Hilary and Elizabeth in 2016 would be historical

[edhopper]

or should i say 'herstorical"

[img][/img] [img][/img]

[Just Saying]

1. I love that idea!

Of course the angry white men of the Repug party would be so pissed that we put two "chicks" on the ticket and they're not even hot!

Be even better if we nominated a woman of color.

[MannyGoldstein]

2. The debates will be entertaining

that's for sure!

[Deep13]

6. The ones with the Rs or the ones between the two of them? nt

[Hydra]

7. 3 way fight FTW!

[MannyGoldstein]

20. Both.

Warren will clean the Republican's clock.

[woo me with science]

13. I see what you did there.

[Tx4obama]

3. It's not going to happen. n/t

[msongs]

4. don't think clinton would like being vice president nt

[Deep13]

5. I prefer EW as a senator than to waste her on the VP slot.

Besides, business-friendly HRC will never pick her.

[Cal33]

9. I agree with you and msongs of msg. 4. Hillary Clinton has been in politics all of her adult

life. She probably has a lot of political baggage and favors to repay, in addition to
being business friendly. These will certainly reduce her effectiveness in doing her
job as president.

Elizabeth Warren entered politics late in life. She carries little or no political
baggage and has little or no political favors to return. She has already shown
her abilities and courage in protecting the average Americans from being taken
advantage of by Big Business, as well as her intelligence, honesty, integrity and
willingness to work hard for the well-being of ALL Americans.

I think Warren would easily make a better president.

[Deep13]

11. The one thing I do like about HRC is that she has so much experience...

She would be a centrist, except on social issues, but since she knows how Washington works, she would be far more successful in advancing her agenda than Obama, who really seems like an amateur at times.

I definitely see things more like EW than HRC, but I wonderr if the DC machine would stymie her term in office.

[karynnj]

15. Obama - amateur or not - got healthcare passed - Hillary and Bill did not come close nt

It is worth remembering that far more of their Senate peers lined up behind Obama. These were people that knew both of them and had worked with them.

[Whisp]

25. Xactly. What exactly did Hillary's 'experience' do for America?

It did a whole lot for the Clinton's pocketses tho. Keystone will be the Whale for them.

Her list of real accomplishments as Senator and as SoS is very thin.
Her supporters blush and run off when you ask that tender question.

[Beacool]

26. 2010 was not 1993.

As for the lining up of Senators. They only did so after Obama started going up in the polled after IA. Who said that most politicians are not self serving?

[karynnj]

39. not true - there were many who made the move before Iowa -

even if it was announced later. (An example is Kerry who told Obama he was with him in 2007 - and said he would make the endorsement when ever Obama and his team wanted.)

You could argue that 1993 was a more liberal Congress overall - as there were many Republicans who were quite willing to qork on it. The problem was that HRC and Ira Magaziner designed it without Congress - even without Ted Kennedy. No surprise when the ENTIRE Finance committee - including people like Bradley - rejected it.

[Cal33]

42. Maybe Obama learned from Hillary's mistakes in 1993. Even then, the healthcare bill that

passed is a severely watered-down version of the one he wanted. But, this is the first step.
I hope more steps will follow. We have a lot of catching up to do. Among all the advanced
nations of the world, we are the only one that does not have healthcare for all our citizens.

[karynnj]

47. Fair enough, but it still makes my point

It means that not just Hillary would have learned from her mistakes. In addition, we do not know if a President Hillary Clinton would have succeeded to get even this. The root of the Clinton failure in 1993 might have been that Hillary preferred control of a small group to create the policy - rather than working with the various Congressional committees letting them create what could pass. He then used his position to make the case for it. Looking at Hillary's 2008 campaign, I don't know if she has changed from the mindset of 1993. )

It is far worse than what every other country has, but the reasons are buried in the history. I would bet that oddly enough the root of why we are different was that labor unions fought for medical insurance as a benefit of working and won. This led to a majority of people (declining in recent times) having insurance mostly (or completely) paid by their employer. This was a remarkable and good thing done for people, but it also meant that it for decades prevented most people seeing government insurance as benefiting them. It also has had other negative effects such as people staying in jobs they would prefer leaving because they fear losing the insurance.

It is hard to see an easy transition from where the US was to an efficient single payer system.

[Deep13]

44. No he didn't, he got--and really, Max Bachus got--insurance reform.

The end result of all that dealing is a law that looks an awful lot like what Bob Dole was offering as an alternative to "Hillary care."

[karynnj]

48. The country moved to the right between 1993 and 2009

Given the margins in both the House and Senate, it is pretty clear that what passed was as good as what could be passed. Hillary's plan, on the other hand, was opposed by EVERY member of the Senate Finance committee - including people like Bill Bradley.

Ted Kennedy agreed with the bill as it was configured - although he died before there were votes on it. (Vicki Kennedy was there when it passed watching the vote.

[Cal33]

43. "I definitely see things more like EW than HRC, but I wonderr if the DC machine would stymie her

term in office."

Oh, sure. They definitely will try. But EW is a fighter with courage. She goes
after what she thinks will benefit our country like a bull-dog. She doesn't give
up. Nor does she raise her voice, but her words can sting -- when necessary.

The past 5 years in the DC arena have probably been a great educational
experience for her. I believe she is a fast learner. She is the type to get things
done.

The Republicans are afraid of her.

[Deep13]

45. You may be right about that. nt

[loyalsister]

18. Warren is a specialist in matters of economics

She is very focused and her strengths would be squandered if she had to divest her attention to learn about the things she has not learned about.

[Agnosticsherbet]

8. Won't happen for tactical and stratigic reasons in state by state voting

Have no idea who Hillary will offer to be "not worth a warm bucket of spit." It will be a decision that will make sense in state by state voting.
I think both would make a good President. I think having Warren in the Senate puts her in a place where she can do more good.

[GeorgeGist]

10. HiLLary

[GeorgeGist]

12. Hillary's net worth $21.5 Million.

[KoKo]

14. Oh...STOP IT!

What would you demand of them? What is the Democratic Party Platform?

You think folks here are stupid enough to jump on a bandwagon this EARLY given what's been going on?

[cali]

16. it would be obscene.

[1-Old-Man]

17. Take Hillary off that ticket and I'd vote for it in a heartbeat

[fadedrose]

19. great idea

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

41. Me too. Hillary is no progressive.

[alp227]

21. NO! I pledge to NEVER, EVER, EVER, EVER, EVER vote in monarchy thus will NOT vote Clinton in 2016.

Hillary Clinton voted for the Afghanistan and Iraq Wars as well as the PATRIOT Act.

Hillary was once on the board of directors on Wal Mart.

Warren, on the other hand, really cares about the people as she has introduced bills for lower student loan rates & wants to re-introduce Glass Steagall. Honestly what power as vice president would she have?

I thought America was better than a monarchy. Let's not have an elected monarchy. ANYONE BUT HILLARY 2016 for me.

I am SICK of this Hillary worship going on at DU. At least the Obama worship has worn off. My ideal ticket: Ron Wyden & Elizabeth Warren since Wyden has been standing up to the government surveillance complex.

[Beacool]

29. Hillary worship on DU?????

You must be joking!!! What I mostly read is negative comments like yours.

[Whisp]

22. No

What goodness Warren has to offer will be obliterated by Clinton.

No fucking way these two people are of the same heart and mind.

[Honeycombe8]

23. Won't happen. You must choose. nt

[winter is coming]

24. ...

[Nye Bevan]

27. Absolutely will not happen. No way will there be two women on the ticket.

You need a balanced ticket. Hillary's running mate will be a man.

[polichick]

28. That would be popcorn-worthy...

I mean if it was HRC VS EW

[Beacool]

30. Warren will not run.

Even if Hillary chooses not to give it another shot.

[Motown_Johnny]

31. I'v been saying Warren/ Napolitano for quite a while now

I agree that two women on the ticket makes more sense than having a man as VP candidate.


I think the Sec. of Homeland Security checks the box for security nicely. Plus she has executive experience.

Fmr. Sec. Clinton has as many negatives as positives and, unfortunatly, having her pushed on the public for years (which is what is in progress now) is going to be a huge negative also. By the time the primary fight comes around everyone is going to be sick and tired of her.

The best thing that could possibly be done for her chances to become President is for people to just STFU about it and let her actually make news when/if she announces. The way things are going the reaction to her announcement will be a uniform "DUH!".

[Chiennoir54]

32. Warren yes. Clinton no.

Hillary is a political hack just like her husband. She's a woman so her presidency would be historic (or herstoric if you insist) but it would in no way be a progressive thing. Case in poit: Barack Obama.

[snappyturtle]

33. Nope. Hilliary is too much a corporatist and EW better to be left where she is. imho nt

[hootinholler]

34. That is the day that Senator Warren would become an extreme disappointment to me.

Oh, gosh darn it I have the willies just thinking about it.

[Little Star]

35. I'd vote for that ticket in a NY minute!

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

36. The Warren part sounds good. The 3rd Way, DLC, chickenhawk, part doesn't.

[forestpath]

38. +1000

[Egalitarian Thug]

37. Switch offices and I'm on board with enthusiasm. n/t

[madokie]

40. with VP Warren following up with 8 years of her being at the helm

I really like this woman. Elizabeth Warren

You know what she likes all of us too.

[MineralMan]

46. It would. Once we get past 2014, this might come up

as a possibility. Until then...

GOTV 2014!

[Marrah_G]

49. Warren yes, Clinton no

I won't ever put my support behind a centrist again, even if I think they are nice.

And even then, I have to say I am jaded now. I would love to see Warren in the WH but I am not confident that the office wouldn't change her once she is in there (anyone really).

[elaristotle]

50. About a woman President.. and why men should support the idea

This made me think of this topic:
"Guys get caught up in the myths of feminism and the idea that it’s about taking something away from men – as though privilege is a zero-sum game. Feminism isn’t about hating men or putting men into a submissive role or taking over the worl...d. It is – as the famous quote goes – about “the radical idea that women are people too” and treating them accordingly… and that helps men as well.

There’s a phrase in feminism: “The Patriarchy hurts everyone.” Every time a man laments that women won’t make the first move, he is lamenting the gender roles that the patriarchal system enforces. Every time he wonders why women aren’t as interested in sex as men are, he’s staring down at behavior enforced by the entrenched structure. Every time a guy is given shit for acting queer, called a fag or is told he’s being a little bitch, he’s being punished for acting outside of the strict definition of “MAN”."

http://goodmenproject.com/featured-content/hesaid-the-unbelievable-secret-to-getting-more-sex/

[hrmjustin]

51. I think a Clinton/Brown of OH ticket is more likely.

[Deep13]

52. No, we need someone no one will miss as VP.

The best way to shut up E.W.is to take her out of the Senate and make her VP.

[RufusTFirefly]

53. Great! Hyde and Jekyll. Perfect! n/t

[longship]

54. Elizabeth wants to be a senator.

No offense, but this is fantasy football.

[JDPriestly]

55. Hillary is subservient to the bankers. Elizabeth is not. I don't think Hillary's banker friends

would want Hillary to pick Elizabeth. Besides, again they are both from the East Coast. A ticket with two candidates from the same side of the country is probably not going to do well no matter who the candidates are. The Bush/Cheney ticket is an exception to the rule that the candidates for the presidency and vice presidency should be from different parts of the country.