2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumSorry, liberals. Elizabeth Warren isn’t going to be Hillary Clinton’s running mate.
File under no shit.
<snip>
My dear liberal friends, I can feel your excitement already. But while Warren will be a great anti-Trump surrogate for Clinton maybe the best Clinton will have shes not going to be on the ticket. Sorry to deliver the bad news.
There are a few reasons for this. The first is that Clinton and Warren arent close or even particularly friendly, and personal rapport is a key part of an effective working relationship between the president and vice president, as Clinton surely understands. Warren would come to the office with her own agenda on economic affairs an agenda more aggressively liberal than Clintons, particularly when it comes to how the government should deal with Wall Street. Warren would also bring her own constituency, which could make her an unwanted headache for Clinton, who like all presidents would want a vice president who has no goal other than advancing the presidents goals.
Second, picking Warren would make for a historic all-female ticket, and that could be a risk. To be clear, its ludicrous that there should be something troubling to anyone about having two women running together. After all, weve had over a hundred all-male tickets in our history, and only two with one man and one woman. But there could well be some number of voters how many is difficult to tell who would vote for Clinton with a male running mate, but would find Clinton with a female running mate just too much to handle. Its sexist, but Clinton is going to need the votes of people who have some sexism somewhere in their hearts, just like Barack Obama needed the votes of people with some racism somewhere in their hearts.
And Hillary Clinton is nothing if not a risk-averse politician. Shes been blessed with Donald Trump as an opponent, and she isnt going to take any big chances between now and November that might complicate things.
Third, and probably most important, right now the governor of Massachusetts is a Republican, Charlie Baker. That means that if Warren stepped down to become vice president, Baker would appoint a temporary successor for her Senate seat. In other years this might have been a relatively minor consideration, but in 2016 its absolutely central to the fate of Clintons presidency.
<snip>
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2016/05/13/sorry-liberals-elizabeth-warren-isnt-going-to-be-hillary-clintons-running-mate/
joshcryer
(62,280 posts)Because Wall Street benefits when the banks are broken up. From Elizabeth Warren's own mouth.
cali
(114,904 posts)joshcryer
(62,280 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)jack_krass
(1,009 posts)global1
(25,290 posts)Hillary wouldn't share her presidency with another woman - particulary one that is even more popular and liked than Hillary herself.
InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,123 posts)I'd be even more shocked - and disappointed! - if Elizabeth accepted.
Not that it matters, since Bernie is going to take this thing.
Bernie & Elizabeth 2016!!!
MFM008
(19,826 posts)but I seem to remember their presidential ticket.
NEVER SAY NEVER.
cali
(114,904 posts)joshcryer
(62,280 posts)Everything else she says is uncontroversial, boring, and tepid to me. But when she talks about not being able to do anything without congress my eyebrow raises. Obama promised the world but never said "hey, I need the downticket." Clinton does the opposite, she'll say in an interview, "well I can't do much without congress."
Exilednight
(9,359 posts)TCJ70
(4,387 posts)...she bludgeoned Sanders over the head constantly saying his agenda will never come about without congress (which is true) but that made it seem like hers would and no one challenged her on it. Meanwhile, in every singe appearance and speech he gave he mentioned needing to change congress to get anything passed. A complicit media let her get away with it.
Sanders is the only candidate this primary season who was asked "How?"
thesquanderer
(11,998 posts)Bernie has made a much bigger point of "I can't do it alone" from the start, though.... and based on exhibited voter enthusiasm and an obvious desire to keep his base motivated, may have more luck turning his people out in a midterm, if he's in office.
Cal33
(7,018 posts)InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,123 posts)azurnoir
(45,850 posts)B Calm
(28,762 posts)Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)that would be horrendous!
Punkingal
(9,522 posts)The hope of that is ludicrous for any number of reasons.
reformist2
(9,841 posts)Lizzie needs to keep Hillary at arm's length. And I hope she has very, very long arms.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)Dawgs
(14,755 posts)Why would anyone want to be on a losing ticket?
LuvLoogie
(7,062 posts)Someone on Joe Biden's level. Jerry Brown would be my choice, if they could overcome their past differences--and if Jerry were 20 years younger. I could see a lot of creative tension between them.
Not a Castro, though. Neither has been elected to state-wide office, which I think is an important prerequisite.
cali
(114,904 posts)LuvLoogie
(7,062 posts)leveymg
(36,418 posts)I can't think of anyone else who might be able to do that.
kstewart33
(6,551 posts)No one knows if Hillary will make the offer or if Warren will accept. Let's see what happens.
timmymoff
(1,947 posts)voting for her takes away that title. She is not a liberal and if you vote for her you vote for her policies which are not liberal. At least be honest .
cali
(114,904 posts)timmymoff
(1,947 posts)her supporters that call themselves as liberals.
cali
(114,904 posts)timmymoff
(1,947 posts)does not make Hillary liberal. I agree he's crazy but his craziness does not elevate her to liberal status.
cali
(114,904 posts)timmymoff
(1,947 posts)More often than not we are in agreement.
cali
(114,904 posts)timmymoff
(1,947 posts)I do not understand what you are riled about regarding me.
redstateblues
(10,565 posts)Sorry -you and your Purity Partiers and Trump enablers don't get to decide who is liberal.
timmymoff
(1,947 posts)and when you factor in fracking, free trade, etc, I'd say we are more correct than you.. sorry friend. regime change has always been a liberal policy.
cali
(114,904 posts)Ferd Berfel
(3,687 posts)Liberal/Progressive and neoCon/Conservative are mutually exclusive ideologies.
You can't be both.
corkhead
(6,119 posts)I couldn't get past the condescension of the first 4 words. Since I doubt he is a member, I can tell him to kiss my ass.
lunamagica
(9,967 posts)Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)....(until the voters of MA elect a Democrat) would be worth it to have Elizabeth Warren in the White House.
I want Warren as VP.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Don't want her in the VP slot for Sanders of Clinton.