Predict the two tickets

[136or142]

Clinton/Castro
Walker/Martinez

I think Gary Locke would be her best option for Clinton, but in an effort to create another superstar who can solidify the Hispanic vote in 2020 or 2024, she'll pick Castro.

Likewise, Walker's best option would be Rubio, but he'll pick Martinez for demographic reasons.

While the past is no predictor of the future (duhhh), it should be remembered that every Democratic vice presidential pick has been a senator since, I believe, 1948 with the exception of Geraldine Ferraro in 1984.

Rubio is a half wit and will be defeated for reelection to the senate if he runs again.

My predictions:
D: Hillary (Rodham) Clinton/Mark Warner
R:Scott Walker/Bob Corker (assuming he becomes Chair of the Senate foreign relations committee)

[136or142]

Clinton/Heinreich vs Walker/Martinez

Both V.P nominees from New Mexico?

Heinrich would be nice as he is a scientist (mechanical engineer).

[136or142]

Clinton/Castro
Walker/Martinez

I think Gary Locke would be her best option for Clinton, but in an effort to create another superstar who can solidify the Hispanic vote in 2020 or 2024, she'll pick Castro.

Likewise, Walker's best option would be Rubio, but he'll pick Martinez for demographic reasons.

Being from British Columbia, I'd like to see Gary Locke, but he's been out of elected politics for around  10 years and is probably largely forgotten.

Would a Hillary Clinton/Gary Locke ticket be the first time 2 cabinet secretaries were chosen?

The last (and as far as I know only) person from Washington State to run for president is U.S Senator Henry (Scoop) Jackson in 1976. He was the initial front runner, according to the media anyway, but, of course lost out to Jimmy Carter.

[136or142]

Clinton/Heinreich vs Walker/Martinez

Both V.P nominees from New Mexico?

Heinrich would be nice as he is a scientist (mechanical engineer).

My thought was that Walker picks Martinez first (since the opposition party usually does) and then Clinton picks Heinreich. It's pretty logical for both of them. A republican nominee needs to show that they aren't entirely the party of old white men and Hillary needs a younger running mate. Heinreich seems like the most natural choice.

Congressman Ben Ray Lujan is also a wild card possibility, ironically also a New Mexican.

1.I can't see Walker picking another governor.  With foreign policy rising in importance among voters (of course the election is still two years off),  I think he'd need to pick a senator with foreign policy experience (hence Corker).

2.Walker, Martinez and Heinrich would 'show up' Hillary Clinton's age.  I believe she's more likely to play up the 'experience' angle as a counter balance to that, hence somebody like Mark Warner.

[136or142]

Locke provides three distinct advantages that a Clinton ticket lacks. Executive experience (he was a governor), business experience (he was secretary of Commerce) and successful foreign policy experience (ambassador to China). Plus he'd break another glass ceiling as the first Asian American VP. He's old though, and will never be a rock star. Castro is being groomed so I suspect she'll pick him.

As for Rubio being a half wit, while I disagree, it's irrelevant. For God's sake, Joe Biden is our vice president right now. Rubio provides great optics, had foreign policy experience (which, as another poster noted, a two governor ticket lacks) and helps in Florida. But given the opportunity to pick a Mexican American female governor, my bet is Walker goes with Martinez.

1.Executive experience: Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State

2.Business experience: Hillary Clinton was a partner at the Rose Law firm as well as being on the boards of over 10 companies, though her association at some of those companies is not something she seems to like to bring up, just as John Kerry did not ever bring up his successful ownership of a gourmet cookie store likely because of the rather sleazy way he started the company.  (He pretended he was interested in becoming an owner of a major cookie store franchise business, took the business plan and opened his own store).

3."succesful" foreign policy experience.  Hillary Rodham Clinton is often sited by polls as one of the best recent Secretaries of State.

[136or142]

The likeliest match-up is Clinton/ Castro VS Paul/ Walker

I think Democrats tried to build a running mate for Clinton by giving Castro a cabinet post, given the paucity of Hispanic statewide officeholders. A younger western Hispanic guy is probably the best match for her. He also backed her in 2008, and is a protege of one of a former Bill Clinton cabinet secretary, which is a big deal because the Clintons are horrible, petty and insular people.

If that was the case, Castro would have received a cabinet post that more people care about than HUD.  Transporation would have been a better choice and that went to another mayor, Anthony Foxx.

[136or142]

1) I assume by executive they meant-governor. Not that this is much of an issue-people tend to vote for senator/governors it's only congressman who could struggle at the top of the ticket.

2) As you say HRC doesn't need any business links-wall street already love her, and as warren said why do we need people in government who've come straight from business.

3) Eh? What polls? I'd say that Dulles, Marshall and Kissinger were much more effective than Clinton, and actually shaped foreign policy away from the President (in a sense) HRC didn't achieve much as SOS apart from pushing to Libya intervention

I'd say being Secretary of State also counts as executive experience.

Dulles may have been 'effective' he was also one of the most evil people ever in public life, both he and his brother were absolute slime.  Kissinger, though his record is more mixed, is also implicated in mass murder.

Also, a minor point but I did say 'recent' and I didn't mean to include either Dulles or Marshall.

Regarding the polls on Hillary Clinton's tenure as Secretary of State.  Here is one, there are likely several more:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/hillary-clinton-remains-popular-for-her-time-as-secretary-of-state-viewed-apart-from-obama/2014/06/07/4bad6e62-ea61-11e3-b98c-72cef4a00499_story.html

or: http://tinyurl.com/nfcc37u

June 8 2014
Hillary Rodham Clinton retains broad public support for her performance as secretary of state, a sign that President Obama’s struggles abroad and Republican attacks over Benghazi have not been a major drag on her reputation.

Clinton left office 1 1 / 2 years ago as the most popular outgoing secretary in recent memory, and 59 percent of the public still approve of her tenure, according to a Washington Post-ABC News poll this month. That dipped from 68 percent in late 2012, but 67 percent call her a strong leader in the most recent survey.

[136or142]

1) I assume by executive they meant-governor. Not that this is much of an issue-people tend to vote for senator/governors it's only congressman who could struggle at the top of the ticket.

2) As you say HRC doesn't need any business links-wall street already love her, and as warren said why do we need people in government who've come straight from business.

3) Eh? What polls? I'd say that Dulles, Marshall and Kissinger were much more effective than Clinton, and actually shaped foreign policy away from the President (in a sense) HRC didn't achieve much as SOS apart from pushing to Libya intervention

I'd say being Secretary of State also counts as executive experience.

Dulles may have been 'effective' he was also one of the most evil people ever in public life, both he and his brother were absolute slime.  Kissinger, though his record is more mixed, is also implicated in mass murder.

Also, a minor point but I did say 'recent' and I didn't mean to include either Dulles or Marshall.

Regarding the polls on Hillary Clinton's tenure as Secretary of State.  Here is one, there are likely several more:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/hillary-clinton-remains-popular-for-her-time-as-secretary-of-state-viewed-apart-from-obama/2014/06/07/4bad6e62-ea61-11e3-b98c-72cef4a00499_story.html

or: http://tinyurl.com/nfcc37u

June 8 2014
Hillary Rodham Clinton retains broad public support for her performance as secretary of state, a sign that President Obama’s struggles abroad and Republican attacks over Benghazi have not been a major drag on her reputation.

Clinton left office 1 1 / 2 years ago as the most popular outgoing secretary in recent memory, and 59 percent of the public still approve of her tenure, according to a Washington Post-ABC News poll this month. That dipped from 68 percent in late 2012, but 67 percent call her a strong leader in the most recent survey.

I'm aware that both Kissinger and Dulles were complete bastards who could easily be in jail, but that's what happens when you're a cold war secretary of state-if you look at the 50's and 70's that's when the US was doing most effectively around the world.

I'm still skepitcal of Clinton's secretary of state record, she's popular sure but its what 2 years later?

Kissinger, to his credit, is credited with holding in Nixon's excesses on foreign policy.  Although Nixon's defenders state that he would often just spout insane ideas to let off steam.

[136or142]

I'm beginning to think that Pence or Kasich are going to swoop in and take it while the obvious choices are killing each other. I think Ayotte is the frontrunner for VP.

and probably Clinton/Castro.

Ayotte will be running for reelection in 2016, I highly doubt she will be on any ticket.

Couldn't she be like Bentsen and Biden and do both?

[136or142]

Hickenlooper would likely turn the VP slot down.  Like his fellow westerners and mountaineers, Brian Schweitzer and John Kitzhaber, Hickenlooper doesn't want to live back east.