Picking a woman for woman's sake didn't work out in 2008. It won't be tried again.

If it comes down to Bush vs. Clinton, as I suspect it will, then there's going to be roughly equal-sized groups:

1) People who loved Bill and/or Hilary Clinton. They're voting Clinton, no matter what.

2) People who love Jeb, George W, and/or George HW Bush. They're voting Bush, no matter what.

3) People who specifically hate Hillary Clinton. They're voting against Clinton, no matter what.

4) People who specifically hate the Bush family. They're voting against Jeb, no matter what.

These people all balance each other out. So who's left? I don't think there's a significant group of people saying "Gee, Bush versus Clinton, they're both equally great choices!" They're each polarizing in their own way. So you're either passionately for/against a side, or you're saying "Are you fucking kidding me?"

Let's say you're a "fucking kidding me" kinda guy. Who are you going to vote for? Third party and throw your vote away? Stay home and pout? Maybe. But both parties know you're the only group that's still in play. So they're both coming for you.

Bush is going to have the religious people (they're not touching Clinton) and the business people. What's his weakness? Young college folk who think his brother is the devil. How does he get their vote? Rand fucking Paul, that's how.

But what's Hilary Clinton's weakness? People who specifically don't like Hilary Clinton. I have no idea who the VP is that combats the "I just don't like her" mentality some folks have against Hilary. I don't think there is one. Her only move is to counter Bush's Rand Paul move by getting Elizabeth Warren as her VP, to duke it out over young college votes.

As for Julian Castro, I just don't see it. I actually have a friend who worked for him when he was Mayor, and speaks highly of Castro...but he is nowhere near ready. He needs at least four years as Governor or Senator. He has a future, but it's not 2016.