[url=http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/03/politics/cory-booker-hillary-clinton/][U]Source[/U][/url]
[t]http://www.politics-prose.com/sites/politics-prose.com/files/Booker_Credit%20Kelly%20Campbell.jpg[/t]
[quote=CNN]New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker is now referring questions about whether he is being vetted as a potential running mate for Hillary Clinton to her campaign -- a shift from as recently as two weeks ago, when he flatly denied he was in the running for the job.
"I'm just referring questions about the vice presidency to the woman who is going to have to make this decision," Booker told CNN's Brianna Keilar in an interview that aired Sunday on "State of the Union." "You should talk to the Clinton campaign."
Booker's tightly guarded answer is a marked difference from how he responded to that question last month, when he told MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell: "I'm not being vetted."
Booker is one of several Democrats believed to be under consideration by Clinton. Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia, Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julian Castro, Labor Secretary Tom Perez, Sen. Sherrod Brown of Ohio and Rep. Xavier Beccera of California have all been floated as potential choices.[/quote]
Figured the New Democrats would start grooming Cory Booker for the presidency one day, but I didn't expect them to shine the spotlight on him just yet.
Could be just another drop in VP guessing game bucket, or possibly the early signs of a 2024 election strategy taking shape.
As someone from NJ, I can say he's....okay. He's by far not the worse choice.
Honestly thought it would be Elizabeth Warren the way she's been campaigning for Clinton these past few weeks.
For some strange reason, I don't think Corey's the VP.
Edit: i think there trying to find a back up right now, just in case.
How long until the Cory in the House jokes?
Shit...
I don't know much about this guy, but looking at his political positions, he seems like a decent pick. He wouldn't pull discouraged progressives or Berniecrats, but there's a lot of issues that could sway on-the-fence conservatives. He's decent on second amendment rights, but he's for school vouchers and further privatization of education. He's for a carbon tax, but he'd rather amend than repeal the PATRIOT Act. He wants to expand the ACA to control costs, and is in favor of expanding Medicare. He supports increasing the federal minimum wage. He's strong on LGBT rights. He wants to protect Social Security. He wants further financial regulations on Wall Street. He's very much against the war on drugs.
He'd be a decent pick to get moderates. I'd much prefer Castro, but this guy isn't too bad either. If Trump went with Christie, he'd be a good balancer. Super unpopular NJ VP versus a decently popular NJ VP? Easy.
[QUOTE=.Isak.;50650349]I don't know much about this guy, but looking at his political positions, he seems like a decent pick. He wouldn't pull discouraged progressives or Berniecrats, but there's a lot of issues that could sway on-the-fence conservatives. He's decent on second amendment rights, but he's for school vouchers and further privatization of education. He's for a carbon tax, but he'd rather amend than repeal the PATRIOT Act. He wants to expand the ACA to control costs, and is in favor of expanding Medicare. He supports increasing the federal minimum wage. He's strong on LGBT rights. He wants to protect Social Security. He wants further financial regulations on Wall Street. He's very much against the war on drugs.
He'd be a decent pick to get moderates. I'd much prefer Castro, but this guy isn't too bad either. If Trump went with Christie, he'd be a good balancer. Super unpopular NJ VP versus a decently popular NJ VP? Easy.[/QUOTE]
The biggest difference between him and Clinton is corruption. He's probably one of the least corrupt politicians we have. There was a documentary I watched a few years back on him combating the corruption in Newark trying to win the mayoral campaign there.
Clinton is in a tough spot for VP picks. Senators are the most common choice, but if they leave in the middle of a term, they are appointed by the Governor. This is crucial because the Senate often sits on a knife edge, and particularly with the filibuster every single vote counts. Her problem is that huge numbers of governors are Republicans who will appoint Republicans. Cory Booker's governor is Trump supporter Chris Christie, whilst Elizabeth Warren's governor is the Republican Charlie Baker.
[QUOTE=FlashMarsh;50650394]Clinton is in a tough spot for VP picks. Senators are the most common choice, but if they leave in the middle of a term, they are appointed by the Governor. This is crucial because the Senate often sits on a knife edge, and particularly with the filibuster every single vote counts. Her problem is that huge numbers of governors are Republicans who will appoint Republicans. Cory Booker's governor is Trump supporter Chris Christie, whilst Elizabeth Warren's governor is the Republican Charlie Baker.[/QUOTE]
What a shitstorm that would be in NJ if Christie as Trump's VP picked out Cory's seat if Clinton won.
Why not someone like Martin O'Malley, or anyone that's a well-known politician?
[QUOTE=LTJGPliskin;50651105]Why not someone like Martin O'Malley, or anyone that's a well-known politician?[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=LTJGPliskin;50651105]Martin O'Malley[/quote]
[QUOTE=LTJGPliskin;50651105]well-known[/quote]
Also Cory Booker, while he hasn't been in the news as of late much, was pretty well known nationally a few years back when he was still the Mayor of Newark. Can't remember what precisely he did, but it resulted in him doing the late night comedy talk-show circuit for a while. He's a pretty charismatic man.
I wonder how his love life would have to change living in the White House, though, since he's unmarried.
I'd say Martin O'Malley is decently known, considering how he was presidential candidate.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;50650362]The biggest difference between him and Clinton is corruption. He's probably one of the least corrupt politicians we have. There was a documentary I watched a few years back on him combating the corruption in Newark trying to win the mayoral campaign there.[/QUOTE]
It's probably why he's in the front running, and frankly she has no one with an ounce of scruples on her team as it is.
Im still holding out for my hometown homeboy Castro, but all the picks for VP seem good so far, perhaps even better than the Presidential candidate they're running with lol
[QUOTE=Maegord;50651125]Also Cory Booker, while he hasn't been in the news as of late much, was pretty well known nationally a few years back when he was still the Mayor of Newark. Can't remember what precisely he did, but it resulted in him doing the late night comedy talk-show circuit for a while. He's a pretty charismatic man.
I wonder how his love life would have to change living in the White House, though, since he's unmarried.[/QUOTE]
If memory serves me correctly, he kicked in a door and saved a person from a burning house. I don't know much about Booker, but what I've heard, I like. At this point I'm hoping that Clinton gets elected and then impeached/removed from office, and a Democrat who's not synonymous with corruption gets into the Oval Office.
[QUOTE=Sega Saturn;50653326]If memory serves me correctly, he kicked in a door and saved a person from a burning house. I don't know much about Booker, but what I've heard, I like. At this point [b]I'm hoping that Clinton gets elected and then impeached/removed from office,[/b] and a Democrat who's not synonymous with corruption gets into the Oval Office.[/QUOTE]
How's that working out for you so far?
[QUOTE=Duck M.;50652814]Im still holding out for my hometown homeboy Castro[/QUOTE]
The last name alone would drive far-right conspiracy theorists insane.
[QUOTE=LTJGPliskin;50652244]I'd say Martin O'Malley is decently known, considering how he was presidential candidate.[/QUOTE]
Not really, considering the media barely even talked about him when he was a presidential candidate to the point where some people didn't even know he was running...or even existed.
[QUOTE=InvaderNouga;50653664]How's that working out for you so far?[/QUOTE]
Hey man, it's just a hope; I didn't say it would happen. What's with the smug attitude though? Are you happy with this turn of events?
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;50650321]As someone from NJ, I can say he's....okay. He's by far not the worse choice.
Honestly thought it would be Elizabeth Warren the way she's been campaigning for Clinton these past few weeks.[/QUOTE]
I think a two-women ticket is too much for people to take especially if Hillary wants to steal over republicans
He's a very good man. He gave the commencement speech at my sister's college graduation, and he's a brilliant orator. Incredibly nice guy, too.
[QUOTE=LTJGPliskin;50651105]Why not someone like Martin O'Malley, or anyone that's a well-known politician?[/QUOTE]
O'Malley ran Maryland into the fucking ground in his failed bid for presidency.
Castro comes off as incredibly underqualified. I like Booker, Brown, or Franken.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;50650321]As someone from NJ, I can say he's....okay. He's by far not the worse choice.
Honestly thought it would be Elizabeth Warren the way she's been campaigning for Clinton these past few weeks.[/QUOTE]
Wall Street already said they do not want Warren, so Clinton's not gonna take Warren.
Warren would be a pretty bad pick, honestly - Hillary shouldn't even be considering Senators in states with Republican governors. The Senate needs Democrats - stealing one to be a VP would be willingly forfeiting a senate seat to a Republican appointee. Plus from what I've seen the Bernie Busters already disowned her as a progressive - I don't think she'd bring in many of the upset Bernie supporters. Plus she's in a strong Dem state - Hillary doesn't need anyone to deliver Dem states to her.
Castro is under qualified, but he'd help secure the Hispanic vote and I just like the guy a lot. Really unlikely he'll be the pick at this point, since he's flat-out denied being vetted, but one of my top picks.
O'Malley is okay, but not popular enough and again from a strongly Dem state.
Franken's from Minnesota which is probably the biggest Democratic stronghold in the country. Not a chance he'd be selected - people already don't take him seriously.
I'm pretty sure it'll be some random that nobody expected.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.