2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumHey Hillary, one of these women needs to be your VP
Hillary Clinton smashed a giant glass ceiling June 7 when she became the presumptive nominee for the Democratic Party. She is now the first woman to lead a major party ticket in the United States. But why stop there?
Thats right people, the feminist fun has only begun. With Clinton as a lock for the Democratic nominee, its only fitting we turn to her running mate. And as Nancy Pelosi recently suggested, having an all-female ticket would be, well, awesome.
So weve rounded up five kick-ass women who would all be excellent vice presidents, if Clinton's elected. It does read a little like a list of perennial female favorites, but hey, with only 20% representation in Congress, theres not a lot of female politicians to choose from.
Heres hoping Hillary or one of these five women can help change that...
5. Kamala Harris
As the first female African-American and Indian-American attorney general in California, Harris is no stranger to breaking barriers. And she could probably help Clinton break down a few of her own: Harris's work on both immigration reform and the Black Lives Matter movement prove she could definitely help Clinton on social justice issues.
Harris earned accolades for her work on women's rights as attorney general, and even picked up a few big-name endorsements along the way. Cory Booker who has been floated as a potential VP pick himself says he "reveres" her.
The only thing keeping Harris from topping our list is her relative lack of experience. She's yet to serve in Congress, which is the generally accepted training ground for higher office. But she just scored first place in the California's U.S. Senate primary, showing enthusiasm for her in a national position. We're sure California wouldn't mind if we borrowed her for four years, right?
More:
http://www.revelist.com/politics/hillary-vp-picks/2866/kamala-harris/1
msongs
(67,347 posts)TheCowsCameHome
(40,167 posts)I mean, come on..........
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)seabeyond
(110,159 posts)for a two woman ticket won't vote for one, so screw it. The power of a two woman ticket would be incredibly fun. Now, I am all on board and would love it. Glad this conversation is being had.
longship
(40,416 posts)I have an idea. Let's not strip the US Senate of one of its prominent -- and very few -- women.
Least of all Warren whose seat could flip to GOP with the MA GOP governor.
What are you people thinking?
We need to take the US Senate back, not gut it.
thesquanderer
(11,970 posts)there was an article recently about how Harry Reid found a way to probably be able to maneuver around that.
longship
(40,416 posts)Upon a Senate vacancy, MA would have a special election, and we know how those things turn out in MA.
Leave Elizabeth Warren alone!!
I don't want any Democrat taken out of either House until we have at least a majority on that side of the Capitol.
mythology
(9,527 posts)Granted last time that gave us Scott Brown, but I think we learned from that experience.
longship
(40,416 posts)Any other conclusion would mean that the lesson wasn't learned very well.
My best to you.
woolldog
(8,791 posts)She needs a balanced ticket. In order to win, Clinton needs to keep her margin of loss among male voters respectable. A dual female ticket would hurt that goal.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)woolldog
(8,791 posts)Penis provides balance.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)unbalanced, however.
woolldog
(8,791 posts)Should also be balanced in terms of age (i.e. Someone a lot younger), balanced geographically (someone from the South not the east coast) and so on. The idea is to appeal to groups Clinton doesn't appeal to so much now. Doubling down on gender is not going to win her more male votes...which is what she needs most to win.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)woolldog
(8,791 posts)But that doesn't change the reality of the present situation, which is that a two woman ticket will not help (and will in fact hurt) her chances of winning the GE.
TheCowsCameHome
(40,167 posts)Get ready to suffer some serious wrath.
Chan790
(20,176 posts)Warren is a terrible idea because we lose a key Senate Dem, Davis is a terrible idea because she's a nice person and fierce but her qualifications for the job make Sarah Palin look presidential, Gillibrand is a terrible idea because she's from the same state and that means forfeiting the EC votes of NY, Harris is a terrible idea because she literally adds no benefit to the ticket in terms of electability...and that leaves Amy Klobuchar who I doubt excites anybody all that much as a running mate.
Response to wyldwolf (Original post)
Post removed
Starry Messenger
(32,342 posts)Loretta Sanchez cannot fill Boxer's shoes, I forbid it!
Florencenj2point0
(435 posts)that is my only thought. I am not interested in EW. I am not interested in a centrist.