Last week I was excited at the prospect of Senator Warren running (still does excite me) .
I was not imagining that Sanders would run again and part of me was hoping he would pass the torch to another this time around.
That was until I got a text message from my partner exclaiming:
“My love, we can still have cool grandpa. He’s running.”
I blinked. My initial thought was — amazing — we can have a Sanders/Warren ticket and ride that progressive wave to a Green New Deal!
Then I took a breath. That would be a mistake.
Why?
During the last election during the primary the rough breakdown nationally of Sanders support (within the democratic party) was roughly 45%. Clinton by contrast won the nomination with 55% of our party.
Clinton (or her advisors) wrongly assumed that Virginia (or geographical politics) of the previous generation would make Tim Kaine an ideal candidate that would draw white men and women to the party. She pulled her VP pick from the same collective 55% pool of voters that she had already won during the primary. There was no real excitement about Tim Kaine. He just checked a few boxes off (and where has he been the last two years?) — and was a dismal failure as a VP selection.
I am asserting that due to rapid expansion of communication technology in the digital era — it is more important that a ticket be ideologically balanced rather than geographically balanced.
Al Gore was supposed to be Bill Clinton’s more liberal VP.
Tim Kaine was Hillary Clinton’s more conservative VP.
Bernie Sanders has now announced his intentions to run again.
I’d like to avoid many of the problems that arose during the last time.
Why should Sanders be on top of the ticket over Harris?
- Harris does not support filibuster reform in the Senate. This is actually a huge deal. The filibuster currently is one of the largest controls the 0.1% use over controlling legislation. It is one of the reasons we can’t have nice things. The filibuster (as it is currently) in our constitutional oligarchical republic only serves as an extension of capital and their interests. Our senate (and House) is generally consisted of millionaires. President Obama noted this fact and that those around him reflect the views of the rich and solely the rich.
- Harris failed a test of morality when she decided not to prosecute OneWest over home foreclosures, robo signing, and clear evidence of fraud. She was on the receiving end of Trump’s pick Munchin’s only donate to a democrat. Since then she has taken steps to fix this perception of her but the idea that she’s another “go along to get along” democrat or “look forward, not backwards” democrat is a hard label to shake.
- Harris has a big problem with the trans community and is just recently starting to address those concerns. She wrote tons of briefs denying trans patients surgeries and her justifications have been weak.
www.motherjones.com/...
Harris has long tried to bridge the tricky divide between social progressivism and the work required as a prosecutor—sometimes more successfully than others. As San Francisco’s district attorney, for instance, she steadfastly refused to seek the death penalty against a man accused of killing a police officer, but later, as California’s attorney general, she defended the state’s right to use capital punishment. In 2012, she helped win a massive, $25 billion settlement with Wells Fargo and other financial institutions for foreclosure abuses, but a year later she declined to prosecute Steven Mnuchin’s OneWest Bank for foreclosure violations. In 2014, she co-sponsored a bill to outlaw the so-called gay-panic defense in California, a legal strategy that often shielded perpetrators of violent crimes against LGBT people from serious punishment, but a year later she sought to block gender reassignment surgery for a transgender prison inmate.
Sanders by contrast is not burdened by these problems and has been a steadfast champion of the most progressive legislation (almost every time). I do not have to ponder hard where Sanders will ultimately fall on any issues because of his history and what he has actively done.
Our tickets are typically balance: Capital/capital (with big money on top) — a capital/Capital ticket with big money (Harris) on the bottom would balance our ticket and check off the several diversity markers that matter less to me (but more to voters), than the candidates positions and actions.
Sanders will pass a Green New Deal and might have a chance at saving the planet. Even if Sanders only governs 4 years (with a democratic majority in the House & Senate) — it will basically be like Breaking Bad for progressives. Nothing excites a base like a champion with little time, nothing to lose, and willing to tell big special interests (#$%% off) .
A Sanders/Harris ticket can balance the party and stave off many of the problems we experienced the last election with the best possible outcome of getting Trump and his disgusting cabal out of the White House and into prison (where they belong).
It’s early. Vote your heart out in the primary — but I’m telling you (as someone who voted & volunteered to helped elect Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in D14, Queens) and someone who (just campaigned and won against Amazon coming in my neighborhood) — that a Sanders/Harris ticket will beat Trump, unite the party, and possibility compel the world to take meaningful action on Climate Change.