Who are the best and wrong VP choice for Clinton and Christie?

[Senator Cris]

Who are the best and wrong VP choice for Clinton and Christie?

[WalterMitty]

Who are the best and wrong VP choice for Clinton and Christie?

christie:  susan collins

clinton: tim kaine

[Mister Mets]

For either candidate, an undisciplined running mate would be a poor choice. And it would be problematic if they picked someone who didn't seem qualified for the office. It would hurt Christie's brand, and reinforce the image of Hillary as opportunistic. Neither should pick anyone first elected to statewide office in 2014 (unless that person had a really impressive resume before that.)

Good choices for Clinton would be Mark Warner (immensely popular in a swing state, experience as both Governor and Senator), Tim Kaine (Mark Warner's strengths but slightly younger and more blue-collar) and Michael Bennet (younger swing state Senator who adds regional balance and policy expertise on a key issue- education.) In most cases, it would be best for her to avoid older, female or Northeastern running mates, and to pick someone with a stable family life. There are exceptions. If Susan Collins bolts from the Republican party due to her disgust with their approach to governance, she could be an effective running mate.

Christie's main goal would be to pick a running mate who does no harm. He would also probably be helped if he doesn't pick a white guy, but this doesn't mean John Thune is a wrong choice. Rand Paul and Ted Cruz would likely be too risky. Susanna Martinez comes from a swing state, and offers both diversity (Hispanic southwestern woman) and a doubling down on Christie's strengths (Prosecutor turned popular moderate Governor in state Obama won.) Marco Rubio offers youth and legislative experience. Kelly Ayotte is a woman who comes from a swing state and offers legislative/ foreign policy experience.

[TDAS04]

For purely strategic purposes, Mark Warner and Susana Martinez.

While I would love a Clinton/Schweitzer administration, I would guess that Hillary would choose Warner, the safe boring guy who would likely lock down all-important Virginia.

Christie/Martinez, imo, is the strongest possible Republican ticket, and something that Democrats should be afraid of.  The popular NJ Governor and the popular Mexican-American female NM Governor sharing a ticket would be a very smart ticket for any Republican who wants to beat Hillary.  However, I think that there is a good chance that Christie may not even win the nomination.

[useful idiot]

Christie would be in a much more precarious situation with his veep pick. Picking a woman would make it seem like he's pandering, even if Ayotte and Martinez are genuinely good candidates. Either way I think picking someone he's defeated in the primaries would be a mistake. I can't see Cruz, or even Paul, being a good advocate for Christie.

[Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook]

As much as I like both of them, Christie/Paul would be a terrible ticket; they hate each other.


(When was the last time two members of a ticket hated each other? Reagan/Bush? Then again, I don't know if they hated each other.)

[Kung Fu Kenny]

Christie's best bet would be Susana Martinez, Clinton's would probably be Mark Warner

[barfbag]

Christie

best- Huntsman or Martinez
worst- Rick Scott (lots of them though)

Clinton

best- McAuliffe
worst- Hagan

For both of them there's countless names we can list for the worst choices.

[Warren 4 Secretary of Everything]

I think Martin Heinrich would be the best choice for Clinton. He's from a Western state (New Mexico), he's liberal, young, and attractive.

[Flake]

Clinton

best- McAuliffe
worst- Hagan

For both of them there's countless names we can list for the worst choices.

I think the opposite, McAullife will definitely be on the worse end of candidates and Hagan would bring Hillary a lot of southern votes.

But;

Chris Christie:

Best: Governor Susana Martinez of New Mexico
Worst: Governor Pat McCrory of North Carolina

Hillary Clinton:

Best: Senator Mark Warner of Virginia
Worst: Governor Pat Quinn of Illinois

[Fuzzy Bear]

Christie's best choice would be Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA).  He comes from a key swing state, he has experience sufficient for the job, and he's Jewish.  The GOP has missed some opportunities to make inroads in the pro-Democratic Jewish vote in a number of states.

Clinton's best pick would be Gov. Jay Nixon of Missouri.  He's still popular, and he represents a chance for the Democrats to extend the map.  

Christie's worst choice would be any one of these guys:  Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Mike Lee, Rand Paul.  They each have their own contentious personas, and none of them could be counted on to be loyal.

The wild card for Christie would be Jeb Bush.  Christie would run the risk of the waiter appearing to be a better cook then the chef.  On the other hand, Jeb could carry FL for Christie, and the Bushes have a track record of being loyal soldiers when it's called for.

Clinton's worst choice would be another woman.  Or a guy like Mark Warner, who has had success as the head guy in and out of government, and would probably let it show that being VP isn't really his bag.

Clinton's wild card would be Sen. Mark Pryor. provided he wins re-election.  He's a friend, he could bring Arkansas back into the fold, and he'd be loyal.  Hillary has never been personally popular in Arkansas.  She's not Southern, and she is considered to be one of the reasons Clinton lost re-election in 1980.  

[moderatevoter]

Christie's best choice would be Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA).  He comes from a key swing state, he has experience sufficient for the job, and he's Jewish.  The GOP has missed some opportunities to make inroads in the pro-Democratic Jewish vote in a number of states.

Clinton's best pick would be Gov. Jay Nixon of Missouri.  He's still popular, and he represents a chance for the Democrats to extend the map.  

Christie's worst choice would be any one of these guys:  Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Mike Lee, Rand Paul.  They each have their own contentious personas, and none of them could be counted on to be loyal.

The wild card for Christie would be Jeb Bush.  Christie would run the risk of the waiter appearing to be a better cook then the chef.  On the other hand, Jeb could carry FL for Christie, and the Bushes have a track record of being loyal soldiers when it's called for.

Clinton's worst choice would be another woman.  Or a guy like Mark Warner, who has had success as the head guy in and out of government, and would probably let it show that being VP isn't really his bag.

Clinton's wild card would be Sen. Mark Pryor. provided he wins re-election.  He's a friend, he could bring Arkansas back into the fold, and he'd be loyal.  Hillary has never been personally popular in Arkansas.  She's not Southern, and she is considered to be one of the reasons Clinton lost re-election in 1980.  

No.
Cantor is such a polarizing figure. I am pretty sure he would not guarantee that the Republicans carry Virginia.

I just think it's bad strategy to pick someone from the House for the ticket as well. They have only been elected to their congressional district, which tend to be more extreme. Pick someone who has proven they can win statewide.

Had McDonnell not dealt with this Star Scientific stuff, he could have been a decent pick. I cannot think of any other Republican from VA who would be a good pick. Certainly not Cantor.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Hillary Clinton could use a solid liberal running to balance out her third way conservative views. Sherrod Brown would be good.

[Morning in Atlas]

Christie: Scott Walker/Susana Martinez
Worst: Cruz.

Clinton: Hickenlooper/Warner
Worst: McAuliffe

[moderatevoter]

Christie: Scott Walker/Susana Martinez
Worst: Cruz.

Clinton: Hickenlooper/Warner
Worst: McAuliffe

In general, I have a very hard time seeing Christie pick Cruz or anyone closely associated with the Tea Party. I think assuming Christie is the nominee, he'd pick another Governor; the anti-Washington strategy could work for him.

[Non Swing Voter]

Clinton just needs to pick someone who can lock up Virginia or Florida for her, then game over.  Though probably game over for the GOP anyways unless there is some massive event that changes the dynamics of US voting patterns by 2016.

[IceSpear]

Christie's best choice would be Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA).  He comes from a key swing state, he has experience sufficient for the job, and he's Jewish.  The GOP has missed some opportunities to make inroads in the pro-Democratic Jewish vote in a number of states.

Eric Cantor is very unpopular statewide in Virginia. That would be a very stupid pick.

And why would Hillary pick Mark Pryor? If she wanted to make inroads into Appalachia/Arkansas, it would be much better to pick the super popular Mike Beebe.

[Maxwell]

Mark Warner, but Tim Kaine can't be taken seriously as a Vice President candidate. Hillary's opinion of Kaine as a candidate is well known.

[H. Ross Peron]

Hillary Clinton
Good-Any sort of Progressive (Schweitzer, Warren, Feingold etc.), preferably with a populist stance on issues such as guns
Bad-Centrist or neoliberal Democrat (Cuomo, Warner, etc.) which Hillary would have locked up anyways

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Mark Warner, but Tim Kaine can't be taken seriously as a Vice President candidate. Hillary's opinion of Kaine as a candidate is well known.

Not all that well-known, considering I just did a google search on it and I still have no idea what you're talking about

[moderatevoter]

Hillary Clinton
Good-Any sort of Progressive (Schweitzer, Warren, Feingold etc.), preferably with a populist stance on issues such as guns
Bad-Centrist or neoliberal Democrat (Cuomo, Warner, etc.) which Hillary would have locked up anyways

She won't pick Cuomo, or at least she can't, with the whole rule about picking two people from the same state and how you won't get the Electoral Votes awarded?

The issue is, Warner would likely mean Virginia goes Democrat, and that makes the map a lot harder for the GOP to win on. That's why, even though I agree he's kind of redundant, he would definitely be an asset.

Mark Warner, but Tim Kaine can't be taken seriously as a Vice President candidate. Hillary's opinion of Kaine as a candidate is well known.

Not all that well-known, considering I just did a google search on it and I still have no idea what you're talking about

Okay yeah, I'm curious about this too. I realize Kaine endorsed Obama in 2008, but I'd like to hear an elaboration on this?

[Ogre Mage]

Mark Warner, but Tim Kaine can't be taken seriously as a Vice President candidate. Hillary's opinion of Kaine as a candidate is well known.

Not all that well-known, considering I just did a google search on it and I still have no idea what you're talking about

Okay yeah, I'm curious about this too. I realize Kaine endorsed Obama in 2008, but I'd like to hear an elaboration on this?

Maxwell may have another source, but this was from the book Game Change by John Heilemann and Mark Halperin.  The source is deep background, but they claim Hillary said this shortly after she conceded in 2008 and was musing about who Obama would pick as a running mate:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If this is correct, Hillary correctly forecast Biden's selection as VP and we can surmise from her lack of criticism that she thought it was at least a decent choice.  Her thoughts about Kaine and Sebelius as running mates are crystal clear.

[Ogre Mage]

Clinton's wild card would be Sen. Mark Pryor. provided he wins re-election.  He's a friend, he could bring Arkansas back into the fold, and he'd be loyal.  Hillary has never been personally popular in Arkansas.  She's not Southern, and she is considered to be one of the reasons Clinton lost re-election in 1980.  

Take it from a Democrat -- Pryor is too conservative to be Hillary's running mate.  The base would revolt.

[IceSpear]

Clinton's wild card would be Sen. Mark Pryor. provided he wins re-election.  He's a friend, he could bring Arkansas back into the fold, and he'd be loyal.  Hillary has never been personally popular in Arkansas.  She's not Southern, and she is considered to be one of the reasons Clinton lost re-election in 1980.  

Take it from a Democrat -- Pryor is too conservative to be Hillary's running mate.  The base would revolt.

They would not revolt. There'd be some grumbling, then in a few weeks everyone would be back to only caring about beating the (R).

Now, Christie/Martinez on the other hand, would have solid potential for a third party Tea Party candidate.

[Ogre Mage]

Clinton's wild card would be Sen. Mark Pryor. provided he wins re-election.  He's a friend, he could bring Arkansas back into the fold, and he'd be loyal.  Hillary has never been personally popular in Arkansas.  She's not Southern, and she is considered to be one of the reasons Clinton lost re-election in 1980.  

Take it from a Democrat -- Pryor is too conservative to be Hillary's running mate.  The base would revolt.

They would not revolt. There'd be some grumbling, then in a few weeks everyone would be back to only caring about beating the (R).

Now, Christie/Martinez on the other hand, would have solid potential for a third party Tea Party candidate.

You really think a pro-life, anti-gun control, anti-LGBT rights senator with a poor environmental record is going to pass muster with the base?  Do you realize how many constituencies within the party would be hugely pissed off?