2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumWaPo:Elizabeth Warren still isn’t going to be Hillary Clinton’s vice presidential pick.
Which brings me to Warren and Clinton. Warren got lots of attention on Thursday night for endorsing Clinton. Part of that is because she is a national figure who is regarded as one of the leading voices of liberals. But, another big part is that she was the only Democratic women senator who hadn't endorsed Clinton long ago. And, it's not only that: When asked about the race for the past six months, Warren painted it as essentially a toss-up between Clinton and Bernie Sanders. For all of that time, it wasn't.
Trust me when I tell you that Warren withholding her support and making sure that people knew she was still withholding her support did not and does not sit well in Clintonworld. Warren was already regarded by many within the Democratic establishment including a decent-sized chunk of the Obamans as a bit of a grandstanding, holier-than-thou figure. (Her relationship with Clinton has been very up and down through the years as well.) Warren's decision to keep on the sidelines throughout the primary process only reinforced that sense for many people.
If Clinton doesn't have a problem on her left to solve, then adding Warren to the ticket only brings potential problems. She is an unapologetic liberal and someone who is directly in line with Sanders on the dim view that she takes toward Wall Street as well as the wealthiest Americans. Warren is loathed by conservatives, and a Clinton-Warren ticket might be the one thing that could convince lots of Republicans who are uncertain about Donald Trump to make a lesser-of-two-evils vote for the real estate mogul.
It would also allow Trump to paint the ticket as "the most liberal in the history of America" or some such, a potentially potent attack for him as he tries to turn the spotlight away from his shaky candidacy. Trump may say that of the Democratic ticket no matter who Clinton picks. But, you don't want to make it easy for him if you are a Democrat.
Vice presidential picks are the most personal and closely guarded of all decisions within a presidential campaign. That makes them inherently hard to handicap. So, it's possible Clinton has an amazing meeting with Warren today and winds up putting her on the ticket. But, I sincerely doubt it.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/06/10/why-i-still-dont-think-elizabeth-warren-makes-hillary-clintons-vice-presidential-shortlist/
TheCowsCameHome
(40,168 posts)Actually, she should've been the presidential pick.
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)and to give Warren a little higher profile in the war against Trump.
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)juxtaposed
(2,778 posts)CaliforniaPeggy
(149,615 posts)DinahMoeHum
(21,787 posts)And one day, maybe sooner, she'll be called Senate Majority Leader.
CaliforniaPeggy
(149,615 posts)NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)Maru Kitteh
(28,340 posts)When it isn't. At all.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)... and are responsive only to things that confirm or validate their pre-held beliefs and biases. (Take for example, the notion that Bernie still might pull-out a win in California ... or that the super-delegates might still change their mind and give Bernie the nomination.)
I like a good analysis-piece as much as the next person (not including the kooky stuff) but to present it as being official, or carved in stone ... when it's just one person's opinion ... is odd.
(Edit: Chris Cillizza and Matt Taibbi aren't quite as bad as HA Goodman ... but that's not really a compliment either.)
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)George Eliot
(701 posts)After Bernie, what a succession that would have been. She's been up front for sbrtshr Americans since day one and before. My current hope is getting down-ticket dems elected on behalf of Bernie. They will protect his agenda as possible.
Maven
(10,533 posts)Please consider revising.
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)I left off "here's why" at the end
Demsrule86
(68,565 posts)If Washingtonpost is against it...sounds like a good idea...aww-It might happen.
w4rma
(31,700 posts)Hillary probably holds dipshit oligarch, Mark Cuban, in higher regard.
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/283032-mark-cuban-ill-vote-for-trump-if-clinton-picks-warren-as-vp
OnDoutside
(19,956 posts)1. Warren had little/no working relationship with Clinton
2. Warren certainly had a good working relationship with Sanders
3. Warren was absolutely expected to endorse Sanders
4. Clintonworld would never have expected an endorsement from Warren, they would have been happy that she sat on the fence. Your supposition falls flat bearing in mind where Warren was today.
5. Trump is only, at best, playing with 41%. He can paint it any way he wants.
Renew Deal
(81,858 posts)And it's all FUD. Being the OMG most liberal evah didn't hurt Obama and it won't hurt Hillary.
Barack_America
(28,876 posts)Clinton has a problem on her left.