eculation/

Fivethirtyeight has a good article about factors that go into picking running mates.  On the question you asked:

Do vice presidential candidates help a ticket win their home state? Not really. A new book by two political scientists — “The VP Advantage: How running mates influence home state voting in presidential elections” — finds that these effects are “conditional and rare” and uses American National Election Studies data to demonstrate that even famously strategic picks, such as John F. Kennedy’s selection of Lyndon Johnson in 1960, did little to influence election performance. This is all consistent with previous research,2 which points to an unsurprising conclusion: Presidential elections are about presidents, not vice-presidents, and that goes even for residents of the running mate’s home state. Beware stories claiming a vice-presidential nominee will put his or her home state in play.

BC

[TrumpCard]

[quote author=OutsiderFan link=topic=15208.msg165100#msg165100 date=1466086764]
Cory Booker is too nice and well-mannered from a state with a Republican governor to be on the ticket in this election.

FTFY. Unless NJ has a special election mandate like MA there's just no way Hillary can in good conscience pick him. Control of the senate is on a knife-edge and letting Chris "Trump's new best friend" Christie pick his replacement would be a ridiculous unforced error.
[/quote]

Booker got his seat in a special election a few months after Lautenberg died. 

[TrumpCard]

[quote author=OutsiderFan link=topic=15208.msg165100#msg165100 date=1466086764]
Cory Booker is too nice and well-mannered from a state with a Republican governor to be on the ticket in this election.

FTFY. Unless NJ has a special election mandate like MA there's just no way Hillary can in good conscience pick him. Control of the senate is on a knife-edge and letting Chris "Trump's new best friend" Christie pick his replacement would be a ridiculous unforced error.
[/quote]

Booker got his seat in a special election a few months after Lautenberg died. 

[yvonne]

Then he was reelected the following year when Lautenberg's term (would have?) ended.

[yvonne]

Then he was reelected the following year when Lautenberg's term (would have?) ended.

[82lsju]

[quote author=stupac2 link=topic=15208.msg165107#msg165107 date=1466093211]
[quote author=OutsiderFan link=topic=15208.msg165100#msg165100 date=1466086764]
Cory Booker is too nice and well-mannered from a state with a Republican governor to be on the ticket in this election.

FTFY. Unless NJ has a special election mandate like MA there's just no way Hillary can in good conscience pick him. Control of the senate is on a knife-edge and letting Chris "Trump's new best friend" Christie pick his replacement would be a ridiculous unforced error.
[/quote]

Booker got his seat in a special election a few months after Lautenberg died.
[/quote]

Christie would get to appoint a replacement to hold office until the special election.  Last time he appointed someone who was not going to run for the office, this time he may or may not follow the same plan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Sta...rsey,_2013

[82lsju]

[quote author=stupac2 link=topic=15208.msg165107#msg165107 date=1466093211]
[quote author=OutsiderFan link=topic=15208.msg165100#msg165100 date=1466086764]
Cory Booker is too nice and well-mannered from a state with a Republican governor to be on the ticket in this election.

FTFY. Unless NJ has a special election mandate like MA there's just no way Hillary can in good conscience pick him. Control of the senate is on a knife-edge and letting Chris "Trump's new best friend" Christie pick his replacement would be a ridiculous unforced error.
[/quote]

Booker got his seat in a special election a few months after Lautenberg died.
[/quote]

Christie would get to appoint a replacement to hold office until the special election.  Last time he appointed someone who was not going to run for the office, this time he may or may not follow the same plan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Sta...rsey,_2013

[stupac2]

The wikipedia article says it wasn't clear whether a special election would've been held until Christie announced the dates. Is NJ law unclear on this? The reason I brought it up is that I haven't seen a discussion of how that would work. I have seen discussion of it wrt Warren.

Still, if the seat isn't actually vacated until the term starts that could easily switch control of the Senate for a few crucial months at the beginning of a term. Would Clinton really want to risk that?

[stupac2]

The wikipedia article says it wasn't clear whether a special election would've been held until Christie announced the dates. Is NJ law unclear on this? The reason I brought it up is that I haven't seen a discussion of how that would work. I have seen discussion of it wrt Warren.

Still, if the seat isn't actually vacated until the term starts that could easily switch control of the Senate for a few crucial months at the beginning of a term. Would Clinton really want to risk that?

[fullmetal]

We might see a Bern/Booker ticket if, IF, something bad shakes out:

Russia Is Reportedly Set To Release Clinton's Intercepted Emails
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/russia-rep...00629.html

I believe there's a good possibility that the unsecured email server was breached catastrophically, possibly with knowledge on the part of whatever amateur was administering that server (apparently it was "powered down for a few minutes after evidence of a hack in progress"--great countermeasures, kid).  Many in the federal services have been fired and blackballed for life for much smaller violations.  I would be very upset if justice were subverted in this case...but first we must see what the facts of the case are.

[fullmetal]

We might see a Bern/Booker ticket if, IF, something bad shakes out:

Russia Is Reportedly Set To Release Clinton's Intercepted Emails
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/russia-rep...00629.html

I believe there's a good possibility that the unsecured email server was breached catastrophically, possibly with knowledge on the part of whatever amateur was administering that server (apparently it was "powered down for a few minutes after evidence of a hack in progress"--great countermeasures, kid).  Many in the federal services have been fired and blackballed for life for much smaller violations.  I would be very upset if justice were subverted in this case...but first we must see what the facts of the case are.

[dabigv13]

What I have read seems to indicate that while the Democrats will likely close the gap, perhaps to a single seat in the event of a Democratic VP, an actual majority seems very very unlikely. Still a risky proposition though.

[dabigv13]

What I have read seems to indicate that while the Democrats will likely close the gap, perhaps to a single seat in the event of a Democratic VP, an actual majority seems very very unlikely. Still a risky proposition though.

[dabigv13]

We might see a Bern/Booker ticket if, IF, something bad shakes out:

Russia Is Reportedly Set To Release Clinton's Intercepted Emails
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/russia-rep...00629.html

I believe there's a good possibility that the unsecured email server was breached catastrophically, possibly with knowledge on the part of whatever amateur was administering that server (apparently it was "powered down for a few minutes after evidence of a hack in progress"--great countermeasures, kid).  Many in the federal services have been fired and blackballed for life for much smaller violations.  I would be very upset if justice were subverted in this case...but first we must see what the facts of the case are.

From the esteemed oilprice.com.....these rumours have been pretty thoroughly debunked. Only Breitbart and their ilk have been reporting them.

Even if Putin did have these emails (which he may), releasing them would not really make much sense.

[dabigv13]

We might see a Bern/Booker ticket if, IF, something bad shakes out:

Russia Is Reportedly Set To Release Clinton's Intercepted Emails
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/russia-rep...00629.html

I believe there's a good possibility that the unsecured email server was breached catastrophically, possibly with knowledge on the part of whatever amateur was administering that server (apparently it was "powered down for a few minutes after evidence of a hack in progress"--great countermeasures, kid).  Many in the federal services have been fired and blackballed for life for much smaller violations.  I would be very upset if justice were subverted in this case...but first we must see what the facts of the case are.

From the esteemed oilprice.com.....these rumours have been pretty thoroughly debunked. Only Breitbart and their ilk have been reporting them.

Even if Putin did have these emails (which he may), releasing them would not really make much sense.

[82lsju]

We might see a Bern/Booker ticket if, IF, something bad shakes out:

Russia Is Reportedly Set To Release Clinton's Intercepted Emails
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/russia-rep...00629.html

I believe there's a good possibility that the unsecured email server was breached catastrophically, possibly with knowledge on the part of whatever amateur was administering that server (apparently it was "powered down for a few minutes after evidence of a hack in progress"--great countermeasures, kid).  Many in the federal services have been fired and blackballed for life for much smaller violations.  I would be very upset if justice were subverted in this case...but first we must see what the facts of the case are.

maybe they have them, maybe they release them.  I'd think that the US (or its agents) have hacked into Russian computer systems and could share some equally ugly/embarrassing items.  Might be a situation of mutual deterrence.

If they do have them and release them and think it will hurt Clinton then they clearly seem to want someone other than Clinton or Trump to be President, if they wanted Trump to win the election it seems to me that they would release the material in Sept or Oct not before the democratic convention.

[82lsju]

We might see a Bern/Booker ticket if, IF, something bad shakes out:

Russia Is Reportedly Set To Release Clinton's Intercepted Emails
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/russia-rep...00629.html

I believe there's a good possibility that the unsecured email server was breached catastrophically, possibly with knowledge on the part of whatever amateur was administering that server (apparently it was "powered down for a few minutes after evidence of a hack in progress"--great countermeasures, kid).  Many in the federal services have been fired and blackballed for life for much smaller violations.  I would be very upset if justice were subverted in this case...but first we must see what the facts of the case are.

maybe they have them, maybe they release them.  I'd think that the US (or its agents) have hacked into Russian computer systems and could share some equally ugly/embarrassing items.  Might be a situation of mutual deterrence.

If they do have them and release them and think it will hurt Clinton then they clearly seem to want someone other than Clinton or Trump to be President, if they wanted Trump to win the election it seems to me that they would release the material in Sept or Oct not before the democratic convention.

[stupac2]

What I have read seems to indicate that while the Democrats will likely close the gap, perhaps to a single seat in the event of a Democratic VP, an actual majority seems very very unlikely. Still a risky proposition though.

There's no way you can say it's "very very unlikely". The problem is that this election is one brobdingnagian unknown now that one party has nominated a completely different figure than normal. It's not hard at all to imagine a landslide win for Clinton that carries a few seats they otherwise wouldn't have won.

We're also far enough out that polling isn't super meaningful, and some candidates haven't even been chosen yet, so your certainty seems misplaced.

[stupac2]

What I have read seems to indicate that while the Democrats will likely close the gap, perhaps to a single seat in the event of a Democratic VP, an actual majority seems very very unlikely. Still a risky proposition though.

There's no way you can say it's "very very unlikely". The problem is that this election is one brobdingnagian unknown now that one party has nominated a completely different figure than normal. It's not hard at all to imagine a landslide win for Clinton that carries a few seats they otherwise wouldn't have won.

We're also far enough out that polling isn't super meaningful, and some candidates haven't even been chosen yet, so your certainty seems misplaced.

[BostonCard]

Here's fivethirtyeight's assessment of the senate:

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/sena...rike-back/

Right now, Republicans hold 54 seats to the Democrats’ 46 (including two independents who caucus with the Democrats). The Democrats have a favorable map in 2016: Of the 34 seats up for grabs, 24 are held by Republicans. Democrats need to net four seats to win control of the Senate if Hillary Clinton wins the presidency and five seats if Donald Trump wins. We’ll launch our official Senate projections later this year, but it’s not too early to take a more informal tour through the races. The combination of the polling, the political lean of the states being contested and the candidates running suggests a close race for control of the chamber.

The 10 most competitive races are profiled.

And here is the Cook Political Report profile of the senate:

http://cookpolitical.com/senate

Republicans have 30 senate seats not up for election, another 11 that are considered solid Republican seats.  Another 6 are "likely" Republican and 1 is a Republican lean.  That gives them a baseline of about 47 - 48 seats.  Seven seats are considered "toss-ups" and another one is a lean Democrat.  If you include the "leans" as possibility competitive, Republicans have to win 4 out of the 9 for a 51 vote majority (needed if there is a Democratic President) or 3/9 if Trump wins.

BC

[BostonCard]

Here's fivethirtyeight's assessment of the senate:

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/sena...rike-back/

Right now, Republicans hold 54 seats to the Democrats’ 46 (including two independents who caucus with the Democrats). The Democrats have a favorable map in 2016: Of the 34 seats up for grabs, 24 are held by Republicans. Democrats need to net four seats to win control of the Senate if Hillary Clinton wins the presidency and five seats if Donald Trump wins. We’ll launch our official Senate projections later this year, but it’s not too early to take a more informal tour through the races. The combination of the polling, the political lean of the states being contested and the candidates running suggests a close race for control of the chamber.

The 10 most competitive races are profiled.

And here is the Cook Political Report profile of the senate:

http://cookpolitical.com/senate

Republicans have 30 senate seats not up for election, another 11 that are considered solid Republican seats.  Another 6 are "likely" Republican and 1 is a Republican lean.  That gives them a baseline of about 47 - 48 seats.  Seven seats are considered "toss-ups" and another one is a lean Democrat.  If you include the "leans" as possibility competitive, Republicans have to win 4 out of the 9 for a 51 vote majority (needed if there is a Democratic President) or 3/9 if Trump wins.

BC

[Hulk01]

My bet for VP: Tim Kaine, Governor of Virginia.  Won't thrill the progressives in the party, which also means he won't give ammunition for the GOP's nominee.

[Hulk01]

My bet for VP: Tim Kaine, Governor of Virginia.  Won't thrill the progressives in the party, which also means he won't give ammunition for the GOP's nominee.

[TrumpCard]

Hulk, I thought the same thing until I saw the wandering eyebrow.  I know I shouldn't be so shallow, but have you seen it in action? 

[TrumpCard]

Hulk, I thought the same thing until I saw the wandering eyebrow.  I know I shouldn't be so shallow, but have you seen it in action? 

[Cardinal96]

I hope Clinton picks Governor Cuomo.  I know it would be doubling down on NY but I really like him as our governor. 

[Cardinal96]

I hope Clinton picks Governor Cuomo.  I know it would be doubling down on NY but I really like him as our governor. 

[BostonCard]

Kaine is a good choice, but this may be an odd year where there may be an advantage to picking a fairly liberal running mate, given how unenthusiastic Bernie Sanders' supporters are for Hillary.

Also, she may benefit from an injection of youth into her campaign.

Interesting that the betting markets have Julian Castro as the favorite:

http://www.oddsshark.com/entertainment/u...ident-odds

BC

[BostonCard]

Kaine is a good choice, but this may be an odd year where there may be an advantage to picking a fairly liberal running mate, given how unenthusiastic Bernie Sanders' supporters are for Hillary.

Also, she may benefit from an injection of youth into her campaign.

Interesting that the betting markets have Julian Castro as the favorite:

http://www.oddsshark.com/entertainment/u...ident-odds

BC