Daniels as a running mate needs to be thoroughly vetted first. His statement that moral and social issues need to be set aside and instead economic issues need to be focused on, is the statement of a person who has serious personal and moral issues occuring in his own life. I have a relative who worked for Daniels in an official capacity, and while he agreed with his political views, he had a problem with how he lived his personal life and his treatment of those around him. This of course is always the perenniel debate, should what a politican does in his/her private life have any bearing on his/her public life. But if a person cannot be trusted with the little things in life, should he/she be trusted with the greater things in life? As with the case of Clinton, the line was that his cheating on Hillary was his personal business, but the truth of the matter is that if he would cheat on his wife, that shows him to be a dishonest and sadistic personality, is that really the type of personality that should be leading a nation? Obviously no. Anyone who wants to set aside social concerns does so because of a guilty conscience. It is up to party leaders to find out what he is hiding.
