Is Hillary's Choice For VP Irrelevant ???

Here's a real anomaly - a possibly truthful tale from The New York Times:

I doubt that Hillary Clinton really wants to run with Elizabeth Warren - I doubt that she fully trusts her - but if that’s her calculated decision: mazel tov. They sure were fiery together last week, two blue devils raring to bedevil Donald Trump.

Tim Kaine is totally sensible, mostly safe and a bit of a snooze: the aspirin of aspirants. But if Clinton is tugged in the Virginia senator’s direction, she should head there. I could certainly see him as the vice president.

Then again I’ve seen Julia Louis-Dreyfus in the job, in HBO’s “Veep.” Clinton might as well pick her for all the difference it would make.

Here’s what we journalists don’t like to tell you or even admit to ourselves as we furiously stir the speculation, breathlessly thicken the suspense and whet Americans’ appetites for the big reveal of who will round out the Democratic and Republican tickets: Its impact on the election is close to nonexistent.

That’s particularly true this time around, and especially so with Clinton.

You can read the rest @
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/03/opinion/sunday/the-utter-inconsequence-of-hillarys-veep.html

Hillary's astonishingly huge ego (along with her coterie of covert operatives) will run the entire show - no VEEP is really needed.

Unless the illness underlying her cough cuts her term short, in which case her pick for VP is extremely important.

And no, it cannot be Bill.