Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

mvd

(65,148 posts)
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 01:51 AM Jun 2016

What would you think if Hillary picks Bernie as VP?

Would it get you more excited about the ticket? It probably won't happen, but I would see it as a genuine move if it happens - and would be more interested. So far Hillary does not seem to be really wanting to be more progressive. All lip service. Warren may also get me more interested since she may dull Clinton's tendency to be close to Wall Street.

68 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
What would you think if Hillary picks Bernie as VP? (Original Post) mvd Jun 2016 OP
Not very much...that's Biden's job.. Jack Bone Jun 2016 #1
If not our nominee or VP, he at least derserves that mvd Jun 2016 #2
They would NEVER do it. Bernie would be a thorn in her side newthinking Jun 2016 #57
this would be awesome! nt hopemountain Jun 2016 #10
It's up to Bernie RobertEarl Jun 2016 #3
Bernie does not want that Job Pharaoh Jun 2016 #4
Completely agree n/t condoleeza Jun 2016 #20
Right. Why would he want to be powerless in some ceremonial role farleftlib Jun 2016 #30
He's not interested. Left Coast2020 Jun 2016 #5
I respect your opinion, but if I were him, I would take it mvd Jun 2016 #6
what? and give up the revolution he hopemountain Jun 2016 #8
Only if he get assurances would he be anyone's VP IMO mvd Jun 2016 #14
yes, i believe bernie assesses a situation hopemountain Jun 2016 #16
I have all the trust in the world in Bernie mvd Jun 2016 #19
+100 840high Jun 2016 #7
NO! Not Sanders, not Warren. Neither is going to happen anyway. merrily Jun 2016 #9
^^^ this ^^^ Hiraeth Jun 2016 #39
This message was self-deleted by its author Th1onein Jun 2016 #11
that made me laugh NJCher Jun 2016 #25
It won't happen. Period. SheilaT Jun 2016 #12
I do understand. It's a question that I thought the group should answer mvd Jun 2016 #13
This has come up perhaps 80,000 times in the past year. SheilaT Jun 2016 #45
I would hope Bernie would not accept. Paka Jun 2016 #15
Wouldn't matter EdwardBernays Jun 2016 #17
Look, I've been a Democrat my whole adult life Lunabell Jun 2016 #18
Well unlike many here and at JPR forums, I still agree about her over Trump mvd Jun 2016 #21
disagree--here's why NJCher Jun 2016 #26
If Trump wanted to take us to war, the protests against that could be a threat to stillwaiting Jun 2016 #32
I see it differently. He'd be a puppet like Reagan was mvd Jun 2016 #33
What concerns me with Trump winning (inconceivable!) Ineeda Jun 2016 #34
that could be a problem NJCher Jun 2016 #41
Bernie will never agree to it nt newfie11 Jun 2016 #22
No!!!!!!!!! We need him in the Senate. roody Jun 2016 #23
+100 mahina Jun 2016 #60
There is literally nothing that could get me excited about a ticket with Hillary on it. djean111 Jun 2016 #24
I don't know that Bernie can be neutralized NJCher Jun 2016 #27
VP has zippo power to do anything. djean111 Jun 2016 #31
Hillary on any ticket........ peace13 Jun 2016 #28
peace13 Iwillnevergiveup Jun 2016 #54
Not going to happen as HRC is quite vindictive Kelvin Mace Jun 2016 #29
! nc4bo Jun 2016 #35
I still wouldn't vote for her pengu Jun 2016 #36
I'd love it RussBLib Jun 2016 #37
ridiculous. HRC would never consider him and he would never agree to do it. eom mikehiggins Jun 2016 #38
I think you don't understand Hillary at all if you imagine that would ever happen. n/t winter is coming Jun 2016 #40
For once I disagree with many of you SheenaR Jun 2016 #42
Hi Sheena mvd Jun 2016 #43
At work SheenaR Jun 2016 #44
No. The best way to neutralize people is to make them VP. QC Jun 2016 #46
Do you think Obama chose Biden to neutralize him? SheilaT Jun 2016 #47
You are SO right! Jubilant18 Jun 2016 #49
If Bernie is VP he will neutralize Clinton Rosa Luxemburg Jun 2016 #65
I think it would be a totally bad idea, sadoldgirl Jun 2016 #48
You mean if he accepts? Gross. Maybe the worst possible outcome for me. MinnesotaRob Jun 2016 #50
Oh God! disgusting thought! Bernie team up with that? wendylaroux Jun 2016 #51
No because of his age. If Hillary would not run for a second term or doc03 Jun 2016 #52
We've had Biden as VP now. k8conant Jun 2016 #55
Clinton/Sanders ticket Lance Bass esquire Jun 2016 #53
I'm thinking more along these lines Rosa Luxemburg Jun 2016 #67
No and no to Warren as well davidpdx Jun 2016 #56
A) She won't offer. B) He won't accept. C) Won't change my mind. HooptieWagon Jun 2016 #58
Still wouldn't get my vote. nt Live and Learn Jun 2016 #59
No coyote Jun 2016 #61
I can't think of a better way to octoberlib Jun 2016 #62
Same way I'd feel about a Warren VP, it'd be turning perfectly good senators into things HereSince1628 Jun 2016 #63
I'd think it stinks, what is the benefit of Sanders being Clinton's hood ornament? TheKentuckian Jun 2016 #64
I've been thinking about this and Rosa Luxemburg Jun 2016 #66
No. Just no. I would be aghast if she asked and, horrified if he accepted. Hiraeth Jun 2016 #68

Jack Bone

(2,023 posts)
1. Not very much...that's Biden's job..
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 01:54 AM
Jun 2016

Bernie's gonna be the new senate majority leader....

on edit...if Hillary doesn't get indicated

mvd

(65,148 posts)
2. If not our nominee or VP, he at least derserves that
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 01:58 AM
Jun 2016

Glad Bernie is gong to the convention, because we need to be noticed! I feel if we are ignored, the Democratic Party would not be successful in the future. I feel Bernie's movement is the future - not the Third Way.

newthinking

(3,982 posts)
57. They would NEVER do it. Bernie would be a thorn in her side
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 12:29 AM
Jun 2016

because he would question things that happen constantly. Especially with the war actions that Hillary is preparing for.

 

RobertEarl

(13,685 posts)
3. It's up to Bernie
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 01:58 AM
Jun 2016

Whatever Bernie thinks is best, I'm with him.

There being certain benefits to the revolution, and to Bernie himself, accepting the VP if he doesn't get the whole nomination, it is not something any of us should be rejecting.

 

farleftlib

(2,125 posts)
30. Right. Why would he want to be powerless in some ceremonial role
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 09:32 AM
Jun 2016

when he could accomplish so much more in the Senate? The VP is someone who goes to funerals.

Left Coast2020

(2,397 posts)
5. He's not interested.
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 02:03 AM
Jun 2016

It goes against his principles. My principles too. She might as well pick Chump or DWS since they are already tied at the hip. I'm sure rMoney may be interested since corporations are people.

mvd

(65,148 posts)
6. I respect your opinion, but if I were him, I would take it
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 02:05 AM
Jun 2016

Yes he is important in the Senate, but we need more like Bernie there.

hopemountain

(3,919 posts)
8. what? and give up the revolution he
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 02:15 AM
Jun 2016

has fired up in exchange for serving her highness?
he would not.
however, what do you think of him running as biden's vp when she is indicted?
biden would be much less demanding of his time than hillary.

mvd

(65,148 posts)
14. Only if he get assurances would he be anyone's VP IMO
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 02:36 AM
Jun 2016

Bernie would not compromise himself. You are right that Hillary might hog the time.

hopemountain

(3,919 posts)
16. yes, i believe bernie assesses a situation
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 02:41 AM
Jun 2016

very keenly - not for his own self interests - but for the good of many. hillary would only offer bernie the vp if she believed 1) it would help her win the presidency
2) there were many more other perks
3) she would not hesitate to dump him if he displeased her in any way. bernie just is not the kind of man who would consider a situation whereby someone would think they could just dump him. he doesn't just hand over his power.

mvd

(65,148 posts)
19. I have all the trust in the world in Bernie
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 02:50 AM
Jun 2016

If he doesn't want VP, I am sure his reasons are good. And I don't think Hillary would pick him. But he is older now and I would like him to see some position with power - if he agrees with the move.

Response to mvd (Original post)

NJCher

(35,422 posts)
25. that made me laugh
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 09:18 AM
Jun 2016

because Hillary will definitely do what is in her own best self interest.


Cher

 

SheilaT

(23,156 posts)
12. It won't happen. Period.
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 02:21 AM
Jun 2016

They are too far apart on fundamental issues, to begin with.

For another thing, I sincerely doubt he'd compromise himself that way.

But more to the point, even asking that question shows that you simply do not understand how party politics works, especially at the highest levels.

You might ask, Why wasn't Hillary picked as Obama's nominee? And as you contemplate that, you'll start to understand the party politics.

This isn't high school. These are people who take their affiliations very strongly. A VP nominee is going to have to go out there and support the head of the ticket totally, whole-heartedly, enthusiastically. A VP pick is always going to need to be someone who didn't run for President at the beginning, or who dropped out very early on.

Sanders has stayed in the race until the very end, and every single day he has very openly proclaimed what he believes and how he thinks problems should be solved. His beliefs and his solutions are incredibly different from Hillary's. Why would he alter those beliefs now? More to the point, if he did, he's show himself as a man of zero integrity, and I, as a strong Bernie supporter, would absolutely not vote for that ticket.

Hillary fans may have a different take, may perhaps see Clinton/Sanders as a conciliatory ticket, but they'd also be wrong for the reasons I've stated above.

Similarly, it's probably just a matter of time before Susana Martinez, Governor of New Mexico, who was shabbily and rudely treated by Donald Trump recently, actually endorses the Donald. Because in the end, it's all about the party. You go along with whoever is nominated if it's your party.

So while Bernie may eventually come around and support and even campaign for Hillary, he will only do that out of party loyalty, and considering he's only recently registered as a Democrat, he's not going to feel the same way as a life long party member.

Keep in mind that Hillary is simply not a Progressive. At various times in this campaign she's tried to present herself as such, and there's an urban legend out there that Bernie pushed her to the left, but that's simply not true. She may use language or surrogates to try to represent herself as Progressive, but please do not for one minute delude yourself about this.

mvd

(65,148 posts)
13. I do understand. It's a question that I thought the group should answer
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 02:31 AM
Jun 2016

Bernie would have to feel she really has changed of course. VP is not always a powerless position. Bernie would not take it unless given a lot of assurances.

 

SheilaT

(23,156 posts)
45. This has come up perhaps 80,000 times in the past year.
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 12:50 PM
Jun 2016

It's also come up as "Should Bernie select Hillary as VP?"

Not sure how you've managed to miss all those OPs.

Even when VPs have had a higher profile, it is a powerless position in terms of determining policy. Hillary and Bernie are extremely far apart on lots of things. Not to mention, she might give lots of assurances, but whether she'd keep them, who knows?

Lunabell

(5,919 posts)
18. Look, I've been a Democrat my whole adult life
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 02:48 AM
Jun 2016

If Bernie has his say at the convention and endorses Hillary Clinton, that will be good enough for me. I was for Hillary before Bernie threw his hat into the ring and she is not the horrible person everyone says she is. Sure she has her faults and baggage, but she is a damned far better candidate than having Donald Trump as POTUS! Or any rethuglican for that matter.

If she were to chose Bernie as her running mate, I would be over the hill with joy and campaign for her with my whole heart!

mvd

(65,148 posts)
21. Well unlike many here and at JPR forums, I still agree about her over Trump
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 02:55 AM
Jun 2016

It makes me feel awkward. But we are a big tent and if you are a big fan of Bernie, that is what matters. I feel Trump with his reckless attitude would get us into more wars than Hillary would with her hawkishness. He'd also promote hate, help the Repuke Congress if it is still Repuke, and is insincere about Social Security IMO. But boy, Hlllary is not a good choice. Especially with the corruption.

NJCher

(35,422 posts)
26. disagree--here's why
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 09:21 AM
Jun 2016

Trump will never get the cohesiveness necessary to do another war. If Trump is elected, it will be nonstop political reality show. That's all it will be. There will not be any constructive legislation whatsoever.


Cher

stillwaiting

(3,795 posts)
32. If Trump wanted to take us to war, the protests against that could be a threat to
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 09:41 AM
Jun 2016

Business interests. I believe the protests could be massive and SUSTAINED.

HRC taking us to war would still generate large protests, but I do not think they would be as large or as big of a threat to the status quo business interests.

I am not saying Trump would be better for our nation with these statements. I believe both would be quite bad for a number of different reasons.

mvd

(65,148 posts)
33. I see it differently. He'd be a puppet like Reagan was
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 09:56 AM
Jun 2016

Coupled with his insanity, I think we could have a big problem. He might flame out early leaving the VP in charge though.

Ineeda

(3,626 posts)
34. What concerns me with Trump winning (inconceivable!)
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 10:00 AM
Jun 2016

is not "There will not be any constructive legislation whatsoever." It's the inevitable destructive legislation. It would be possible with a Trump victory because the down-ticket races (House/Senate) could follow the party line.

NJCher

(35,422 posts)
41. that could be a problem
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 12:10 PM
Jun 2016

Not sure, though, how much party cohesiveness there will be for him to be able to pull this off. At present it doesn't look like much, but things certainly could change.

Cher

 

djean111

(14,255 posts)
24. There is literally nothing that could get me excited about a ticket with Hillary on it.
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 09:11 AM
Jun 2016

Anyway, the Clintons do not share the spotlight.

Bernie or Warren would be out of the senate where they are useful (but inconvenient for Clinton's purposes) and relegated to dinners and funerals. Putting Bernie on the ticket would just be pandering for votes and neutralizing Bernie. Same for Warren.

Hillary should just name Pete Peterson or Kissinger and be honest about the direction she will take.

NJCher

(35,422 posts)
27. I don't know that Bernie can be neutralized
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 09:23 AM
Jun 2016

Hence she will never choose him.

Nor, I think, would he agree to do so.

I know one thing: whatever it is that Bernie does after the election, either as president, holding a cabinet position, or Senate leader, he will be highly visible and will wield considerable power.


Cher

 

djean111

(14,255 posts)
31. VP has zippo power to do anything.
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 09:33 AM
Jun 2016
http://www.livescience.com/5113-vice-president.html

The Constitution gives the vice president the role of presiding over the Senate, and voting in the Senate if there is a tie. The vice president's only other formal responsibility is taking over the presidency if the president dies.


The VP can do no more, really, than the president allows. Cheney pretty much ran the government.
 

Kelvin Mace

(17,469 posts)
29. Not going to happen as HRC is quite vindictive
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 09:23 AM
Jun 2016

but it is the only thing that would get my vote.

But she not only wishes to punish Sanders for his "disloyalty" of challenging her rightful claim to the Bush-Clinton Throne, she wishes to punish all who supported him

RussBLib

(8,983 posts)
37. I'd love it
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 10:47 AM
Jun 2016

It would be the best way to satisfy all Dem sides. I think it would be very smart of Hillary to do that.

SheenaR

(2,052 posts)
42. For once I disagree with many of you
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 12:28 PM
Jun 2016

By a lot of accounts that I am hearing, he is not happy that he isn't even being seriously considered. I think he would take it to be honest.

And I think if she wanted to win, she would take him. Would be a slam dunk win.

Keeping my heart out of it and using my head.

mvd

(65,148 posts)
43. Hi Sheena
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 12:41 PM
Jun 2016

Can you say where the accounts are coming from? When I started the thread, I thought this would be a real long shot. But still thought it would be interesting to see opinions.

QC

(26,371 posts)
46. No. The best way to neutralize people is to make them VP.
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 01:04 PM
Jun 2016

That's why I don't want to see Elizabeth Warren take the job either. In either case, one of our most effective voices of opposition would be silenced.

 

SheilaT

(23,156 posts)
47. Do you think Obama chose Biden to neutralize him?
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 09:08 PM
Jun 2016

Or Bill Clinton chose Al Gore for that purpose?

The very closest to that scenario might have been when JFK chose LBJ in 1960, but no other VP choices seem remotely like that.

Jubilant18

(62 posts)
49. You are SO right!
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 10:26 PM
Jun 2016

A progressive group in the Senate led by Bernie and including Elizabeth Warren, Sherrod Brown, Sheldon Whitehouse, Russ Feingold (probably), and Alan Grayson (possibly) and others I can't think of now would have great power to set the agenda.

I hope that Bernie does not do this and I hope that Elizabeth Warren stays true to herself and does not accept VP but runs in 4 years if Trump is elected and in 8 years if Clinton is elected.

sadoldgirl

(3,431 posts)
48. I think it would be a totally bad idea,
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 09:40 PM
Jun 2016

indicating to the movement that he sold out.

The VP will have very little power, especially under
a Clinton, who wants to have absolute loyalty.

I think, that he may stay for the rest of his term
in the Senate, but on the side start a really effective
organization for the important issues nationally.

I don't think that he will run again for his seat, but then
put all is efforts into either a new party or help the
Greens to gain power.

JMO

 

MinnesotaRob

(53 posts)
50. You mean if he accepts? Gross. Maybe the worst possible outcome for me.
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 10:58 PM
Jun 2016

I'd rather he remain in the senate, or retire, than end up being used as a pandering tool.

doc03

(35,148 posts)
52. No because of his age. If Hillary would not run for a second term or
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 11:05 PM
Jun 2016

after a second term we need a VP young enough to run for election following her.

 

Lance Bass esquire

(671 posts)
53. Clinton/Sanders ticket
Thu Jun 9, 2016, 11:26 PM
Jun 2016

Is a no brainer....it's would totally destroy what is left of the Republican party as we know it after Trump is done with it. It would bring both parties back to being left and right of center like President Obama said on Fallon .I'm a old dog ..I remember compromise for the better of the country as the norm..rather than the exception to the rule. JMHO

davidpdx

(22,000 posts)
56. No and no to Warren as well
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 12:16 AM
Jun 2016

Her VP nominee is going to be a minority and since she is a woman, my guess it will be a male minority probably Hispanic. It will be someone who agrees with her on most issues and is to the right.

She could pick God and I still wouldn't vote for her.

octoberlib

(14,971 posts)
62. I can't think of a better way to
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 05:19 AM
Jun 2016

shut Bernie down and sideline him than to make him VP. Bernie is up for head of the Senate Finance Committee where he will have a lot of power and influence that's where he needs to stay. In the Senate.

HereSince1628

(36,063 posts)
63. Same way I'd feel about a Warren VP, it'd be turning perfectly good senators into things
Sat Jun 11, 2016, 08:20 AM
Jun 2016

"not worth a bucket of warm spit" as a person who held the job called it.

Sure the path that Neo-liberals want to travel is -reducing- the number of senators that are pro-labor and/or pro-consumer.

But all the hyper hype about safe preferred SCOTUS justices can NOT happen without a senate that gets behind a nomination. Indeed a whole lotta appointments can't happen without senate approval.

It's pointless to be giving away senate seats, really.








TheKentuckian

(24,934 posts)
64. I'd think it stinks, what is the benefit of Sanders being Clinton's hood ornament?
Sat Jun 11, 2016, 10:53 AM
Jun 2016

You understand officially and legally the Vice President breaks rare and randomly occurring ties (I don't even remember the last time this even happened), checks on the health of the President, and hangs out in DC in case the President is incapacitated or expires, right?

Can a President at their pleasure give their VP more to do and/or make them an influential adviser? Sure. Can the President also completely cut their VP out of the loop and send them to the Naval Observatory when they aren't attending state funerals they don't feel they need to go to and then drop them like a hot potato? Absolutely.

Is a VP going to be able to a President in line or lead or even participate in push back against them? No, not really.

Other than Cheney being the puppet master what VP has had any practical power?

Gore was probably 3rd he was more the Secretary of Special Projects than Co-President which was more Hillary Clinton though I don't think that is accurate either just closer than Gore.

Bush had significant power but that is because he came with that power and he'd have juice if he was sitting at home or on a beach somewhere instead of the Whitehouse but while Reagan was a puppet, I'm not sure he was exactly Bush's puppet but rather Bush had enough weight to throw around that he could cause the ones pulling Reagan's strings to broker something of a compromise.

Mondale hung out.

Rockefeller was maybe the ultimate hood ornament.

Agnew was a henchman.

Humphrey totally neutered.

LBJ a total move to have him in the tent pissing out rather than outside pissing in and geography.

Nixon was powerful, he was actively back up President, influential adviser, and perhaps the first Secretary of Special Projects.

Before that, they generally were truly relegated strictly to constitutional duties.

Rosa Luxemburg

(28,627 posts)
66. I've been thinking about this and
Sat Jun 11, 2016, 12:04 PM
Jun 2016

If Bernie was VP he would not be a hood ornament by any means. Bernie would be driving the limo and Hillary would be in the back seat. If you know Bernie she would be kept on ehr toes.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Bernie Sanders»What would you think if H...