who would YOU pick for Hillary's veep, and why
I think it will be crucial, especially if the GOP picks someone like a Fiorina or Carson to "look diverse."
I would like a Julian Castro, if nothing else to counter Jeb's fake Latino stance. He could make Texas a lot less solid for the GOP.
As much as I hate it, Cory Booker could also play the part, even though I find him sleazy.
Kristine Gillbrand would be a strong one, especially as she could help scent this campaign which hints of Kennedy Camelot.
As far as absolute NOS
This is NOT anti Semitic, but a dislike of people who have defined their politics a certain way...NO RAHM, NO DWS. Putting them in is a big middle finger to the left, period.
No Evan Bayh, No landrieu, no Tim Kaine!, because they have defined themselves as backstabbers.
= new reply since forum marked as read
especially since Ohio is key. Though frankly, the idea the Brown's former opponent in the elections, who works for Fox News, Mr. Dennis K. might eat his guts out to think Brown beat HIM to the VP slot 
Hillary Clinton Praises a Guy With Lots of Blood on His Hands
In lauding Henry Kissinger, the possible Democratic presidential nominee goes far beyond her usual hawkish rhetoric.
Hillary Clinton often plays the hawk card: She voted for the Iraq war, dissed President Barack Obama for not being tough enough on Syria, and compared Vladimir Putin to Adolf Hitler. This is to be expected from a politician who has angled for a certain title: the first female president of the United States. Whether her muscular views are sincerely held or not, a conventional political calculation would lead her to assume it may be difficult for many voters to elect as commander-in-chief a woman who did not project an aggressive and assertive stance on foreign policy. So her tough talk might be charitably evaluated in such a (somewhat) forgiving context. Yet what remains more puzzling and alarming is the big wet kiss she planted (rhetorically) on former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger this week, with a fawning review of his latest book, World Order.
Sure, perhaps there is secretary's privilege—an old boy and girls club, in which the ex-foreign-policy chiefs do not speak ill of each other and try to help out the person presently in the post. Nothing wrong with that. But former-Madam Secretary Clinton had no obligation to praise Kissinger and publicly participate in his decades-long mission to rehabilitate his image. In the review, she calls Kissinger a "friend" and reports, "I relied on his counsel when I served as secretary of state. He checked in with me regularly, sharing astute observations about foreign leaders and sending me written reports on his travels." She does add that she and Henry "have often seen the world and some of our challenges quite differently, and advocated different responses now and in the past." But here's the kicker: At the end of the review, she notes that Kissinger is "surprisingly idealistic":
Even when there are tensions between our values and other objectives, America, he reminds us, succeeds by standing up for our values, not shirking them, and leads by engaging peoples and societies, the sources of legitimacy, not governments alone.
