Evening update: From The Hill: “By positioning herself as Donald Trump’s primary Democratic antagonist right now, Sen. Warren is filling the space that would normally be occupied by bickering between the two Democratic primary characters. When she’s taking on Trump, there’s not a lot of oxygen left for Sanders and Clinton attacking each other,” said Kevin Franck, a strategist who worked for the Massachusetts Democratic Party during Warren’s 2012 race against Scott Brown.
At least one high-ranking Democrat is already behind the idea of Warren on the ticket.
Vice President Joe Biden wanted to tap Warren as his running mate when he was considering a presidential run last year, according to Politico. He reportedly believes Clinton should pick Warren now that she is on the verge of clinching the nomination.
=====
From Politico: If you haven’t said it yourself, you’ve surely heard it: “Of course I want to see a woman in the White House, but …” Warren on the ticket would annihilate many of those “buts.” She would help to neutralize some of Clinton’s very real flaws; it would be harder to accuse Clinton of doing the bidding of big banks while running with Warren, the scourge of Wall Street. Warren’s presence would give disappointed supporters of Bernie Sanders a reason to rally to the Democratic banner. And by Clinton’s side, she would make it blazingly clear what an epochal moment this is for American women. She’s a choice who could electrify both Clinton’s fiercest progressive critics and her most devoted acolytes.
I began my piece arguing a case for Hillary selecting Warren as her running mate with a riff on how Elizabeth could become the Selena Myers of the TV show Veep, but then got serious to say:
Aside from the treasure trove of imagined SNL comedy sketches about back-room cat fights between the two, these strong willed women might be able to become the greatest and most change making POTUS/VPOTUS team in history. And, for progressives, they’d be ours.
Cheney was the dark lord, and will go down in history as such. Elizabeth Warren could become the most influential progressive vice president in history.
Of all the names I’ve seen mentioned, Warren is the only one who came up early on as someone many progressives wanted to see run for president. Undoubtably she will want to be involved in major decision making and also have areas of import that she is in charge of. Given the overlap of her interests with Bernie Sanders’ she would be able to run as Hillary’s Bernie, and function as such in the Executive Branch.
What about losing Warren in the Senate? With Warren as veep, there are other influential progressive senators who will have a lot of impact, including Bernie (assuming he’s not president), Sherrod Brown, Amy Klobuchar, and my state’s own Jeff Merkley.
While balancing the ticket with a Hispanic, something pundits have suggested as good strategy, has its merits, I think a good case can be made for running a true power-ticket, and that would be Clinton-Warren.
This is how 60 Daily Kos readers voted in my poll of potential VP candidates:
Warren (30%) and Castro (27%) were virtually tied among the 60 Kos poll takers who thought one of them would be the best veep choice.
Below is what
Daily Kos founder Marco Moulitsas had to say about close runner-up Julian Castro
Fact is, these old-line Latino organizations have latched on to Castro out of desperation to see one of their own on a presidential ticket, regardless of Castro’s actual credentials. I share that desperation! But I also know that a Sarah Palin- or Dan Quayle-like Latino on the ticket would significantly set back our cause.
But in the midst of all this hubbub, one thing is still clear—none of those old-guard Latino groups have countered Presente on the merits of their attack on Castro.
Apparently, he is untouchable, regardless what he does. And of course, that is ridiculous.
Otherwise, we’d be seeing those guys endorse and embrace Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz. But even for them, there are things more important than raza, except, apparently, when it comes to Julian Castro.
Here’s some of what Sam Stein had to say on Huffington Post today:
The attributes that Warren would bring to the VP slot extend beyond vigorous mocking of Trump. Top Democrats increasingly see a dual-female ticket as a potent response to a GOP nominee with a well-documented past of sexist remarks.
Then there is the conventional wisdom that Warren would keep backers of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) in the fold. “She can help validate Clinton with progressives and remind them that despite their differences in the primary, the alternative of the Donald would be untenable,” said Penny Lee, a former longtime aide to Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and now a Democratic consultant.
If Elizabeth is indeed testing the waters for a veep run, there’s no doubt she is weighing two or three considerations. First, in what position will she have the most influence, and second whether she will help defeat Donald Trump in a close race. She is probably also thinking about her long term future. If she stays in the Senate she will be assured this will be for as long as she wants to. I can see her as a Ted Kennedy fighting the good fight until the day she dies. If she becomes vice president, I’m not sure what she’d want to do after eight years. She might run for president, or opt for the Supreme Court, but then her age would be a factor.
So, what do Kos readers think? I’m looking forward to hearing what some of those who commented on my first diary think. How about it our Australian friend Mopshell?
