So donated in her (Ebi for Ebony) memory.

Good luck.

I posted this in response to another similar post on Friday.



Sherrod Brown would be my pick.
As it says in the article:
Plus he's 63, 8 years as VP would be a nice cap on his career.

He's been in the senate 9 years and the congress for 14 years. She needs a good operative to work those 2 houses to get things done and he knows his way around.

He has said he doesn't want it, but sometimes when you're asked....."I serve at the pleasure of the President".

Tim Kaine: Again, I think HRC will need the congressional experience to help her, especially if we don't increase our numbers this election. The one down side they had for him is; he's a white male with senator in front of his name. Well same thing for Sherrod Brown.

Amy Klobuchar: As much as I hate to say it, I just don't think we're ready for a female president AND Vice president. Maybe someday, but we've barely got this far with a female running for president. I wish it wasn't so.

Julian Castro: Would love to be able to say Sec Castro is my 1st pick, but he is so inexperienced. Mayor of San Antonio, Tx for 5 years before being appointed Sec of Housing and Urban Development in 2014. To me just not enough experience.

Tom Perez: Don't know enough about him, other than little or no legislative experience.
_________________________________________________________________________________
Now to add the others on your list:

Deval Patrick: would be a great VP. My only thought here is you would have a Pres and VP nominee, both from the Northeast.

Elizabeth Warren: again would be a great pick, but like Amy Klobuchar, not sure about 2 women on the ticket, then there is the fact they are both from the NE and I think she feels she can do the greater good staying in the Senate.

Mark Warner: I really don't have an opinion about him. Just don't know enough about him. However, he was a governor and is now a senator, so certainly has legislative experience. Also, technically from the South so the ticket would have some regional diversity.

2383 is the total number of delegates needed to be the outright nominee.

Currently HRC has 1446 and BS has 1200 not counting Super Delegates.
HRC is short of the 2383 target by 937, BS is short by 1183.

There are 1,668 remaining delegates in the primaries thru June 14th.

HRC will have to win just 56% of those delegates to reach 2383
BS will have to win 71% of those delegates to reach 2383.

Hillary will do well in the upcoming primaries, Ct, De, Md Pa, & RI.

For each one of those that BS does not hit the 71% goal, the percentage he needs to win goes up for each successive election/caucus.

As I pointed out this calculation does not include Super Delegates.

If you include the Super Delegates:
HRC currently has 502 Super Delegates.
When added to her Pledged Delegates(1446) she has a total of 1948 delegates.
She only needs 435 Delegates to reach 2383 to clinch the nomination or just 26% of the remaining delegates..

But Bernie's people continue to delude their followers into thinking he can still pull this out.

This from a post in the Bernie Forum this morning:

It is an excerpt from an email one of his followers received last night:


Ted Devine and Jeff Weaver don't want to give up on their gravy train.

This is what she's basing her support on:

"I happen to think that Senator Sanders is 100 percent realistic about his goals for our nation."

Really! 100% realistic goals. Oh how I wish.

Yes, his lofty goal are wonderful and they are just that; GOALS!

We would all like to live in a land of milk and honey,
where there are no wars,
where the body of a 4 year old refugee boy doesn't wash up on the beach,
where there is a decent livable minimum wage of at least $15,
where parents can earn enough money to put food on the table and a roof over the heads of their kids,
where there is no racial, sexual orientation, or religious discrimination,
where the top 1% to 10% of the population doesn't have more wealth than the the bottom 90%
where kids can go to a state university to get a degree and graduate without a mountain of debt
where our infrastructure and transportation systems are as up to date, modern and efficient as those in other developed countries,
where our kids can go to school and we don't have to worry about some monster shooting them all to death,
where for that matter, you can go shopping in Walmart, or go to your workplace and not get shot by some crazy with a gun,
where everyone has access to good healthcare and not have to mortgage their home or spend all their retirement savings for that care,
where there are free and open elections, where everyone gets to vote, with no gerrymandering of districts, no voter id laws that disenfranchise a segment of our communities.

Yes, those are my goals, but what are goals and what can be accomplished in hopefully a 8 year term are two totally different aspirations. Hillary knows what she can get accomplished, she knows how to work and collaborate to get effective change. Will all the goals be met, hell no, but she will put us on a path so that maybe someday, in my life time those goals will be reached.

I do not have the same confidence that Bernie Sanders has the patience, finesse, political skills or experience to accomplish his promises.

SUPERDELEGATE
su·per·del·e·gate
ˈso͞opərˌdeləɡət/
nounUS
plural noun: super-delegates
(in the Democratic Party) an unelected delegate who is free to support any candidate for the presidential nomination at the party's national convention.

Kim Metcalfe is not an elected official.

This approach worked so well for Ralph Nader. What did he ever accomplish except to help Bush be appointed President in 2000, So we ended up with 9/11, the Iraq War, and so many anti-progressive Supreme Court decisions. Elections have consequences. Where was the Great Revolution? Oh sure we had Occupy Wall Street, to what end? What did they accomplish?

Where are all these lefties during the mid-terms. Change starts from the bottom up. OWS would have been better off supporting progressives and getting them elected to local and state positions as assembly people, mayors, state reps, senators and congressmen and governors. That's where you effect change. But that's hard work. If and that's a big if, Bernie gets elected, without the senate and congress working with him NOTHING WILL CHANGE. He'll get the same stonewalling Obama faced for his 8 years.

Bernie is not a compromiser, as evidenced by all the bills he voted against that were 90% laws to help "We the People" but may have had an amendment he didn't like so he voted against.

Also in all his years in congress and the senate, he's introduced a ton of legislation, but only 3 bills were ever passed, 2 were for the naming of Post offices in Vt. So he hasn't really shown an ability to build consensus.

https://www.congress.gov/member/bernard-sanders/S000033?q=%7B%22sponsorship%22%3A%22sponsored%22%7D

So Susan Sarandon can call for Revolution all she wants. Didn't happen in 2000 and won't happen in 2016.

By the way, I will vote for Bernie if he is the nominee. Hopefully he'll make good decisions in nominating Supreme Court Justices.

DU will lose many, many Bernie bugs and trolls. Their work will be done here and they will have failed.

Monday, February 1
Iowa caucus (results) 52 D, 30 R Closed

Tuesday, February 9
New Hampshire (results) 32 D, 23 R Mixed

Saturday, February 20
Nevada caucus (D) 43 Closed
South Carolina (R) 50 Open

Tuesday, February 23
Nevada caucus (R) 30 Closed

Saturday, February 27
South Carolina (D) 59 Open

Tuesday, March 1
(Super Tuesday)
Alabama 60 D, 50 R Open
Alaska caucus (R) 28 Closed
American Samoa caucus (D) 10 Open
Arkansas 37 D, 40 R Open
Colorado caucus 79 D, 37 R Closed
Democrats Abroad (Vote March 1 - 8) 17
Georgia 116 D, 76 R Open
Massachusetts 116 D, 42 R Mixed
Minnesota caucus 93 D, 38 R Open
North Dakota caucus (R) 28 Closed
Oklahoma 42 D, 43 R Closed
Tennessee 76 D, 58 R Open
Texas 252 D, 155 R Open
Vermont 26 D, 16 R Open
Virginia 110 D, 49 R Open
Wyoming caucus (R) 29 Closed

Saturday, March 5
Kansas caucus 37 D, 40 R Closed
Kentucky caucus (R) 45 Closed
Louisiana 58 D, 47 R Closed
Maine caucus (R) 23 Closed
Nebraska caucus (D) 30 Closed
Sunday, March 6 Maine caucus (D) 30 Closed
Puerto Rico (R) 23 Open

Tuesday, March 8
Hawaii caucus (R) 19 Closed
Idaho (R) 32 Closed
Michigan 148 D, 59 R Open
Mississippi 41 D, 40 R Open
Democrats Abroad 17 N/A

Saturday, March 12
Guam (R convention) 9 Closed
Northern Marianas caucus (D) 11 Closed
District of Columbia caucus (R) 19 Closed

Tuesday, March 15
Florida 246 D, 99 R Closed
Illinois 182 D, 69 R Open
Missouri 84 D, 52 R Open
North Carolina 121 D, 72 R Mixed
Northern Mariana Islands caucus (R) 9 Closed
Ohio 159 D, 66 R Mixed

http://www.uspresidentialelectionnews.com/2016-presidential-primary-schedule-calendar/#8XfM5uQUwoXOfQU9.99

America needs comprehensive immigration reform with a pathway to citizenship.

Hillary will:
Enact comprehensive immigration reform to create a pathway to citizenship, keep families together, and enable millions of workers to come out of the shadows.

End family detention and close private immigrant detention centers.

Defend President Obama’s executive actions to provide deportation relief for DREAMers and parents of Americans and lawful residents, and extend those actions to additional persons with sympathetic cases if Congress refuses to act.

“We have to finally and once and for all fix our immigration system – this is a family issue, it’s an economic issue too, but it is at heart a family issue. If we claim we are for family then we have to pull together and resolve the outstanding issues around our broken immigration system. The American people support comprehensive immigration reform not just because it’s the right thing to do—and it is—but because it will strengthen families, strengthen our economy, and strengthen our country. That’s why we can’t wait any longer, we can’t wait any longer for a path to full and equal citizenship.”
HILLARY CLINTON, MAY 5, 2015

https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/immigration-reform/




http://correctrecord.org/hillary-clinton-and-immigration/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/zachary-leven/the-case-for-hillary_b_9201778.html


THE BLOG
The Case for Hillary
02/10/2016 11:13 am ET

Zachary Leven

The case for Hillary Clinton is mostly a matter of rebutting the case against her. Once that's done, you're simply left with the most qualified candidate, and someone who is, by all reality-based measures, progressive (ranked the tenth most liberal senator). And just as important, someone who is capable of achieving results (I'll conclude with the case against Sanders, and there's a very, very strong case to make against him).

We'll start with this specific example, which I think is illustrative of the sorts of attacks we see made on Hillary. It begins with this video of an interview with Elizabeth Warren that's been making its rounds on the internet, you may have seen it:

t's worth watching, but I'll summarize. Warren tells a story about the bankruptcy bill initially supported by the Clinton administration in the 1990s. Warren wrote an op-ed opposing the bill on the grounds that it offered deadbeat dads a mechanism for cheating their ex-wives out of child support, along with a few other issues.

After the op-ed was published, Hillary phoned Warren requesting a meeting. They met in private, and Warren proceeded to educate Hillary on this issue. She said that Hillary was a "quick study" and really "got it." Hillary returned to Washington, and by all accounts, single-handedly turned around the administration's support of this legislation. When the bill reached Clinton's desk, he vetoed it.

"The case for Hillary Clinton is mostly a matter of rebutting the case against her. Once that's done, you're simply left with the most qualified candidate..."
So far, this is a glowing account -- everything you would want in a leader. She's engaged, she cares deeply about protecting people, she listens, she's smart, she takes action, and gets results. It's hard to imagine a Republican doing anything like this -- actually reading a newspaper, caring what other smart people have to say, listening to those people honestly and seriously, and then taking action out of compassion and empathy for those in need of help.

The second part of the interview is where it gets quite damning. According to Warren, First Lady Clinton became Senator Clinton of New York, and then things changed. The same bankruptcy bill came through congress, and this time Hillary voted for it. When Warren is asked what changed, she replies (paraphrasing), "Hillary started receiving all this money from Wall Street, and they became her constituency." Well, that would be a very dramatic transformation, indeed.

Now if you loathe Hillary Clinton, and are mostly interested in validating that worldview, then you can stop reading. You have what you need. You can go and post that video to Facebook and talk about how corrupt and horrible she is. But if you'd like to gain a broader understanding of things, continue on.

So what happened? Did Hillary vote for this bill because she became beholden to special interests on Wall Street? What excuse does she have? Here's her explanation in her own words:

Read More at link, long but excellent OP.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/zachary-leven/the-case-for-hillary_b_9201778.html

But as a 25 year member of congress and the senate, he knows deep down in his heart how difficult or impossible it will be for him to get even a fraction of what he is promising accomplished. However, if he is lighting a fire under all these young people who have jumped on his bandwagon so that they will carry forward and vote for Democrats in the mid terms, and work for reforms in the years ahead, then mazel tov ! He has performed a great service to the progressive cause even if he's not the nominee.