Shouldn't knowing who thier running mate be known now and not after?

Vice Presidents have historically done very little, "a post the Constitution left all but devoid of formal authority", that "isn't worth a warm bucket of piss".

Shouldn't the Prime Minister of the UK or Canada be chosen before a Parliamentary election.

I'm sorry but if for example Harper or Brown were chosen I would rather know now instead of wasting my time.

By the way you are Canadian, it won't be waisting your time.

Honesty is a virtue, try it some time.

Since running mates are sometimes chosen from candidates who were running for the presidential nomination and lost, it would be impractical to name a running mate before the presidential candidate is chosen. On the other hand, I would certainly like to know who the candidate would choose for chief of staff, Secretary of state etc. Since these people will be his closest advisors..

We have got to wait and see who wins the democratic and republican nominations first. They'll then chose the VP who will add most value to the ticket. That way is better.

I agree with SSP...But my candidate is Ron Paul...so he can tell me now because I know it won't be one of his running mates!....I would not vote for any of those idiots!

No.