>But what a VP pick says is that, u matter, u matter to my
>coalition, women matter, Black women matter, if he picks Pete,
>gays matter. It’s like going to Selma, it says u matter,
>what ur community values matters and that’s what identity
>politics is.

This is a really good point. And, tbf, I may be placing disproportionate focus on strategies that seem more statistically sound vs. other consideration. I guess I'm just focused more on wondering what a *winning* strategy looks like for someone like Biden. He does already have the black vote..

>
>Clinton picking tim kaine was one of her biggest mistakes, he
>wasn’t an exciting choice and it didn’t show the POC who
>had got her the nom that she really valued them.

Lol! See now, I agree it was a terrible mistake... but in my eyes not because of perceived slight to the black community (she still won like 90% of the black vote https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_United_States_presidential_election#Voter_demographics), but because one of the reasons her camp stated for picking him was to appeal to white voters... basically from an identity politics/representation angle. My theory is he was a coastal elite type that was never going to help her with those middle america voters, and it also hurt her that she didn't target industrial middle america hard enough during her campaigning. In hindsight, Tom Perez might have even been a smarter pick because he was a very popular Labor Sec (with unions, anyway), civil rights attorney, and organizer in the latino community up to that point and might have been able to help her fight for those white workers that flipped from Dem to 45 in the industrial areas (eg. MI/PA/WI) etc.