https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/07/22/will-tim-kaine-deliver-virginia-and-catholics-dont-count-on-it/

Another article from the Washington Times that discusses the negligible difference selecting a VP candidate has made in previous elections.

Goose wrote:

I would tend to agree. I don't think that anybody on the fence about a candidate, says "oh look who he picked for his vice president. I will vote for him now.".

I think the only thing a vice presidential candidate can do is potential harm to the candidate. I remember in 2008 I was quite interested in voting for John McCain until he picked his vice presidential candidate, and I switched to Obama.

Kaine might, and I mean might, help in Virginia and perhaps North Carolina since he is well-known and well liked in that region. But even that's not a given. I don't think that any Virginian who was going to vote for Trump will change his vote because of Kaine. But his popularity there among Democrats may help increase turn out a little.

As far as the Washington Post reference to the Catholic vote, Clinton already has a fairly sizable edge among Catholics. So I don't think Kaine was selected in an effort to secure that vote. Catholics don't generally turnout for hardhearted xenophobes .

I like the ticket. But I was voting for Clinton anyway.

I know in my case, the VP selections this year have not changed my mind.  Although I think Pence is a fine choice, I am not going to vote for Trump because of that.  Same thing goes for Kaine, while he seems like a solid choice for Clinton, I am still not going to vote for either.  So there selections made no difference for me.  

Now if the Dem ticket was switched and Kaine was the Presidential nominee, in this year I would take a look at them and consider voting for him.  Same thing if it was switched on the Republican side, if it was a Pence/Trump ticket, I would probably vote for Pence.