Wednesday, June 01, 2016

Warren Commission

Here it is, June, and Hillary Clinton will (finally) be going over the top in delegates.  The first thing she needs to figure out is who will be her running mate.  (So does Trump, but somehow, with him, it doesn't seem to matter--he'll always be the whole show).

The Veep pick generally doesn't make a difference, but if it turns out to be a close race, every little bit helps.  More and more you're hearing the name Elizabeth Warren.  I say go for it.

It'd be an unusual pick in that it's rare enough to have one woman on the ticket, and we've never had two.  And Warren is far left while Hillary may want to appeal to moderates.  And she's from a state that any Dem should win easily.  And she's a big enough star that she might even outshine Hillary.  

But so what? Veep picks are as much about synergy as balance.  It's like when Bill Clinton chose another young guy from the South for his running mate--Clinton and Gore as a team offered something new against the old guard.  Anyway, Americans aren't that ideological, and will often go for the aura of the candidate more than the specific policies.

Right now, Hillary has more voters than Sanders, but Sanders has all the electricity.  There is a fear this lack of passion will translate into lower turnout, deadly in a close race. (The race may not be close, but Hillary can't count on that.)  Picking Sanders is another possibility, but they've been at each other's throats too long to join together now, and anyway, he'll be 75 this November, while Hillary at 69 will be old enough--Warren will be a relative spring chicken at 67.

No one else can provide the same excitement.  Biden?  I don't think so.  Sure, Hillary can play it safe, picking a no-name along the lines of a Sherrod Brown.  But I say forget the swing states and swing for the fences.  We've come this far.  Let's go all the way.

7 Comments:

Blogger ColumbusGuy said...

Hey! Don't go picking on our Socialist. Brown's a good name in Ohio.

I say she should pick Kasich. He's Left enough.

2:57 AM, June 01, 2016  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Elizabeth would be wasted as a VP.

4:03 AM, June 01, 2016  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Elizabeth Warren shouldn't be doing anything of any importance, but that's not the question here. The only thing that matters is can she get Hillary across the finish line? If the country is so screwed up that the voters think she'd make a good Vice President, then Hillary should be willing to harm the country big time and make that happen.

9:10 AM, June 01, 2016  
Anonymous Denver Guy said...

I don't think the Democrats will be inclined to take advice from Pajama Guy. What's pissing off a lot of Democrats is they feel that with the Trump nomination, they have the leeway to pick someone far left - farther than Obama - and still win. That person is not Clinton; after all - Bernie trounces Trump in polls, while Clinton for the moment is barely even with him.

I suspect Hillary's calculation will largely turn on her needs. Someone who won't overshadow her in the least, some one who won't embarrass her (that means Bill is out of the running), and someone who can take orders. I know Governor Hickenlooper from Colo. is interested, but I imagine it will be someone hispanic.

11:29 AM, June 01, 2016  
Blogger LAGuy said...

"Clinton for the moment is barely even with him"? A more accurate statement is Clinton for the moment is only slightly ahead of him.

As for picking a Latino, does Hillary need to? Hasn't she already got that vote?

11:58 AM, June 01, 2016  
Anonymous Denver Guy said...

I don't know - just my guess that the Democrats will try and build the kind of electricity that Obama's nomination created. You would think the first woman at the top of the ticket would do that, but Hillary isn't even sure to win the CA primary against Sanders.

Interesting polling today - Quinnipiac polled Trump v Clinton nationally, and came up with Clinton +4. They also polled Trump v. Clinton v. Johnson v. Stein, and the result was Clinton up +2. Clinton lost 5 points, Trump lost 3. Johnson got 5%, Stein 2%. I think it is likely that whoever wins will not win a majority of the popular vote. Still 5 and 2% make it seem very unlikely that Johnson or Stein could win even one state (unless Bernie runs as VP with Stein ;-)

3:22 PM, June 01, 2016  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

She needs to pick someone who hates banks. That's what selling this year

5:25 PM, June 01, 2016  

Post a Comment

<< Home

web page hit counter