2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumElizabeth Warren as Vice President for Bernie Sanders?
A dream is a wish your heart makes.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)leftofcool
(19,460 posts)bvf
(6,604 posts)djean111
(14,255 posts)Warren as Hillary's VP? Cold-hearted political pandering, and a big sigh of relief from the Third Way that Warren would be out of Congress and relegated to the sidelines. If Hillary announced Warren as her VP pick today, it would not change my enthusiastic support for Bernie one iota.
longship
(40,416 posts)Both candidates from New England?
Plus, I think Liz wants to be a US Senator. Like she has said multiple times.
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)I think VP status for Warren would be a HUGE mistake. The VP position is NOT a position of any real power, more of simply an ambassador position but with a better title. No, for my money lets have Bernie as POTUS and Warren as Senate Majority Leader. That would be a far more powerful team for change than having her partner with Bernie as VP. Think about it, especially if you are one of those folks clamoring for Warren to get the VP nod.
Douglas Carpenter
(20,226 posts)geographic and ideological closeness. There would be a great deal of pressure to "balance the ticket." I would love to vote for such a ticket. But. I don't think it's going to happen.
demwing
(16,916 posts)Seems like ideological closeness would be a benefit, not a setback.
Geographic and ideological closeness didn't hurt the Clinton/Gore ticket...
Douglas Carpenter
(20,226 posts)identity in solidly blue states that any Democratic nominee is going to carry anyway is just not the same.
I would not be opposed to such a ticket at Sanders/Warren. I just don't think it would happen even if Sen. Sanders becomes the nominee.
Besides, as others have pointed out - she could very well be a stronger asset in the Senate.
demwing
(16,916 posts)Directly before picking her, a USA Today/Gallup poll showed McCain trailing then-Sen. Barack Obama by 7 points. After picking her, McCain jumped to a 4-point lead his biggest since January of that year and its often noted that McCain only began to bleed badly after the fall financial crisis.
Those who suggest that a vice president can help in this modern era generally point to the 1992 and 2000 elections, and at last, theres some empirical proof to back up the claim that a vice presidential candidate can matter.
In 1992, Bill Clinton tapped Tennessee Sen. Al Gore as his running mate. Gore and Clinton shared youth, geographic roots and a centrist Democratic ideology, and Gore helped reinforce Clintons message of change at a time when the electorate was pining for a shift in course.
Clinton ultimately won the election, and Gore was credited with playing a significant role in that victory. In fact, CNNs polling director, Keating Holland, estimates that Gore gave Clinton up to an 11-point bounce after he joined the ticket in July 1992. Clinton opened up a lead in what had been a very tight race and never trailed again.
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/christian-heinze/242653-whom-to-pick-do-vice-presidents-even-matter
MineralMan
(146,329 posts)to select a VP candidate. Elizabeth Warren would not accept an invitation at this point, for the same reason she has not endorsed a primary candidate. Bernie Sanders would not offer that position unless he felt assured of the nomination. It's all premature.
It's too early to start talking about VP choices, by far. Until there have been some caucuses and primaries, we have no clue as to who the nominee will be.
Ferd Berfel
(3,687 posts)she can have much more impact on the floor, heading up committees, etc
Cal33
(7,018 posts)team they would make! Both of them need to work hard the first two to four years to get
more Progressive Democratic candidates into Congress. When Dems. control both Houses
in sufficient numbers, change in our government will become a reality.
LWolf
(46,179 posts)senz
(11,945 posts)The choice would be VERY clear.