Unconventional #22: How a loss in California could make Sherrod Brown Clinton’s perfect VP pick (and more!)

Unconventional is Yahoo News’ complete guide to what could be the craziest presidential conventions in decades. Here’s what you need to know today.

1. The Clinton Veepwatch, Vol. 5: Sherrod Brown

In which Unconventional examines the likely Democratic nominee’s possible — and not-so-possible — vice presidential picks. Previous installments: Elizabeth Warren, Tim Kaine, Mark Cuban, Julián Castro.

Name: Sherrod Campbell Brown

Age: 63

Résumé: U.S. senator from Ohio; former U.S. congressman from Ohio’s 13th District, Ohio secretary of state, and member of the Ohio House of Representatives

Source of speculation: The Great Mentioner has been mentioning the rumpled, froggy voiced Brown as a possible Clinton running mate for a while. But with the publication Sunday of a career-spanning 3,000-word profile in USA Today — and many other Gannett papers — the buzz about Brown is getting louder.

“A partisan brawler who’s as obsessed with baseball as he is with politics, Brown is Ohio’s senior senator and — perhaps — the next Democratic nominee for vice president of the United States,” writes Gannett Washington Correspondent Deirdre Shesgreen. “With his unabashed progressive politics suddenly in vogue and his home state of Ohio a pivotal presidential battleground, Brown is among Democrats being touted for the No. 2 slot on a Clinton ticket.”

Shesgreen goes on to say that, according to his supporters, “Brown would be a great pick — a salt-of-the-earth candidate whose mix of progressive politics and Midwestern pragmatism could appeal to a broad swath of voters.”

Then she quotes two of the most prominent Democrats in the country all but endorsing the idea of a Clinton-Brown ticket.

“He was a populist before being populist was cool,” says Missouri Sen. Claire McCaskill.

“He’d be a great choice,” adds Joe Biden — who happens to know a little something about the job.

Expect more stories like Shesgreen’s to pop up in the press as the Democratic nominating contest draws to a close next Tuesday in Washington, D.C. — and as Clinton begins to turn her attention toward picking a second-in-command.

Backstory: Beltway types were chattering about Brown’s veep chances before Clinton even announced her candidacy. In a January 2015 Washington Post profile, Ben Terris asked why “progressives” weren’t “begging [Brown] to run for president” — then touted the senator as a smart pick for Hillary’s (hypothetical) ticket instead.

“If Clinton gets the nomination and wants to allay the [Elizabeth] Warren wing of the party, maybe she can pick the progressive senator from a state she will need to win?” Terris speculated.

The notion continued to pick up steam once the 2016 campaign got underway.

In October 2015, Brown surprised many observers by endorsing Clinton over left-wing kindred spirit Bernie Sanders, who was trailing the former secretary of state by 40 percentage points in the polls at the time. “From opposing unfair trade deals to fighting for a fair financial system, Hillary Clinton has shown she puts working families first,” Brown said in a statement. “She knows as president that her first job will be creating jobs for the middle class.”

The somewhat uncharacteristic move — Brown refused to endorse either Obama or Clinton during the heat of the 2008 Democratic primary — prompted another round of speculation about his VP prospects.

“Some liberals have floated Brown as a possible vice presidential pick,” wrote MSNBC’s Alex Seitz-Wald, “noting he could help deliver votes in Ohio, perhaps the single most important general election swing state.”

But Brown’s stock really began to rise after Donald Trump emerged in March as the likely Republican nominee. The Clinton camp (and Bill Clinton in particular) long assumed that Hillary would be facing off against Florida Sen. Marco Rubio in November. In that scenario, picking a running mate like, say, Julián Castro could help keep Latino voters from defecting to the GOP. That’s no longer necessary, however, with a man who calls Mexican immigrants “rapists” atop the GOP ticket. Instead, Clinton is now more concerned with losing white working-class voters from Rust Belt states like Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin to Trump — and with uniting her own party in the wake of Sanders’ spirited challenge.

As an unapologetic liberal and a union champion, Brown is uniquely suited to both missions — or so the thinking goes.

“With Donald Trump increasingly likely to win the Republican nomination, some Democrats say Clinton needs to consider picking a running mate who can counter his populist appeal,” the Hill wrote in March. “Progressives view [Brown] as in line with Warren on most issues and believe he could help propel Clinton to critical Rust Belt wins in the general election.”

From the beginning, Brown’s answer to the VP question has been the same.

“I have zero interest in being vice president,” Brown told the Washington Post last year.

“I do not want to be vice president,” Brown informed the Hill five months later. “I love working for the people of Ohio, and I have a lot more work to do as their senator.”

But in the new Gannett profile, the senator’s tone seems to have softened. “We like where we live,” Brown says. “We like the life we have.”

“There’s no point in getting worked up about it until I see what happens,” adds Brown’s wife, the journalist Connie Schultz — before admitting that she won’t say no if Clinton comes calling. “I would never dream of stepping in his way. We are very supportive of each other.”

Odds: Depends what happens Tuesday in California.

Although Schultz says that “we have no idea if he’s being vetted at all,” Brown is, according to the New York Times, “among the names under discussion by Mrs. Clinton.”

If Hillary loses the Golden State primary — an outcome that would encourage Sanders to keep battering her from the left all the way to the convention in Philadelphia — Brown could shoot to the top of her shortlist. The most important thing for Clinton at that point would be persuading progressives to trust her and to turn out in November. Tapping Brown would be the quickest way to do it. The fact that he also has some serious anti-Trump assets — Ohio address, blue-collar cred, attack-dog chops — would only heighten his appeal.

If Clinton wins California, however, then all bets are off. In that case, Sanders would probably bow out shortly after the final Democratic primary, in Washington on June 14, and Clinton may start to pivot toward the center. Picking someone like Sen. Mark Warner or Sen. Tim Kaine, both of Virginia, would hit some of the same notes as picking Brown — white, working-class, swing state, and so on — without yanking the ticket to the left just in time for the general.

It would also help Clinton avoid the main drawback of plucking Brown from the Senate: the fact that Ohio’s GOP governor, John Kasich, would almost certainly imperil the Democrats’ potential majority by appointing a Republican to replace him. (Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe is a Democrat.)

“If we have a Republican governor in any of those states, the answer is not only no, but hell no,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid told MSNBC’s Joy Reid last month when asked about the prospect of Brown (among others) joining Clinton’s ticket. “I would yell and scream to stop that.”

_____

2. Jane Sanders on why the media shouldn’t declare Clinton the nominee before Philadelphia — and what Bernie plans to do if he loses

Yahoo News Chief National Correspondent Lisa Belkin just got back from in Burlington, Vt., where she spent a day hanging out with Bernie Sanders’ wife Jane. They talked about a lot of things: printer cartridges, Don Quixote, Donald Trump. But for our purposes here at Unconventional, the most interesting moments were when Jane talked about Bernie’s endgame — specifically, why the press should wait until the convention before crowning a nominee and what he’s planning to do if he doesn’t win in Philadelphia.

A few key excerpts, starting with Jane on why Clinton’s delegate shouldn’t include superdelegates (yet):

Jane on why superdelegates exist:

And Jane on the new group that Bernie will launch after the election:

Make sure to read the rest of Belkin’s profile here.

_____

3. Republicans rally around — and rationalize — Trump at state GOP conventions

Remember when each weekend used to bring news of some contentious state GOP convention where activists railed against the prospect of presidential nominee Donald Trump — and where, more often than not, rebel forces loyal to a rival candidate successfully contrived to steal control of the state’s delegation from the guy who actually, you know, won the primary?

Alas. It seems so long ago.

In yet another sign the Republican Party has come to terms with its new ochre-hued leader, four states held their GOP conventions last weekend — Georgia, New Hampshire, Idaho and Oregon — and the headlines that emerged from each event were almost identical:

“The Republican Party calls for uniformity after Georgia Republican Convention”

“NH Republican convention rallies behind Trump”

“Idaho GOP concludes businesslike state convention with show of unity”

“Oregon GOP rally behind Trump as only choice”

The last one nicely captures the flavor of these affairs: resignation, rationalization and rah-rah rhetoric from Republicans who recognize they’ve run out of other options.

“Initially I was a Cruz guy,” former Deschutes County Republican Chairman John Philo told Central Oregon’s The Bulletin. “But we’ve got to unify.”

“You don’t see any fighting between supporters of the campaigns,” added state Rep. Gene Whisnant. “I haven’t heard anyone say, ‘I am not going to vote for Trump.’”

Trump came away from the Oregon convention with all 18 of the delegates he’d earned in the state’s May 17 primary — but not all them were selected because of their undying love for the Donald. State Republican Party Treasurer Chris Barreto, a former Cruz supporter, ran to protect the GOP platform in Cleveland. Meanwhile, state Rep. Bill Post, another Cruz convert, was mainly hoping to attract money for local legislative races.

“I’m more concerned about Oregon,” Post said. “That’s always been my concern.”

Ultimately, nine of Oregon’s 10 at-large delegates were elected from a unity slate endorsed by both the Trump and Cruz campaigns.

The story was much the same in New Hampshire and Idaho. According to the Associated Press, “no one at the [Granite State] meeting publicly criticized Trump or suggested Republicans shouldn’t back him.” Republicans in the Gem State also “got the memo,” according to Idaho Statesman reporter Bill Dentzer, “embrac[ing] the national party message of unity against a common foe — the Democrats.”

“Everyone is focused on November and making sure we beat Hillary Clinton,” said state Rep. Brent Crane.

Only in Georgia did any Republicans revolt. Back in April, Cruz allies outmaneuvered Trump by winning a majority of the 42 delegates up for grabs at the district conventions, and they tried to pull off a similar feat Saturday by challenging the state GOP’s final Trump-friendly slate with their own list of 31 potential delegates (most of whom were pro-Cruz). But when it came time for a vote, the last-minute scheme fell short — and all of Cruz’s supporters were “soundly defeated.”

“This is our nominee,” newly minted delegate Michael McNeely said of Trump. “We’re going to come together and face off with the Democrats in November.”

The question now is whether this pattern will continue through Cleveland — or whether Trump will do something to upset the GOP’s fragile new unity before then. The big convention is 41 days away. We wouldn’t put it past him.

_____

4. Why did Paul Ryan endorse Trump?

Last week, House Speaker and GOP Convention Chairman Paul Ryan finally signaled that he would be supporting Trump in the fall. But why, if the two men disagree on so many issues, did Ryan give in? Yahoo News Senior Political Correspondent Jon Ward has a theory — to protect the reform agenda he plans to start rolling out this week and avoid any blame if and when Trump loses in November:

So it wasn’t just about awkwardness in Cleveland! Sounds about right to us. But what do you think? Drop us a line on Twitter (@andrewromano) and we’ll retweet the smartest responses.

_____

5. Best of the Rest

_____

History Lesson

In June 1848, when they gathered for their convention at the Chinese Museum Building in Philadelphia, the Whigs had a choice. They could nominate a party stalwart like Henry Clay or Daniel Webster. They could select antislavery Gen. Winfield Scott. Or they could go with an inexperienced, loutish, wealthy outsider who had never held office or voted in a presidential election, and who professed little loyalty to Whig principles, but who nonetheless had become a nationwide celebrity after winning the Mexican-American War: General Zachary Taylor.

It wasn’t an easy decision. The Whig Party was divided between antislavery Northerners and Southern slaveholders, and no candidate managed to win a majority on the first three ballots. Finally, on the fourth, Taylor — the rough-hewn outsider — captured the nomination.

His victory was a triumph of popularity over party loyalty and principles — and, as historian Gil Troy recounts, it basically killed the Whigs.

“Some party luminaries thought [Taylor] would help them win the general election, but many of the faithful were furious and mystified: How could their party compromise its ideals to such a degree?” Troy writes. “The Whig Party never recovered from his victory. In fact, just a few years after Taylor was elected under the Whig banner, the party dissolved — undermined by the divisions that caused Taylor’s nomination in the first place, and also by the loss of faith that followed it.”
Something for Republicans to consider at their own convention this summer in Cleveland.

_____

Countdown

For the latest data, make sure to check the Yahoo News delegate scorecard and primary calendar.