Deval Patrick please
2 Likes
Iâll admit that two women on the ticketâespecially those twoâwould personally make me extremely proud. You are quite correct in your analysisâas you always seem to beâthat Warren has been and will be far more valuable in the Senate that as the VP. Now, if she picks a Latino, that would be almost as good.
Or better yet, a lesbian LatinaâŚbut now Iâm just dreaming. However, twenty years ago who could have imagined that a black man named Barack Hussein Obama would be completing his second term in office in 2016?
6 Likes
Kaine has a 100% rating from both Planned Parenthood and NARAL for 2015.
https://www.plannedparenthoodaction.org/congressional-scorecard#/virginia/450
8 Likes
I love Elizabeth Warren. I worked for her campaign in 2012. If she had run for president this year, I would have been with her 'til the last dog died. But she should not be Hillaryâs running mate. Two liberal women (and Clinton IS a liberal on the national spectrum, however much Bernie may disagree) from the northeast is not a good ticket.
Iâm rooting for Tom Perez, the Secretary of Labor and former chief of the Civil Rights Division at DOJ, who has spent his life speaking for working people and victims of discrimination.
14 Likes
Julian Castro is an interesting choice, in that Trump (and a lot of his followers) would very likely go ballistic about the fact that what Trump would call a âMexicanâ would be a heartbeat away from the Presidency.
Iâm not sure if thatâs something folks have thought about much. The overt racism on the Trump campaign will likely go through the roof.
7 Likes
Not sure Warren is the best choice. I lean Sherrod Brown, only problem, he always sounds like he is losing his voice
3 Likes
Completely agree. Sheâs too smart, articulate, and inspiring to be muzzled in the role of VP.
Sheâs a true leader and being a VP just doesnât suit her personality.
4 Likes
What about Cory Booker?
Elizabeth is older,
No, sheâs a bit younger than Hillary. Liz was born on June 22, 1949, while Hillary was born on October 26, 1947.
1 Like
Iâm thinking no. Something about him bothers me. I canât quite put my finger on it. Something about him just doesnât sit right with me even though he seems nice enough and has done some good things. I realize thatâs not a hard objection, but itâs all Iâve got at the moment.
4 Likes
Warren to landslide with progressives.
Castro to landslide with Latinos.
I think those are the equations.
The choice to be made predicated on whether one might elicit enough of a waveâ
to bring the House into play with downticket coattail voting.
Warren might could do that on a national scale.
And if it looks possible, it might also foretell keeping the Senate without her seat.
Castro, I feel, is being groomed for 2024.
If he is to be the next glass-ceiling breaker? The one who cements a (D) POTUS in place for a 24-year-run?
Then he looks to be the right choice for 2016.
Neither is a gamble personally. The gamble is strategic.
All in with Warren? Strike with the âhot ironâ and see if a real revolution is possible?
Or play the long-game with Castro? Setup the dominoes to show a lineage of leadership for the Democratic Party that could last for 2 decades or more?
Like to think Iâm clever regarding strategic decision-making.
Thereâs nothing here clear-cut to me-- to even make me lean yet.
I donât envy HRC and BHO in mulling over this one.
jw1
4 Likes
But mull they will and, at the end, the decision will be a good one.
1 Like
The reasons Clinton would want Warren as a running mate are obvious, but why would Warren accept? To be Clintonâs running mate, Warren would be selling out.
2 Likes
Not older than HillaryâŚâolderâ, period. They are both grandmothersâŚthatâs older.
1 Like
I agree, Brown is the best choice. Not only does he have a strong progressive record, but he speaks to the concerns of working class voters in Appalachia and the industrial Midwest. And - unlike Warren - he is also respected by the business community, so he would not scare away business oriented Republicans who do not want to vote for Trump.
1 Like
Having intelligent, well-spoken women in the Senate is a very good thing too. I think sheâd be wasted as a VP candidate.
3 Likes
There are pros and cons for any VP selection, but the #1 rule is of course: do no harm. Risking a senate seat is doing harm, period. Whereas Kaine is the epitome of do no harm.
Vetting Warring like this is simply paying respect to the progressive wing. On top of doing harm by way of risking a senate seat, you could do Warren harm with progressives by opening her up to claims of being a sell out.
4 Likes
From the linked article:
Beyond the Massachusetts senator, other prospective candidates include Labor Secretary Tom Perez; Housing and Urban Development Secretary JuliĂĄn Castro; Sens. Tim Kaine of Virginia, Sherrod Brown of Ohio and Cory Booker of New Jersey; Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti, and Reps. Xavier Becerra of California and Tim Ryan of Ohio, several Democrats
said.
Rep Becerra â Iâm a fan. Great presence/cred in the Latino community, excellent organizer, well experienced. If a little younger he would probably be hands down my choice. No Warren, no Brown â we canât afford to lose either of those precious seats in the Senate.
6 Likes
I love love Sherrod Brown and would love to see him on the ticket. I actually like his raspy voice.
Rather than fantasizing over landslides, I think we ought to be concentrating on taking Ohio and Pennsylvania, and avoiding big losses in the Midwest and Appalachia. Brown has more experience than either Warren or Castro, and speaks to those industrial and economic concerns. Moreover, you will never have to worry about him saying something - in the heat of the moment - that you will be dealing with for the rest of the campaign. With all of Warrenâs gifts, she doesnât help at all with working class voters. Castro is very interesting, but not nearly experienced enough.