General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsPost removed
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)Were you dancing in the street?
ChisolmTrailDem
(9,463 posts)...aherrmmm...what were we talking ab....
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)was more exciting to you than Tim Kaine?
ChisolmTrailDem
(9,463 posts)...
Bbbbbrrrr... Tim....
still_one
(98,883 posts)LWolf
(46,179 posts)and went on with my life.
My reaction to Tim Kaine:
"Who? Whatever." And moving on with my life.
dlwickham
(3,316 posts)and he ended up being a pretty good VP
Response to Post removed (Original post)
Post removed
ChisolmTrailDem
(9,463 posts)Arugula Latte
(50,566 posts)I totally believe that! Yeeeah, that's the ticket!
CaliforniaPeggy
(156,378 posts)He supports a woman's right to choose.
He has always supported Planned Parenthood.
Let's not distort things.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)Marshall-Newman Amendment anyway and marriage was then defined as between one man and one woman, serving Kaine's personal views and not the public views he'd claimed he would uphold.
So good luck to others in that same boat.....
csziggy
(34,189 posts)The governor did not sign it and could not have stopped it.
Constitutional amendment (voter referendum); marriage. Provides for a referendum at the November 2006 election on approval of a proposed constitutional amendment to define marriage. The proposed amendment provides that "only a union between one man and one woman may be a marriage valid in or recognized by this Commonwealth and its political subdivisions." The proposed amendment also prohibits the Commonwealth and its political subdivisions from creating or recognizing "a legal status for relationships of unmarried individuals that intends to approximate the design, qualities, significance, or effects of marriage." Further, the proposed amendment prohibits the Commonwealth or its political subdivisions from creating or recognizing "another union, partnership, or other legal status to which is assigned the rights, benefits, obligations, qualities, or effects of marriage." This bill is identical to HB 101.
<SNIP>
03/15/06 House: Signed by Speaker
03/16/06 Senate: Signed by President
04/10/06 House: Bill became law without Governor's signature, Chapter 828 (effective 7/1/06)
http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?061+sum+SB526
Emphasis added by me.
misterhighwasted
(9,148 posts)As for anti-abortion Sen Kaine just received a sound approval & endorsement fro Cecile Richards on Rachel Maddow tonight.
100% from NARAL & A rating from Planned Parenthood.
He is capable of keeping his personal religious beliefs outside of the law. As he has well proven.
Broadbrushing is easier than looking for his actual record.
longship
(40,416 posts)So he has that going for him.
Let's not confuse his personal beliefs -- he's a Catholic, like Biden -- with his political positions.
The guy is fine for me.
Rhiannon12866
(252,612 posts)Sounds a bit like Jimmy Carter. I've been listening to his autobiography, "A Full Life" (read by the author...
), was given the audio book for my birthday. He really has lived a long and fascinating life and I've learned so much I never knew, think he finally got to his run for president on disc #5, LOL. And he personally opposes abortion, thinks there are better alternatives - like sex education and contraception - but said he supports the law of the land.
longship
(40,416 posts)Too many Debbie Downers here Re: Tim Kaine.
I think he is a fine choice.
My only issue is that he is a sitting senator from VA. Apparently Hillary is putting great faith in a prospective electoral win in that state. I would not blame her if she did. But any special election for vacant senate seat rolls the dice.
Not sure about VA election laws here concerning a vacant senate seat. Still, we hold the governorship.
My best to you.
uponit7771
(93,505 posts)CentralMass
(16,910 posts)Response to Post removed (Original post)
Post removed
Response to Post removed (Reply #8)
ChisolmTrailDem This message was self-deleted by its author.
Grey Lemercier
(1,429 posts)POTUS in the event of a tragedy. Kaine is appealing to millions of moderates Dems (like me) and independents, he has evolved to a pro LGBTQ stance (as a gay woman I am quite comfortable with him), and his support of "Wall Street" is vastly overspun, he is not a Booker. Kaine will tow the anti TPP line now that he is VP for Sec Clinton. He has a 100% lifetime rating on abortion. He also is fluent in Spanish and is an all round decent human being. Our next president picked WELL.
pnwmom
(110,225 posts)Penn Voter
(247 posts)I didn't expect to see! It is a relief from reading Kaine is a terrible choice because that person doesn't agree with him 100% of the time.
I think he was an excellent choice. Tim Kaine was also a civil rights attorney.
CentralMass
(16,910 posts)of a moderate Democrat could fit someone who is Pro: TPP, bank deregulation, Big coal, fracking, off shore drilling, and supports right to work laws (arguably) anti-union policies.
So he seems like a decent honest man, but given choices. I wouldn't vote for someone who supports these things. Call me funny that way.
Grey Lemercier
(1,429 posts)someone who is Pro: TPP, bank deregulation, Big coal, fracking, off shore drilling, and supports right to work laws (arguably) anti-union policies.
1. Pro TPP
As VP, his pro TPP vote is removed from the senate, and I believe Sec Clinton when she says she is against it in it's current form. I addition, Dems will pick up quite a few seats , possibly take over the Senate, and then TPP is truly dead. Clinton can also veto it as well.
2. Bank Deregulation
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/tim-kaine-banking-letter-225953
"Sen. Kaine is a strong supporter of Dodd Franks financial protections because certain financial institutions wreaked havoc on the American economy, hurting millions of Americans in the process and believes we need strong rules to stop that chaos from happening again," Dudley said. "The toughest regulation should be on the biggest and riskiest institutions. Credit unions, community banks and regional banks need to be carefully regulated, but the nature of the regulation can be different to ensure scarce resources are efficiently spent allowing regulators to focus on the bad actors."
Kaine was one of 70 senators who signed a one-page letter asking Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Director Richard Cordray to try to "prevent any unintended consequences that negatively impact community banks and credit unions or unnecessarily limit their ability to serve consumers," although the letter did not call for the rollback of any specific regulation.
Kaine also signed a second letter that called for changes to the rules governing how larger regional banks have to set up capital cushions to protect themselves against failure. Written to the heads of the Federal Reserve, Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. and Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the missive asked regulators to reconsider how they apply safeguards to the activities of regional banks meaning those that are bigger than the smallest, community lenders but smaller than international mega-banks such as JPMorgan Chase and Citigroup.
Kaine was one of four Senate Democrats signatories on the letter, including Sen. Mark Warner, a fellow Virginia Democrat. Kaine and Warner have a strong constituent interest because Capital One, the tenth biggest bank in the country by assets, is based in McLean, Virginia.
The senators asked regulators to reconsider aspects of two sets of rules designed to ensure that large banks have enough financial resources to withstand another crisis. Kaine did not endorse dramatic de-regulatory measures, but asked for changes for "regional banks that do not share the same risk profile or complexity as their larger, systemically important brethren."
The general idea is one that is also being advanced by top Fed officials who have repeatedly told Congress and the public that they are considering steps to differentiate the way rules apply to major Wall Street banks and their smaller competitors.
3. Big coal
This one is easy to debunk. Just watch this PRO COAL advert attacking Kaine
4. Fracking
Yes he is not for a total ban, but neither is Hillary, neither is the platform. He is for very careful use of thsi and was for banning it in most of the George Washington forest.
Kaine, Warner praise George Washington forest fracking decision
Officials are pleased that most of the George Washington National Forest is off-limits.
http://www.roanoke.com/news/politics/kaine-warner-praise-george-washington-forest-fracking-decision/article_eacfe63e-04c2-589a-8c6a-68f6a7661185.html
5. Off Shore Drilling
Clinton opposes it, Kaine supports lifting the current ban and having limited drilling far off the Atlantic coast. I say he sides with Clinton now.
He DOES oppose the XL Pipeline.
Drilling Down Into Tim Kaines Environmental Record
Hes not a radical green, but activists see a chance to work with him if hes on the Democratic ticket.
https://www.nationaljournal.com/s/638780/drilling-down-into-tim-kaines-environmental-record
6. Labour Issues
He was pro Right to work when he was Governor, but not since he has been in ther Senate
Largest federal employee union applauds Clinton pick of Senator Tim Kaine as running mate
Kaine has been strong advocate for government workers and programs, AFGE president says
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/largest-federal-employee-union-applauds-clinton-pick-of-senator-tim-kaine-as-running-mate-300302981.html
His Senate voting record is highly rated by the AFL-CIO.
http://www.aflcio.org/Legislation-and-Politics/Legislative-Voting-Records?&act=6&newzip=false&location=both&termyear=2014&statecode=VA

For Secretary of the Commonwealth Kaine chose Danny LeBlanc, the head of the Virginia AFL-CIO and an opponent of the state's right-to-work law. The Republicans voted LeBlanc down.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/07/AR2006030700684.html
He is a a moderate centrist liberal (as am I), with some positions (like LGBTQ, coal, etc) that have evolved, and a couple where he is at odds with Sec Clinton, but I expect him to fall in line.
CentralMass
(16,910 posts)On his "clean coal" support. However on the TPP, fracking, off shore drilling bank deregulation I am unconvinced. Given a choice, I wouldn't vote for him. These are not policies that I support.
adigal
(7,581 posts)And so is Kaine.
I'm voting for her, but I believe if she wins, we lose to someone like Kasich in 4 years. Then, maybe, in 8 years we'll actually get someone slightly progressive.
Marr
(20,317 posts)We've got a of people here who insist on denying the obvious just because they want to support Hillary.
If you want to support Hillary, then why not just acknowledge her obvious strategy and explain why it's smart?
CaliforniaPeggy
(156,378 posts)pnwmom
(110,225 posts)CaliforniaPeggy
(156,378 posts)You obviously don't have me on ignore, and the post wasn't removed.
pnwmom
(110,225 posts)CaliforniaPeggy
(156,378 posts)Whole subthreads used to be removed, but now we don't do that. I'll copy and paste my text from my post so you can see what I said.
Here's what I said:
10. He is personally against abortion, BUT...
He supports a woman's right to choose.
He has always supported Planned Parenthood.
Let's not distort things.
Hope that helps!
pnwmom
(110,225 posts)he separates his personal religious beliefs from his political views. The decision belongs to each woman to make, without interference by the government.
CaliforniaPeggy
(156,378 posts)I'm glad we got this straightened out.
StevieM
(10,578 posts)At no point did she suggest that she would consider banning abortion, or agreeing to new restrictions, or appoint judges different than the ones Bill Clinton and Barack Obama has appointed.
She said that she could accept a ban on third trimester abortions if they included an exception for the life and the health of the mother. That is the same exact position that Barack Obama took in 2008. I remember John McCain making an idiot out of himself in the debate, saying the word "health" while making air quotes with his hands.
pnwmom
(110,225 posts)And Kaine strongly supports Roe v. Wade and does NOT believe that the government should be involved in this decision.
He doesn't allow his personal religious beliefs to affect his policy decisions.
ontheissues.org
longship
(40,416 posts)uponit7771
(93,505 posts)Response to Post removed (Reply #8)
Post removed
Calculating
(3,000 posts)This is Hillary's attempt at stealing moderate republicans from Trump. Definitely a disappointment for those who wanted a true progressive ticket though.
underahedgerow
(1,232 posts)over 'to the light', so to speak.
She's got the Dem vote, by and large, so she needs to shift rightish to pull in the conservatives. That's not a bad thing. He has little effect on policy, and he can't be all bad if she's chosen him.
Response to underahedgerow (Reply #14)
ChisolmTrailDem This message was self-deleted by its author.
underahedgerow
(1,232 posts)and that they'll vote the Dem ticket or whatever leftish candidate, etc. But she needs a few more electoral votes from the right side, ultimately.
It's classic strategy, which might be her downfall, staying with safe and comfortable. She might better have gone with a shock and awe candidate, a real firebrand, a female ticket, etc, to shake things up. But it's looking like the potential candidates may not have stood up to the vetting.
Best thing to do is to be FOR Mrs. Clinton, and not Against. Anyone can be against something, that's the easy route. It takes courage to stand FOR something.
ChisolmTrailDem
(9,463 posts)Last edited Sat Jul 23, 2016, 01:33 AM - Edit history (1)
GulfCoast66
(11,949 posts)Americans and even Democrats are not socialist. No matter what his hard core think. And no one has attacked him yet. After the republican machine was done with him we would not pick up even one senate seat.
And I doubt he would have picked his VP any wiser than he picked members of the Platform committee.
VP Brother West work for most Americans?
And he lost. Stop with the Bernie trolling. There are other websites where you can commiserate with your fellow Hillary bashers. 80% of Bernie supporters are on board. You apparently are not there yet.
Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)Grey Lemercier
(1,429 posts)You seem to forget that by the time the actual election rolls around, Stein will get less than 1% of the vote, she is NOT competent to be POTUS, and her Berniecrat supporters who will vote for her NEVER were Dems (for the most part) to begin with.
It is quite simple. Either you are for Trump or you are against Trump. Anything other than a vote for Sec. Clinton is being pro Trump.
SoCalDem
(103,856 posts)just how many "unqualified" types have actually BEEN president.. Trump may be this century's "Reagan"..
Angry, vengeful people WILL turn out and will vote for him..
In this country, people often do not vote unless they feel really motivated..and there will be MANY people who will not be able to vote because of all the flaming hoops they have to jump through to get registered..
Every cycle we get frantic news about the lawsuits being filed...but in-between elections, not many progressive/liberal/Democratic types spend much money to make sure voters have what they need... Probably a lot less than is spent on post election lawsuits would go a long way..
I know it sucks and we should not have to do it, but as long as right wingers get to write the laws, we will have to play by their rules..
misterhighwasted
(9,148 posts)Bernie did say tonight that Sen Kaine "is a good man".
Btw.
Warren approves.
gwheezie
(3,580 posts)He was the mayor in the city at the time I was living in Richmond he was the governor of my state and is currently one of my senators. He helped turn Virginia blue.
alcibiades_mystery
(36,437 posts)Sorry you're bored.
There's a a lot at stake, but some people need to be entertained, I guess.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)marriage as for one man and one woman only. As candidate he promised to veto, but he signed it.
How is that great? If that had been done to another minority group would it still be great? Of course not.
csziggy
(34,189 posts)The governor did not sign it and could not have stopped it.
Constitutional amendment (voter referendum); marriage. Provides for a referendum at the November 2006 election on approval of a proposed constitutional amendment to define marriage. The proposed amendment provides that "only a union between one man and one woman may be a marriage valid in or recognized by this Commonwealth and its political subdivisions." The proposed amendment also prohibits the Commonwealth and its political subdivisions from creating or recognizing "a legal status for relationships of unmarried individuals that intends to approximate the design, qualities, significance, or effects of marriage." Further, the proposed amendment prohibits the Commonwealth or its political subdivisions from creating or recognizing "another union, partnership, or other legal status to which is assigned the rights, benefits, obligations, qualities, or effects of marriage." This bill is identical to HB 101.
<SNIP>
03/15/06 House: Signed by Speaker
03/16/06 Senate: Signed by President
04/10/06 House: Bill became law without Governor's signature, Chapter 828 (effective 7/1/06)
http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?061+sum+SB526
Emphasis added by me.
Come up with a new lie, please. I need something else to research.
lovemydog
(11,833 posts)who practices what he believes, who has volunteered with homeless people and who has helped poor people with housing doesn't bore me.
luckylefty77
(78 posts)other choices she didn't consider.
ProudToBeBlueInRhody
(16,399 posts)And he is not as liberal as Kaine
pnwmom
(110,225 posts)BainsBane
(57,647 posts)Try reading a book or watching a movie, playing sports, hiking, something.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)after getting votes by promising to veto it. Characterizing that as wanting to be entertained is dismissive in a very pointedly creepy way.
If he'd signed laws limiting the rights of another minority group, he'd not be excused for that here or in this Party. And that says all that need be said.
csziggy
(34,189 posts)The governor did not sign it and could not have stopped it.
Constitutional amendment (voter referendum); marriage. Provides for a referendum at the November 2006 election on approval of a proposed constitutional amendment to define marriage. The proposed amendment provides that "only a union between one man and one woman may be a marriage valid in or recognized by this Commonwealth and its political subdivisions." The proposed amendment also prohibits the Commonwealth and its political subdivisions from creating or recognizing "a legal status for relationships of unmarried individuals that intends to approximate the design, qualities, significance, or effects of marriage." Further, the proposed amendment prohibits the Commonwealth or its political subdivisions from creating or recognizing "another union, partnership, or other legal status to which is assigned the rights, benefits, obligations, qualities, or effects of marriage." This bill is identical to HB 101.
<SNIP>
03/15/06 House: Signed by Speaker
03/16/06 Senate: Signed by President
04/10/06 House: Bill became law without Governor's signature, Chapter 828 (effective 7/1/06)
http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?061+sum+SB526
Emphasis added by me.
I can do this all day...
Surya Gayatri
(15,445 posts)pansypoo53219
(22,971 posts)Vinca
(53,607 posts)Shades of
Humphrey
McGovern
Mondale
Dukakis
Gore
Kerry
When WE run exciting, attractive, inventive candidates we win.. when we settle for whomever's turn it is, or the candidate most inline with the establishment, we lose..
It's not about being "entertained"..it's about being excited by the candidate and being interested in getting them to the top of the heap..
It's the difference between a banana split and a cup of vanilla yogurt
Jim Beard
(2,535 posts)Surya Gayatri
(15,445 posts)Your rude snoring adds nothing to the discussion.
