Kaine supports some legal restrictions on abortion, such as requiring parental consent (Holy fuck!)
Kaine previously criticized the Obama administration for “not providing a ‘broad enough religious employer exemption’” in the contraceptive mandate of the Affordable Care Act, (WAT)
In 2005, when running for governor, Kaine said he favored reducing abortions by…“Fighting teen pregnancy through abstinence-focused education” (OH SHIT.)
In July 2016, Kaine said that the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement was “an improvement of the status quo” in terms of it being an “upgrade of labor standards… environmental standards… intellectual property protections”, (NO NO NO NO NO)
Kaine supports the use of hydraulic fracturing technology (fracking) that has allowed the US to access natural gas in shale formations. Kaine supports oil and gas exploration off the Atlantic Coast, saying, “I have long believed that the moratorium on offshore drilling, based on a cost-benefit calculation performed decades ago, should be re-examined.”(DRILL BABY DRILL)
In 2012, he stated that “There should be a license that would entitle a committed couple to the same rights as a married couple.” (SEPARATE BUT EQUAL MARRIAGES?! OH JESUS)
I mean, that’s only a partial list, focusing on the negatives, and he’s not a monster, but he’s basically in line with party standards/Hilary herself on everything else.
Hilary’s writing off EVERYONE who figured Sanders was talking some sense.
FFS, it’s like she doesn’t even WANT to win. She’s trying to win over moderate conservatives! She’s pulling the party FURTHER RIGHT.
@beschizza 's twitter rant covers this pretty well, too.
Oh, no. That would give the Republican governor the chance to hand-pick who would fill the remainder of his term. The Dems would be losing a valuable seat, and Brown would be moved into an utterly powerless position.
Warren 2020 would (realistically) mean that Trump won the election. Waiting until 2024 for Warren seems a small price to pay to avoid a Trump presidency.
I think it’s that her calculus for what it’d take to win is different than yours. In a Dem. Pres. run, the assumption usually is to take the core constituency for granted and peel off enough of the center to swing things. I think she’s still thinking in 90s terms where the Dems had only made gains electorally by runs to the center, while being punished at the ballots when they’ve moved left. Not sure how true that calculus still is, but I expect that’s her frame of reference.
Fair enough, and I hope she’s right, but I’m really worried that lefty people voting their conscience won’t be able to vote for her, because the only thing she can say to get them into the ballot box is “You’re going to eat this shit sandwich, or you’re going to get Trump. Which do you want?”
The Trump rhetoric is all about how she’s part of the Washington system of elites. This doesn’t disrupt that message at all, and it doesn’t shore her up among the base that she desperately needs to overwhelm all the frothing racists who are really excited to vote for a maniac.
Yeah…we’ll see where the messaging goes from here. But I’m not holding out much hope. It’s pretty clear with this pick that she’s happy being Reagan Lite, and that she’s reasonably confident that all the lefties will support her out of simple horror of a Trump presidency.
Which means she’s perilously clueless for a woman who is in one of the most important elections in American history.
This specific decision of theirs was odd, agreed. But they’re the largest LGBT organization in the country. Getting a 100% thumbs-up from them is pretty huge for 10%+ of the population.
I’m not saying it’s a bad thing to speak Spanish, but he’s white. Let’s not sugarcoat, it actually draws attention to his whiteness.
That being said, I’ve been consistent on this: VP has only “sucker’s allure.” The VP has never persuaded me to like or hate anyone, because we haven’t had cause to use one in what is officially a long-ass time. There is no legal reason to pay attention to anything they have to say, and no incentive to involve them in political calculus if you decide you don’t like them that much. So the fact that VP is enough to draw anyone “over the line” to one side has always puzzled me. They’re literally just a backup president. I don’t care that much. With Trump saying he’ll “delegate” to the VP, I care about his VP, but with any conventional candidate, it doesn’t matter.
ETA: I’m actively glad they’re not taking a real progressive out of the Senate or the House to get their VP. I like them where they are.
Well as a committed lefty and former Sanders supporter myself, I certainly disagree with you on this point. Clinton could pick a goat as a running mate and I would still vote for her, because I am completely repelled by the “simple horror of a Trump presidency.”
And if you are also a progressively-minded person, you are quite myopic if you don’t feel the same way. This election isn’t about you. Or me, for that matter.
Let me quote Moulitsas again, because he says it better than I could:
I’m not happy about this pick, but I’m also not losing perspective… And in a few
weeks, we’ll forget Kaine is a thing and head into battle with Clinton
because this week reminded us what the alternative is.
Right, it’s about the low-info independents in Florida and Ohio and Pennsylvania who vote for things, not against things (when they vote at all).
“Vote for disrupting the status quo” can sound pretty good to them, and “But he’s actually a horrific totalitarian racist!” might not sound like too high a price to pay.
(Especially when the counter-argument she’s mustered so far is “But look at how horrible he is and do you REALLY want HIM to disrupt the status quo?”)
