Wisely? NYT’s most relevant para:
Ultimately, Mrs. Clinton, who told PBS that she was “afflicted with the responsibility gene,” avoided taking a chance with a less experienced vice-presidential candidate and declined to push the historic nature of her candidacy by adding another woman or a minority to the ticket.
Kaine is Clinton’s Biden: an accomplished leader who stands on his own merit and is a reassuring, centrist choice for a majority of the country. Clinton’s goal, more clearly than ever, is to win.
Please share widely!
What it a centrist? From my perspective, it seems to be a Democrat who goes along with progressive positions on non-economic matters but falls in lock step with Republicans as both parties march to the orders of Wall Street and the .1%.
Sorry, I’m not excited. As a Sanders supporter, I’ll just sit this one out, thank you. Sure, I’ll vote Clinton/Kaine, but that’s the full extent of my work for that ticket.
Kaine supports lowering Social Security benefits, want’s the government to “ease up” on banking regulations, was for CAFTA, NAFTA, and the TPP.
In other words, his message to working class Americans is “You’re on your own”……
Your text of your link says:
“… supports lowering Social Security benefits”
The text you linked to says something ENTIRELY DIFFERENT (emphasis mine):
“Lowering social security benefits” means reducing monthly payments. Raising the retirement age has already been done and only makes sense in a society whose life expectancy continues to climb.
The GOP has advocated lowering Social Security benefits. Tim Kaine has not. Hillary Clinton has not. The Democratic Party has not.
You are again demonstrating your apparent unwillingness or inability to simply tell the truth about things you cite.
is cutting benefits.
Take the blinders off and stop drinking the Kool Aid.
And stop the propaganda that “Raising the retirement age has already been done and only makes sense in a society whose life expectancy continues to climb.”
Life expectancy is lowering.
Americans face drop in life expectancy
Jeesh, you complain about Ms. Clinton word-smithing while you do the same.
Ok, I get it. Your words mean whatever you say they mean.
is raising the age of eligibility not cutting benefits?
Cutting benefits means people get reduced or no payments. Raising retirement age means benefits start later.
The end answer may be an increase in benefits coupled with an increase in the retirement age.
Or getting fewer payments, because they start later in life.
meaning fewer monthly payments (or none at all for those who die early). Which would be a cut in benefits.
The answer to what, exactly? If the payout is the same, actuarially, what is the purpose?
Or is it just a face-saving policy pretzel for centists dems like Kaine?
Your Kool Aid?
There are two ways to repair Social Security. One is to raise taxes and the other is to cut benefits. Kaine does not want to raise taxes. And no, we are not living longer.
The Time magazine article, ‘What the selection of Tim Kaine means for your money’ is very thin. You can’t draw any conclusions about ‘your money’ from thee odd quotes paraphrased imprecisely without context in there.
The GOP would never put a pro-choice person on the ticket.
I can’t quite decide if this is good news (our tent is bigger) or reflects the usual depressing triangulation reality. I guess I’ll choose optimism.
but pro-choice in terms of his policy position on the issue (100% rating from NARAL, for example).
It’s frustrating to hear from the media that somehow this is a contradiction, when actually it’s both a principled and fairly common position (whether one agrees with it or not). John Kerry and Biden both maintained this exact stance, in fact.
This doesn’t sound like John Kerry to me. Wiki:
So yes, he votes OK, but he seems more inclined to favor restrictions.
When he discovers the little known provision, Article 2, Section 1 ½ the one that allows the Vice President to draft, pass, and enforce law on any one culture war issue of his choice, without the advice nor consent of the Congress, the President, or the Supreme Court.
Kaine doesn’t have positions that align perfectly well with the 2016 Democratic platform. S’OK.
Would you care to poll the delegates and ask them if “personally pro-choice” President is OK? She’s 69. He’ll be a heartbeat away if they win.
former positions; however, he’s coming to the vice-presidency in a different country with a different political landscape.
As much as we want politicians to support our preferred, individual policies in the way we want, we have to remember that our elected officials represent our individual point of view. Kaine was representing Virginia, not Massachusetts or the United States. He has been a vociferous opponent of unfair housing, and on FiveThirtyEight, the showed him as slightly more liberal than Clinton. Obviously, I may be wrong, but I think that times have changed and Clinton and Kaine will change with them.
Abortion wasn’t even mentioned in Trump’s speech, and it’s starting to fade as an electoral issue. Kaine voted for PP funding and all of Obama’s nominees to the court, that’s good enough for me. Hillary is the one running for President and nobody doubts her record or that he will loyally support it and implement it. Biden and Casey have similar stances on the question. Shoring up PA, IA and OH are more important than VA.
If she has to go bland white Catholic make she should’ve picked Vilsack or Casey. Brown had those factors going for him and he is a leader on trade issues. Now she has someone who isn’t needed to carry his state and voted the wrong way on TPP which is the major domestic issue this election. Trump mentioned fair trade more often than he mentioned terrorism, cops or abortion (which he mentioned once). Kaines not a bad guy, but it’s not a great electoral pick. My guess is that she realizes this and just trusts him the most to govern with her.
perfect score 100%
Don’t see where the worry is here either. Made up nonsense. It’s one thing to was a more progressive VP it’s another to be “worried’ about Kaine. That’s just nutty.
I would not put that much score on all thse scores from one issue lobbying organizations. Sometimes their scoring formula lends itself to a color by numbers approach to politics – you can get a politician with 100% in all the desired rubrics, but that’s no guarantee they are any good at what they do.
Read here.
Warren or Brown would have been fine with me. Most progressives hoped that they wouldn’t be selected as they had a more important role in the Senate. Do you think they should be out of the Senate?
In all honesty, get over it.
So you’re this upset about a VP? Don’t know why it really matters who is picked.
to get over it! Picking someone like Rep. Xavier Becerra would have been a YUGE step in the right (er, left) direction. It’s not just about who’s VP. It’s about who will be the automatic frontrunner for the Dem. nomination in 8 years (assuming Hillary wins in ’16 and again in ’20). I don’t want to see 16 years of centrist policy.
And BTW I did NOT want Warren as *Hillary’s* VP! I’m pretty sure she was relieved to not have been picked either. And as much as I love Sen. Sherrod Brown, the thought of Gov. Kasich picking his replacement makes my skin crawl.
So it’s directly related to what you specifically posted here. Explain to me specifically why is continuing what you had specifically posted negative?
Also I did a quick search of every comment you ever made at BGM, don’t worry it took a second, guess how many hits I got for Becerra?
NONE.
You even discussed Feingold never Becerra. Please, with this baloney.
n/t
I assume you wrote that b/c you somehow expected me to be sitting around waiting for your comment…I was out with friends and didn’t check BMG until just a few minutes ago. Ugh, why am I even trying to explain myself to you?
I see…so just because I wrote something 2 weeks ago means I can’t change my mind?! And just because I didn’t mention Becerra previously means I didn’t think he’d be a great pick?! I have a lot of opinions about things but I don’t spend all day posting about them on *BMG* – it’s BMG by the way, not BGM. It’s not baloney that I don’t want Kaine to be the frontrunner in 2024. My opinions are not baloney.
…if we managed to get 16 more years of Dems in the White House. We’ve already had eight and winning six consecutive presidential elections by one party has only happened two other times by my count.
The endless smears, the right wing talking points, the outright lies, the gleeful misogyny, the immediate flocking to Stein and Trump – fuck those people. And screw the ‘be nice, you’ll need them!’ squawking. Those people were never voting Democratic unless it Bernie.
You can’t have it both ways and wave the spectre of Nader anytime progressives complain about Clinton, while simulatenlauly griping that the grassroots should suck it up and stop agitating for change. Sanders and his supporters are working within your party and your system! The number defecting to Stein is negligible, to Trump even more so. They are following the rules, trying to rewrite the platform to make it more democratic and progressive. Sanders endorsed Clinton and spoke highly of Kaine earlier today. What more do you want?
It’s that attitude that is driving people towards my party locally and to une unenrolled nationally as part of #DemExit. This includes the about 10 different DTC members into my party this weekend. I’m happy to have them, but Christ, I want Trump to lose as much as you do and you’re doing his work for him by keeping the movement divided and fighting against itself. Shame on you and any party hack to blind to see the kind of energy that this campaign has done to infuse a dead and moribund movement. Locally and nationally.
Its a testament to the extremism of the right that nominated this clown and his repugnance to the general public that Hillary is still winning this thing. Against any other foe she would be losing, and deservedly so. This has been a shamefully risk averse status quo campaign in a year where globally, nationally, and locally the people are crying out to be heard and fought for.
and you’re not.
But you knew that.
What you did say:
You did not, anywhere in your comment, say you were talking about BernieorBusters, nor have you shown that there are many of them.
Certainly not any of them here. Can we ban Ralph Nader from BMG? Nobody here has stated they are voting third party and my third party isn’t competing in any races where Donald Trump is running. It was a juvenile attack that shut off discussion. Progressives fall in love, we don’t fall in line. I think that brings our side more integrity than theirs, especially when you see so many establishment figures embarrass themselves by working for a racist and insisting Clinton is worse.
Literally nobody here has said she is, what we are saying is Clinton is hardly the best the movement can do going forward and neither is Tim Kaine. Those are valid arguments to have and we can have them while committing ourselves to electing this ticket and defeating Trump. Nobody here to my knowledge isn’t making that commitment. I’ll vote for Kaine for Vice President, but he is hardly my vision of where we should be in 2024.
While I’ve heard variations on that statement over the years and think there is some accuracy to it, I’m not convinced it is a strength. Once the nominating contest is over a little more falling in line wouldn’t hurt (though I agree that watching the other side fall in line in this particular year has been painful to watch).
The entire text of his comment specifically clarified which of the Sanders supporters were the ones who deserved the middle finger. If you are a Sander supporter who doesn’t
– trumpet right wing talking points,
– trumpet the outright lies,
– trumpet the gleeful misogyny, or
– flock to Stein and Trump,
then he isn’t referring to you. It’s pretty simple really.
This isn’t to say that I think mp’s comment was helpful, community-minded, or in good taste. It wasn’t any of those things.
Really, thanks for the middle finger. I’ll vote for Clinton but now that I know the attitude towards folks like me from her camp, I won’t feel at all guilty for not canvassing, phone banking, or donating on her behalf. Thanks again.
one or two sore-winners with the entire Clinton camp.
Seriously, the primary is over. Clinton won and anyone who rubs that in deserves a kick in the ass.
I’d say the party is close to over. The system was rigged. It still is rigged.
from the convention as per Sanders and Clinton supporters. She’ll be out on her ass soon enough.
Prediction: these shananigans will lead to a better DNCom and more power for Bernie.
…according to MSNBC reporting today.
Good – leaving not one day too soon. A partisan should have never been allowed to lead the DNC. She has done damage to the party.
This is “folks like me” to you?
You’re quoting your own strawman argument to attack another member? Including your charming “fuck those people”?
Stay classy, bud.
we’re all set with your moralizing and lack of any substance.
n/t
… is a possible pre-occupation with moral behavior (i.e. ‘moralizing’) something other than ‘substance’?? America itself would not exist but for men like Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, John Adams, et al, who drew substance out of moral imagination to create the very country in which your freedom to dismiss ‘moralizing’ exists…
It may be a substance with which you disagree, and that’s ok, but denying it is of substance at all is, in fact, amoralizing… is it not?
If someone self-identifies with ‘thanks for flipping me off,’ that says more about them than me. YMMV, but I take folks at their word,
Written before the pick, but still relevant
I loathe these ideological purity tests and the premise that Bernie is the progressive standard by which all must be judged is fundamentally flawed.
Bernie is a progressive with plenty of flaws. Kaine is a progressive, and he has flaws also. But for many liberals like me, Kaine is more impressive. Kaine not only has progressive positions, but unlike many, Kaine personally lives progressive values. Before running for city council, Kaine spent 17 years as a civil rights lawyer fighting big businesses red-lining minority areas — actually making a big difference in many minorities’ lives. Kaine married the daughter of a Virginia civil rights legend. Kaine sent his own children to 80% minority PUBLIC schools. And, Kaine to this day sings in the choir of a majority minority church.
As far as being there for others, while Sanders was still finding himself, Kaine was a missionary in Honduras teaching carpentry and welding.
They say one’s character is tested when the going is tough. Both Sanders and Kaine were tested with very close elections when first running for elective office. While Sanders caved to the NRA to get elected to Congress, Kaine stood strong for gun control legislation in the state where the NRA is headquartered.
Frankly, I find Kaine more Presidential than Sanders.
You have some solid points to make in the post I downrated, but there is no need to make your ridiculous claims against Sanders to elevate Kaine. Sanders said Kaine is a great guy to work with and a good choice. So I really don’t see why we have to realitigate this primary over and over again.
It’s over, but boy am I glad Sanders ran and gave her a good scare. And I’m glad his delegates are still fighting for the party they believe in, they shouldn’t be given the middle finger or dismissed. That’s the future of this movement, and you can’t insist it has a home in the Democratic Party while simultaneously belittling the contributions of the people trying to work within it.
Excuse me while I wipe the beer from my computer screen…..really, warn us the next time you’re going to post a line like that. A guy who wants to cut social security, de-regulate banks, and supports NAFTA TPP CAFTA is a progressive…..really?
for those making over 100k. He also wanted to raise the age?
Banking we’d probably need to take a closer look, he had pushed to not impose the same requirements for regional banks Banks that do not have do the same business. He has not in anyway fought to deregulate Wall St. banks.
only 7 Senators with a higher ADA rating. Vote descriptions detail many economic related votes.
Tim Kaine Has a Troubling Record on Labor Issues
Kaine also received a good deal of campaign support from Wall Street.
Kaine has a history of breaking with labor and progressives on economic issues—to such an extent that headlines refer to the senator as “a Democrat Wall Street can like.”
He endorsed Clinton with a strong speech and is working within the system, what more do you people want?!
I think Kaine and Bernie both had impressive careers in their respective states, it helps that both were mayors and city councilors in their respective cities too. Too many federal politicians have no idea how local and urban policy works so I appreciate that aspect of Kaine’s record. To say Sanders isn’t one of the leading progressive champions going back decades is to lie and to contradict our nominee who has said as much both as First Lady and now as the nominee.
From what I’ve seen, not one Clinton supporter has been able to tell me why I should voter for her without using the words “Donald Trump”..And yes, I am voting for her, so hold your fire.
I affirmatively like Clinton and have made plenty of arguments for her without using the words “Donald Trump.” We obviously disagree on our respective assessments of Hillary, and that’s fine.
But the clearest argument in her favor is that a Hillary presidency would preserve the terrain upon which advocates can win progressive change. On some issues (e.g. women’s rights, gay rights, environment, judicial nominees) a Hillary administration and Sanders-wing progressives will be on the same page and will both protect previous gains and move the ball forward. On other issues, former Sanders supporters will not be content with a Hillary administration and will work to push her and the administration leftward.
However, the fact that Hillary has already moved leftward on several issues as a result of Sanders’ and his supporters’ advocacy (trade, minimum wage, health care) indicates that an administration could be pushed to do so as well. Indeed, Hillary occupies nearly the identical political space as Obama — though she’s opposed him on the TPP — and with Obama we’ve seen an administration open to and often adopting policies further to the left due to pressure from liberal advocacy.
A Hillary presidency would be much the same — full alignment with left progressives on some issues, and some conflict on other issues. But all along, the terrain will be relatively friendly ground for progressive change, especially through the sorts of behind-the-scenes administrative actions that the Obama Administration has used so well to move several policy areas in a progressive direction.
Hillary (and Bill) have shown little interest. Her VP choice confirms that. A platform for progressive economic change is a “never ever” with Democrats of her ilk. Sure, on social issues they fall in line and never fail to shout out “women’s reproductive rights, Equal Pay!, minorities!, …L-G-B-T-!!” and similar dog whistle terms in order to confirm their “street cred” with Democrats but on economic issues, well, ask the Goldman Sachs folks why they paid her $225,000 three times to speak.
So no, I have little hope that things will change for ordinary working class Americans and my current projection is that Hillary serves one unimpressive term and will be replaced by Paul Ryan in 2020.
I am undecided on Tim Kaine. I am not taking to the streets like some of the Bernie folks nor am I white washing his record like Ed Kilgore and other progressive writers are. Peter Beinart has the most level headed analysis of the pick I’ve read so far that evaluates his effect on a Clinton administration rather than just the horse race. I think it’s instructive.
I also think Kaine has been a better Mayor and Senator than a Governor, which means he excels in roles that require him to be a bridge builder and peace maker and withers under political pressure when he alone is the decision maker. It’s unclear how that will affect Clinton, but he will be a team player and far less likely than Biden was to disagree and serve as a devils advocate against the Presidents position in internal debates. It also means he will be a decent to good VP, capable of taking over in a crisis, but underwhelming as a post-Clinton leader for the party and movement.
I came across Kilgore on TDS. I like this quote by Beinart:
Too often our interpretation of people leaves out the variable of time. People change. We are molded by our experiences and our time. I know I have been. Why should we expect politicians to remain the same as they were?
Christopher, in particular, told you repeatedly. You blew him off. As I said the last time he tried (and you again trashed his comment), I don’t have his patience with you.
I’m so glad to hear that you’ll be voting for her.
This choice, or one like it, was baked in the moment Trump became the nominee-to-be.
Betsey to get over it. That might apply to Bernie or Bust people, but there’s no reason why she shouldn’t express her disappointment in the VP pick. First of all, VP is a different issue than President. Second of all, she has a good reason, i.e. Kaine being a potential front-runner. You don’t have to agree. I’m not sure I agree, but her opinion and reasoning on this are legitimate.
To my fellow Clinton supporters: the primary is over! You can stop acting like sore winners!
In the next two days, everyone will have read the leaked emails that provide strong evidence that DWS and the DNC were working for Clinton, not Sanders. (Though I think few of us doubted it). This leak and protests/maneuvers of Bernie splinter groups at the convention will give you ample opportunity to vent your spleen.
Thanks for defending me, Mark. I really appreciate what you wrote, esp. since we don’t always agree on stuff. I wish more people on BMG were like you. 🙂