I love the idea of Sanders or Warren as President

[marym625]

And a Warren/Sanders or Sanders/Warren ticket would be a dream come true.

However, we need at least one of these two in the Senate. The loss of both would be like when we lost Byrd and Kennedy. 2 years apart but a loss that really hurt America

Just curious, which would you want on the 2016 Presidential ticket?

24 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Unlimited
	Sanders
	16 (67%)
	Warren
	3 (13%)
	Both
	4 (17%)
	Neither
	1 (4%)
	0 (0%)
	0 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[Little Star]

1. k&r

[marym625]

3. Thanks!

I know people don't usually rec polls. But how else will they be seen? So very much appreciated!

[99Forever]

2. Having been fooled before...

... my full support goes to the proven liberal, Sen Sanders.

[marym625]

4. ikr!

Been years since a bunch of us knew we had been fooled. I'm still not over it

[99Forever]

8. Sen Warren as a second choice...

... is far better than the alternative. But Bernie is far and away, the very best option for America.

[marym625]

9. I agree completely

And I know this is shallow but it's necessary. He needs a make over. He needs someone to dress him and fix his hair, glasses and he needs to be in better physical shape looks wise.

I hate that looks matter but you know as well as I do, they do. It sucks. But it's reality.

As far as his politics, I wouldn't touch a thing. Perfection.

[99Forever]

10. A valid point.

Superficial, but then we live in a very superficial nation.

[marym625]

11. ain't that the truth! n/t

[mother earth]

29. Amen. nt

[RiverLover]

15. Neither am I. I don't think I'll ever get over it. nt

[woo me with science]

17. Agree 100 percent.

I trust him.

Bernie has earned trust, over decades. IMO she is uncomfortably silent on the MIC and the police state. I love what she has to say about the banks, but we don't just need to be financially more comfortable in a police state; we need the restoration of our democracy and Constitution. Perhaps she is the real deal, but it would be a leap of faith, and we tried that in 2008. We are dealing with a machine that knows exactly what we want to hear.

That Obama's team turns easily to Elizabeth I find troubling, as I do her recent vote for MIC funding (on which Sanders voted "Nay&quot .

Not to mention that Bernie is better than almost any politician I've ever seen at resisting efforts by the MSM to divert and distract and distort and reframe the narrative.

If Bernie were to signal trust in Elizabeth by choosing her as a runningmate, I would ecstatically vote for a Sanders/Warren ticket.

For now, my strong support is behind Bernie.

[99Forever]

18. Indeed Woo.

I also find it very troubling that Obama staffers announced that. Even if Warren is for real, I worry that having that crew as her handlers would pollute and destroy her populist ideals.

After the game that was run on us in 2008, I will forever be a skeptic and have to be convinced beyond ANY doubt whoever gets my support is truly on OUR side, completely and without reservation. Weasel words will not cut it.

[marym625]

64. yep. though we sure had hints

Before the election. But nothing that indicated how far he would go from the candidate he played

[woo me with science]

88. Bernie wants to take on the core of the oligarchy:

https://www.goodreads.com/author/show/102824.Bernie_Sanders/blog

To keep the billionaire class from turning our democracy into an oligarchy, we must also focus on campaign finance reform and public funding of elections. Billionaires like the Koch brothers and others should not be able to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on campaigns while candidates who are not rich or dependent upon the rich are unable to have their voices heard. That's why we need public funding of elections. That's why we need a constitutional amendment to overturn the disastrous 2010 Supreme Court ruling in Citizens United that let billionaires and corporations spend unlimited sums to tilt elections in their favor.

[Cali_Democrat]

20. What do you think of Bernie's vote in favor of the ACA? nt

[marym625]

63. agree

But that's no surprise.

I am not happy about how long it took Warren to support the bill to extend the time limit to ratify the ERA. Now, I am sure it won't ever make it to the floor. She's influential and had she jumped on right away, we might actually have an equal rights amendment.

But she fights the banks like Greg Palast does, only she has some power.

[bananas]

76. Yes, Bernie's the real deal. nt

[polichick]

84. Yes - they WILL try to con us again, and with a populist message...

Sanders is "the proven liberal."

[wyldwolf]

5. I LOVE the idea of Warren as President

And would support her in a primary that did not include Clinton.

[marym625]

6. You would support Clinton over Warren?

May I ask why?

I am going to add her to the poll

[marym625]

7. Sorry changed my mind

Want to keep it about Warner and Sanders

[Algernon Moncrieff]

19. +1

I'm Ready for Hillary

If Warren is the nominee, I'll vote for her.

If Sanders is the nominee, I'll be surprised, given that he is not a registered Democrat.

[wyldwolf]

22. I wouldn't support Sanders over other often named contenders.

Biden and Cuomo lead him in a Clinton-less primary.

[LuvNewcastle]

12. I agree more with Sanders, but I chose Warren because of

Sanders's age and appearance. I would vote for Sanders without question, but I think Warren would have more appeal to a wider range of voters.

[marym625]

13. I replied to

99forever up the thread about Sanders and appearance. Only way he would win. Sadly.

[RiverLover]

14. I LOVE Bernie, but a self-avowed "socialist" will never win, imo.

I would have a harder time choosing between Sherrod Brown, Al Franken, and Elizabeth Warren.

[marym625]

16. Maybe, if the democratic party

Did as he asked, he could run as a Democrat.

Good people you named. Anyone of them would get my support after the primaries

[aikoaiko]

21. I'm not sure it will matter unless we see senators voting their way.

I'm still waiting to see followship of either.

[RiverLover]

24. 139 house democrats voted 'NO', and it only passed the house by 13 votes.

This was Liz's address to the house prior to the vote~

[marym625]

27. Also a good point. n/t

[marym625]

25. Good point

I hope we do. But, it's all about, and always about, the money. So, we'll have to see.

[rock]

23. I voted for Sanders

I believe the game is so rigged that he could not win but I personally like the choice.

[marym625]

26. yep. that right there is the reality of it. n/t

[ladjf]

28. I think a great ticket would be Sanders Pres. and Warren VP.

I selected that order because of their age difference. Sanders in for at least one term followed by two terms of Warren. That would be twelve to possibly sixteen years of Governance by two extraordinary people of high intellect, courage and communication skills. It would most likely develop into a "golden period" of political progress.

[marym625]

35. That would be something great! n/t

[Neon Gods]

30. Thanks for this poll

The comments are great too.

I can't vote for Hillary. I can't stand the thought of 4 more years of mushy, center-right politics. So if I must I will write in Warren's name in 2016 if someone more liberal (Sanders, Franken, Brown, etc.) isn't nominated.

[marym625]

36. I am with you there

And center right is generous.

Thank you! And you're welcome

[mother earth]

31. I love Sanders, I love Warren, but we are talking like the voting and nomination is not rigged, as

well. We've got a MSM shaping the race, they pulled Dean down because of what later became the Dean scream. Do you remember the grassroots wave that pushed him to the top? And we were set up to believe his popularity dwindled after being enthusiastic, oh yeah, it just turned off the voters? Let's not forget how exit polls don't matter. or audit trails, or certifying machines.

I'll tell you what, I hope Sen. Sanders runs & I hope he does it on the independent ticket. We will then see a barrage of support from the entire country, regardless of party, the party won't fucking matter, and it shouldn't. There is a huge dissatisfaction, an overwhelming disgust & this country is ripe fcor massive change in the right direction. If we can stop being so afraid of upsetting or crossing party lines.

Perhaps when we are brave enough to realize our party abandoned our principles, we won't be so afraid of Ralph Nader, or any independent. Apparently Ralph was right all along, and what we have now is two parties that are really the one party system of the oligarchy.

Run, Bernie, Run!

PS What is disturbing as well, is some calling for a makeover, I love Bernie, and I'd love him if he looked like a warthog. The man has principles and he speaks truth to power. Have we forgotten how that shines above all else?

[marym625]

37. I agree with everything you said

And yes, we're pretending we have any control.

I realized that the party abandoned us in the 90s. Probably too late then too.

As far as the makeover, I agree about Sanders and his principles. But, if we are going to play in reality at all, his looks will play into it. Sucks but it's reality.

[mother earth]

44. It's MSM reality, every woman is a size 0, it is reality we've accepted as reality, theirs,not ours.

All I'm trying to drive home is we know what we want, we are just wrong in how we go about getting it.

Even back when Edwards had mass appeal (yeah he was a mess behind the scenes), and his message was the right one, we weren't hearing that from MSM. They are a massive tool to dupe the public into accepting the corporate candidates from both parties, framing the race as it proceeds (or proceeds as they want it to).

If we aren't demanding safeguarding the voting booth, the machine, it damn well doesn't matter if we get our perfect candidate.
And, if we are afraid to disenfranchise other dems who are going off the deep end with HRC (my view, not theirs), we really need to wake up. We have to rock this boat, we have to stop being afraid & sink all other boats. The masses are waiting for the people's candidate.

Reality is this, we are going to get what they tell us we get, until we ensure the race and count is on the level, and auditable.

Hey, Kerry got his makeover, he and Gore were robbed, but Kerry accepted it without a fight. Gore fights it and SCOTUS calls GW the winner. That's what we are up against, a totally rigged, anything but democratic system as it stands. People have stopped participating for good reason. At least those who have given up realize how bad it all is.

[marym625]

49. True stuff

All of it. I really believe it is too late. I think we are in for a fall we never thought possible before anything improves. But, for now, I will fight the powers that be and the machine. And if Hillary is the nominee, we know that there is no hope, not even a glimmer, for the Democratic party. Sadly

[MiniMe]

60. I love Bernie, and wish he could win

But running as an independent will guarantee a repuke for Pres in 2016. Because of the possibility of splitting the dem vote, I only want him to run if he runs as a dem. Even if he doesn't win, he will be valuable in the debates.

[marym625]

73. Just saw this

Thought you might like it. Back in the day. .. http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025957341

[hrmjustin]

32. I support Hillary but I am a bit suprised more chose Sanders over Warren. n/t

[marym625]

39. I asked someone else here

And didn't get an answer. You would choose Hillary over either Sanders or Warren? May I ask why?

[hrmjustin]

43. I think she is more qualified for the job. I think she has the best chance to win a third Democratic

term.

I think she is a survivor and knows what the job is and can do it right away.

[marym625]

45. Thanks for responding

I completely disagree, but I appreciate the response and respect your thoughts on it. I agree she could win and has the best chance.

[hrmjustin]

47. And if Sanders or Warren were the nominee I would be happy to support them.

[marym625]

50. Cool! Thanks! n/t

[mother earth]

46. I love her, it's because she's said no more than once. nt

[hrmjustin]

48. I am sorry I don't get your response.

[mother earth]

51. Warren has told the media on more than one occasion recently, that she is not running.

MoveOn's been trying to recruit a progressive candidate & she's at the top of their list. She is aware of this, but despite this has said she will not run.

[hrmjustin]

52. Oh ok. i doubt she will run but I think Sanders will.

[bigwillq]

71. It's a poll on a message board.

I'm not surprised by any results on message boards.

edited

[fadedrose]

33. Biden - P, Warren - VP

Biden has foreign experience, and a lot of it, and Warren has none.

Although Warren is valuable in the Senate, her positive input to Biden would be immeasurable....and she will speak up no matter where she is.

Bernie rules the Senate or could be cabinet officer. I don't think he could carry if he's not a Democrat, even one formerly socialist. It scares the hell out of the conservatives.

[marym625]

40. I do like that ticket. Thanks. n/t

[tiredtoo]

34. Both Warren and Sanders

Would or should i say will? have a tough time winning a general election. Warren because of her lack of experience and Sanders because he is a socialist.
How would Warren respond to foreign affairs questions?
Socialists are rated very low on the like scale in America because of main stream media's portrayal.
I voted for Sanders in the poll above if it makes any difference.

[marym625]

41. Thank you. yeah

It would be a hard sell. Maybe someone to balance out the lack of experience. I don't know what to say about the socialist aspect. We would have to balance that out somehow without selling out

Yes, I appreciate your vote. Thank you

[RiverLover]

38. Wasting Elizabeth Warren in the role as a Vice President would be a tragedy for our country.

I'd rather have her in the senate.

[marym625]

42. I agree

But I also think that if a ticket had her as VP, she would be a shoe in for president after 8 years and still influence the Senate. But yeah, she's desperately needed in the Senate and better there than VP

[Lurks Often]

53. Neither are electable in a general election

The Democratic Party isn't going to let an independent from the small state of Vermont get the nomination, even if he has caucused with them and runs as a Democrat. They also won't allow Warren to get the nomination. At some point one or more of the factions in the Democratic Party will toss them under the bus, but only after they've used them to their benefit.

While no one is too old to run, age will be a factor during the primaries as will choice of VP, many here thought McCain was too old to be President. I just don't see the country electing someone, regardless of party, in their late 60's or early 70's to be President. For that matter we have only had 5 Presidents 64 and older at the time they assumed office and none over the age of 70 when they assumed office in their first term.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Presidents_of_the_United_States_by_age

While Senators Sanders and Warren are very popular here, I don't see that popularity extending to very many of the swing states needed to win an election.

I also think it is highly unlikely that our next President will come from Congress, I expect that the next President will be someone sitting in a governor's chair right now, although I am not sure which one.

[RiverLover]

54. What democratic governors are you thinking of?

I know there are alot of republican governors vying for it. I'm afraid John Kasich will get the nom for rethugs.

But I don't know of any very strong democratic governors who could win.

[Lurks Often]

56. I don't know

I don't follow every governor in every state, although Patrick (MA), Cuomo (NY), O'Malley (MD), Brown (CA) and Schweitzer (MT) have all come up, whether they are electable or even choose to run remains to be seen.

I don't think anyone predicted or expected the two nominees we got in 2008, certainly not 2 years out.

[Recursion]

77. Schweitzer and O'Malley are both making running noises

I think either of them would be a good candidate.

[marym625]

65. There's so much going on now

That we may not see the status quo as far as how people will react to an independent running. But, you're probably right

[marym625]

74. Just saw this

Thought it fit with what you said
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025957341

[Neon Gods]

55. Sander's looks?

Many have noted that Bernie might have trouble getting elected because he always looks disheveled. Anyone seen a picture of Chris Christie?? The guy is, um, quite large, and often looks sweaty, etc. and it doesn't seem to have hurt his popularity.

I think Bernie's bigger problem is that he calls himself a socialist (as do I). He should address that ASAP. It is a discussion we, as a nation, need badly. The Coast Guard, the Weather Service, The Centers for Disease Control, National Institutes of Health, NASA, wildfire/forest-fire fighters, police/fire/EMTs, roads and bridges, etc. All are socialist programs I dare the right to abolish.

[marym625]

57. I brought up looks

Because it's the reality of our society. Christie could never win a presidential election, unless the money people backed him. Even then, depending on the opposition, would have a difficult time.

I also didn't mean he should have plastic surgery. Just a step away from looking like the absent minded professor. And because he wouldn't have the money makers backing him, a comb through his hair, a new suit and glasses would make a big difference.

I hate that that's true but it just is.

As far as the socialist, it's too bad it's not a few years ago. When the media first tried to paint President Obama as a socialist, the party actually grew. The younger generation that wasn't as familiar with it, liked what it stood for.

But I agree, to be elected, that would have to be made over. Either create a new party or run under a third party that already holds the same ideals.

My hope would be, though I doubt it would happen, the democratic party return to what we were and Sanders would join again. Which is what he said. But I won't hold my breath on that one.

[True Blue Door]

58. I remain open to either or both, but neither has convinced me.

And Warren says she's not running.

I would like some Governors in the mix - Jerry Brown specifically. But others would be nice too.

[marym625]

66. I love Jerry Brown

I would be down with that

[sadoldgirl]

59. I love a Sanders/Warren ticket

The problem Bernie has is his total honesty, even though
he is a pragmatist.
EW has charisma, but less experience than Sanders, although
she is a very quick learner.

I wished I could put all of the positives into one person, but
that is impossible.

But thank you for a saturday dream. I need it.

[marym625]

67. No problem

Dreams are easy

[nruthie]

61. I like both of them.

But, I am not naive enough to think either is electable in this day and age. Folks, the nominee will be whomever the financial powers that be decide they want to be the lucky dupe that gets their nod. We voters will be allowed to think that we are actually taking part in this wonderfull farce we call a democracy. It's all a game and what we think or want means zilch. Hilary will be our nominee. By the time the next election rolls around we'll all be so beaten down we won't even care. Sorry to be so cynical, but we are are not calling the shots here.

[marym625]

68. so true. sad but true. n/t

[marym625]

75. Just saw this

Seems to go with what you said

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025957341

[Adrahil]

62. Neither one wins a general election, so no need to choose. n/t

[marym625]

69. Well you're no fun.

You're right but no fun.

[bigwillq]

70. Sanders (nt)

[Omaha Steve]

72. Kick

[Recursion]

78. Running a 73-year-old socialist from New England is a non-starter, nationally

Warren has a more plausible path by connecting with other former Reagan supporters, but I personally haven't seen much that makes me think she'd be good at the job (nor anything that precludes it; I just haven't seen her in a clutch situation yet). But even then I think running a New Englander is dangerous (that's the same argument I make against Patrick, who gets brought up occasionally, along with the unlikeliness of electing a second black Axlerod protege in a row). My own guess is that "security" is going to be a bigger rubric in 2016 than it is now, and while Warren is probably hawkish enough for the national electorate I just don't see how she's going to out-hawk Clinton (not to mention any feasible GOP nominee).

[marym625]

79. I honestly can't think of anyone

That is in the democratic party, that's in national arena now, that I think could win except Clinton. I hate even including her in the Democratic party. Not the same party of George McGovern, that's for sure.

[Recursion]

80. Have you looked at Schweitzer?

I think he's a great candidate, personally, and I think he's doing a lot of good outreach right now.

[marym625]

82. nope

I will now. Thanks.
I didn't mean there's no one I wouldn't like to see run. There's a couple. Just not that could run and win as of this moment. Hopefully, that will change but I think Clinton is already bought and paid for. Done deal

[stone space]

81. Sanders/Warren. 16 more years.

I'll be 75 in 2032.

[marym625]

83. oy!

I will be 70. Can we just stop this time thing for a bit?

Sure is a nice dream for the next 16 years

[TheKentuckian]

85. I say Bernie but my real wish vote would be Brown who is just as proven, younger, and has won the

swing state of Ohio.

I'll support Warren but there is much more risk of a pig in a poke situation with her than these two guys that have walked the talk for much longer and have talked the talk about a wider range of issues. Hell, on economics I worry that she really isn't particularly liberal and what we see is a much simpler distinction sane in a world of crazy that would bare it's self out as more and more must be dealt with. Kinda like how Obama being somewhere in the vicinity of sane on foreign policy catapulted him into being seen as quite liberal in the area by comparison.

Sane is fantastic but it distracts from the reality that one can be sane and still have plenty of room for dangerously wrong. Hell, the Republicans from 20 or 30 years ago could be considered at least in the area of sane even if misguided, twisted, institutionally racist, and even evil. Even Bush had sense enough extend unemployment during recessions and provide some kind of stimulus.

When the opposition has tacked so far into batshit crazy it is easy to fall into a contrast trap, particularly so when so many in our party have followed them down the rabbit hole to either maintain contact in a vain effort to not appear extreme or to enable the regressive shift because that is their honest ideology or both.

I believe we as a party, on the whole have set a dangerous and foolish baseline by which we judge the entire political spectrum, the worst the TeaPubliKlans can conceivably offer as evidenced by the crude minded boogieman threat we have seen for years now, "What do you want President Palin (or insert Cruz, Paul, Romney, McCain, etc)?!?!" silly bullshit. Or at best the middle is the invisible line between Collins and perhaps a Ben Nelson when both are conservatives.

In that kind of framing Warren seems stridently to the left but it is telling that when pressed, those quick to dismiss her as too liberal are beyond hard pressed to name a position she has as extreme in any way, she just is they say and huff and puff off as they mutter something about geography.

Now, the same bunch are trying to holler about her once being a Republican as though they care (how they pivoted from too liberal to too Republican I may never firmly grasp though my best guess is it isn't an ideological concern but one of party loyalty), never seem to bat an eye any other time (to the point that many excused weasel Democrats for supporting Chris Christie), and never seem to give a damn about retrograde policy other than to cheer it but there is a kernel of true concern did Warren have an epiphany and change her stripes or is she holding the same ideology and the ground has moved under her feet as it has for many of us former middle of the road Democrat types that now populate "the fringe" by simply not tacking with the spectrum as it has moved toward crazy right wing?

[woo me with science]

86. Kick

Bernie Sanders, 2016


Because we know we can trust him.

[MrMickeysMom]

87. Let's talk Senate replacements before thinking it will even matter.