Clinton-Kasich 2016? (maybe...?)

I've always been a skeptic of the whole idea of a bipartisan "unity" ticket because the costs associated for all involved seem to outweigh any benefits that could theoretically be attained. Without having given it tons of thought here seem to be the major drawbacks:

First, for the Presidential candidate there is a great chance of alienating the base of her/his party, mainly because of the divide between the parties on social issues (like abortion and gay rights, where there really is just no middle ground). A pro-life, anti-gay marriage VP is a non-starter in the Dem race  (and vice versa). Seems likely that voter turnout of the base of the party would be suppressed.
 
Second, for the VP candidate it will forever alienate her/him from her/his own party. There will be no going back. This means the VP candidate either needs to be at the end of their (embracing the gender-neutral "their" at this point, WPost says its ok!) political career, or ready to switch party affiliation.

So in sum, it will suppress turnout of most enthusiastic voters, and will be political suicide for the VP. These both seem pretty insurmountable reasons against. However, as the title to this post suggests, if it is EVER going to happen, this is the year, and Clinton-Kasich would be the ticket. Why Kasich? Kasich is the only GOP candidate palatable to Dems at all, his whole spiel recently has been the need to move past political divisiveness (i.e. we are americans not dems or repubs), and interestingly enough he has a track record of working  w/ another Clinton in the 90s.

To be clear, I don't think it IS going to happen or that it SHOULD happen, but here is my thinking as to why it is a possibility that is not entirely crazy. You will note that unsurprisingly all these reasons begin and end with Donald Trump's upending of political reality as we know it:

• Let's start w/ the fear that Kasich as VP  will suppress Dem voter turnout (particularly with Sanders supporters). This is probably insurmountable, given Kasich's position on abortion, gay rights, civil rights, and unions. However, Trump again is a wild card. Would Democrats really stay home or vote Green, and let Trump take the White House because of Kasich on the ticket? Trump is such a frightening prospect for our country that he makes almost impossible to say the two candidates are basically the same (the Bush vs. Gore syndrome).

• Depending on how the rest of the primary race goes down, the cost to Kasich could be negligible w/ the Republican establishment and his future in the party would not be diminished. This of course would require Trump completely blowing up the rest of the campaign to the point that it becomes politically unfeasible for most GOP officials to endorse him.  Kasich can also argue that he's not running against the GOP, he's running against TRUMP. It fits into his narrative of being above the fray, being a uniter, being positive, etc., etc.,

•  David Axelrod's theory of American Presidential politics is that voters are always looking for the opposite characteristics of the incumbent president -- WJ Clinton's down-home empathy vs. HW Bush's WASPY distance, W Bush's religious good guy shtick, vs. WJ Clinton's rascal-ishness, Obama's urbane intellectualism vs. W. Bush's more 'simple' demeanor. Obama has (unfairly IMHO, but that's beside the point) been painted as a divisive president who is unable to work w/ Republicans. What could be more opposite than a unity ticket? It also helps H. Clinton who is also viewed as divisive. The narrative would be that desperate times call for desperate measures, that they are both putting country ahead of party, and that Trump is a unique threat to the country as we know it. Plus is there any doubt this ticket would win Ohio (which given the electoral map, that might be enough said).

I'm probably reaching here, and in all reality think this will never happen. But who the hell knows. 9 months ago i would have bet my future first born child that Trump would be the Herman Cain of this election cycle.