If Elizabeth Warren is HRC's VP pick, I will be over the moon!!! (nt)

[LaydeeBug]

that is all.

[SheilaT]

1. You don't think she'd be missed in the Senate?

A year ago many here totally opposed her running for President because she was desperately needed in the Senate. I can't quite understand what has changed, why her becoming the Vice President, a totally useless and completely lacking in power position, is better.

If she can't be President, which is clearly not going to happen, then leave her as Senator. Pick some other, innocuous and harmless Democrat to be VP.

[TreasonousBastard]

2. Large problem at the state level is replacing her in the Senate...

I forget whether a new election would be called for or the Governor appoints her replacement, but either way it's a crapshoot.

The other problem could be her outspokenness. A big mouth, even if a largely correct big mouth, is not part of the Veep's job. It could be tough for both the White House and herself to shut her up if and when she disagrees with Hillary.

All things considered, her place seems best in the Senate for now.

(But, a cabinet position?)

[still_one]

3. I thought Harry Reid was checking that out to see if a special election could be held rather than

a Governor appointment.

I haven't heard what the result was

[TreasonousBastard]

4. Me neither, but if she's in the running we'll hear soon.

[Koinos]

8. Yes, Harry Reid did research a way.

More information here:

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2016/06/06/3784898/harry-reid-quietly-laying-groundwork-elizabeth-warren-vice-president/

[still_one]

11. thanks

[SheilaT]

5. Yes. If she's not going to be President, keep her in the Senate.

There's an incredible loss of memory here on DU. A year ago many here were decrying the all for Elizabeth Warren to run for President because SHE WAS NEEDED IN THE SENATE!!!! And that's essentially how it was expressed, capital letters and exclamation points included.

To propose her as VP at this point is vile. The Vice Presidency is a completely powerless position, not worth a bucket of warm piss, as someone once said. Go ahead and have some one of the various Democratic non-entities as VP. They won't be missed where they currently are, and they can fulfill the various ceremonial aspects of the job quite nicely. But leave Warren to the Senate.

[Eric J in MN]

6. Me too.

I think HRC respects Warren and she'd have more influence as VP than in the Senate.

[Night Watchman]

7. Warren Much More Effective in Senate

And you don't have Charlie Baker appointing her replacement.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

12. Baker won't, a special election will, and democrats esp young ones won't show up

[bigwillq]

9. I wouldn't be. I hope Warren stays in the Senate (nt)

[riversedge]

10. chuckle. I will be fine with it also

[RBInMaine]

13. We all love her, but her place is in the Senate. She brings very little to the VP spot.

No gender balance. No regional balance. Very few new voters with different demographics. She is much better as a surrogate and remaining in the Senate.

[NorthCarolina]

14. What a waste of talent that would be.

No matter, I'm sure the Warren thing is just an exercise in name-dropping. I don't believe Warren would accept because it would be detrimental to her public image by throwing her "progressiveness" into question, and neither do I believe Hillary would truly offer it to her unless it is to reign in her rhetoric.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

15. I hope she stays in the Senate