Populist Reform of the Democratic Party

demwing

(16,916 posts) Thu Apr 21, 2016, 10:43 PM Apr 2016

Why Warren would be a horrible VP for Progressives [View all]

From CNBC article :

...Clinton needs to use her running-mate selection process to heal growing wounds within her party. To do that, she will first have to recognize what her real problem is with the party's new base. And that problem is that Sanders and his supporters in the party are mostly angry at what they see as a rigged process by the party elites and the Clinton camp

<<snip>>

Clinton would be wise to announce well before the convention that she's going to let all the delegates choose her running mate for her. This would not only be an open process, but it would show that Team Clinton is finally willing to give up some control of what's looked like a rigged game for years. Sometimes, nothing consolidates your popularity more than being willing to give up a little bit of your power. That's actually the definition of a compromise.

In that open-nomination scenario for the Democrats, I see Senator Elizabeth Warren as a strong favorite. She, alone, can bring the progressive Sanders followers back into the fold, because Sanders wing is also her wing.

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/04/21/hillary-clinton-has-a-big-problem-commentary.html

Setting aside the fact that Clinton hasn't won the nomination yet, having Warren on as her VP would be bad for Progressives due to the fact that many Progressives are looking forward to a future Warren POTUS run. Being Clinton's VP makes a Warren presidency LESS likely, for a number of reasons:

1. The likelihood of Dems winning with two females on the 2016 ticket is a big unknown. It will be an uphill struggle to get one woman elected. If you doubt that, count how many times it's happened in the past. You can do it on no hands. If Warren runs with Clinton and loses in 2016, it will be highly unlikely that we nominate another woman (ANY woman) in 2020. It's a fucked up load of patriarchal nonsense, but hey...welcome to America.

2. Let's say they DO win. Cool, right? Not for Warren fans. She won't run against Clinton in 2020, and again, if we have our first female president complete 2 terms, it's very unlikely that well run another woman at the top of the ticket in 2024. That pretty much takes Warren off the table permanently. Again, patriarchal nonsense, but that's the world we live in.

3.Once more, let's say they do win. Even if Warren never ends up running for POTUS, isn't it still a win for Progressives to have her voice elevated to the Executive branch? Well sure, unless Clinton locks her down and muzzles her. Warren and Clinton are just not simpatico, and while Clinton would not tolerate a fiery populist voice in her court, Warren would not tolerate having to follow a corporatist agenda. The two would get nothing done together.

Finally, push aside all the POTUS maneuvering. Warren is needed by Progressives in the Senate. End of story.

Clinton/Warren would be a horrible ticket. Bad for the Dems, and worse for Progressives.

17 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Why Warren would be a horrible VP for Progressives [View all] demwing Apr 2016 OP

Warren is a horrible choice because she has a house flipping problem leftofcool Apr 2016 #1

Warren is also smarter than, and more likable than Clinton demwing Apr 2016 #5

Goldman-Sachs will be Hillary's choice. nm rhett o rick Apr 2016 #10

I got nothing to add 'cept a kick Kalidurga Apr 2016 #2

I love Warren, and I agree, it would be a bad decision. TDale313 Apr 2016 #3

She won't choose anyone progressive. Maybe Goldman-Sachs. nm rhett o rick Apr 2016 #11

Totally agree. It's funny we both used the word "muzzle" to describe what they would do to her! reformist2 Apr 2016 #4

which is what drew me to your post! demwing Apr 2016 #6

Clinton is going to ruin Warren's chance at POTUS anyway... Peace Patriot Apr 2016 #7

Yes, I think along the same lines demwing Apr 2016 #12

Elizabeth isn't on the same team as Hillary Hydra Apr 2016 #8

The only way Warren would agree to the VP slot would be if HRC were forced to bow out leveymg Apr 2016 #9

Why Elizabeth Warren would never accept any position with Hillary aurelius2112 Apr 2016 #13

To me the decision is as easy as imagining what would happen when a reporter rhett o rick Apr 2016 #14

In the end, Clinton would never pick Warren demwing Apr 2016 #15

Yes I agree. nm rhett o rick Apr 2016 #16

Two points CobaltBlue Apr 2016 #17