Why not two women on the Dem ticket in 2016?

[CTyankee]

With Eyes on a Possible Clinton Run, Debate on a 2-Woman Ticket

By JENNIFER STEINHAUERAPRIL 22, 2014


WASHINGTON — Few doubt that Hillary Rodham Clinton’s nomination for president would be good for women. But her candidacy would also probably block the paths for other women running for the White House, and, notably, for those who would like to be vice president.

Never has there been so much rising female talent in the Democratic Party, with a record 20 women in the Senate, 16 of them Democrats. They include Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, the liberal fund-raising powerhouse and author of a new book, “A Fighting Chance”; Senator Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, the former prosecutor with made-for-state-fair charms; the issue-grabber Senator Kirsten E. Gillibrand of New York; and others, like Gov. Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire. Any one of them would be a potential candidate for the bottom of a 2016 ticket, or possibly even have a shot at the top.

Ms. Warren emphatically discouraged the idea that she was even considering a White House bid. “I’m not running for president,” she told ABC News on Tuesday.

link here http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/23/us/politics/with-eyes-on-possible-clinton-run-questions-on-room-for-other-women.html?ref=politics

Intriguing idea!

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

1. Elizabeth Warren / Barbara Lee sounds like a good ticket. nt

[TheNutcracker]

34. I like Liz and Amy....

That interview with Amy and Chris Mathews telling him there's plenty of water for him to walk on in MN was just hilarious. Chris was shocked and for the first time, his lips stopped moving!

She is all business.....I like them both.

[sabrina 1]

50. Excellent suggestion. I would love to see Barbara Lee in the running.

[ofmeansandends]

62. That would be amazing.

I live in Lee's district and she's one of the only politicians I unreservedly admire.

Ann Friedman had a great piece about this dynamic and how men are viewed as the default. I shared some more thoughts on it on my blog: http://bit.ly/1n8Kgs1

[DURHAM D]

2. I am all for it.

Add Kamala Harris to the list.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamala_Harris

jftr - Senator Gillibrand is not a possibility as she and Hillary reside in the same state.



ETA: What a profoundly stupid comment from Senator Feinstein -

“It’s certainly possible to have two women,” said Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California. “I am not sure it’s wise. You want a ticket that represents men and women.”

[CTyankee]

3. Harris is promising and it would be nice to have a bicoastal team running...

yeah, I could warm up to that!

ETA Feinstein should get out of the way if she can't up her game...

[DURHAM D]

4. Plus

She is African American and Asian American.

"She is the daughter of Tamil mother, Dr. Shyamala Harris, a breast cancer specialist who came to the United States from India in 1960 to study at the University of California at Berkeley, and a Jamaican-American father, a Stanford University economics professor."

http://ballotpedia.org/Kamala_D._Harris

[Eleanors38]

13. Harris will tote aggressive gun-control baggage.

[DURHAM D]

15. Good !

[CTyankee]

19. It might be interesting to see how people react to an out and out attack by the NRA and how it will

play across the land. Or the Koch's for that matter

[Eleanors38]

53. Might also be interesting to see how she "adjusts"

her history & stance when and if she runs -- Obama did.

[CTyankee]

57. I haven't decided what I think on which way Hillary will govern if she wins.

I'm almost certain she will be down the line pro-choice and appoint federal judges accordingly. As for "adjusting,"I think she will face the reality of the present time she is in. But for sure, it will not be what Obama was experiencing, which was 2008. Eight years will have passed by the time she gets into the White House and that is a long time. I am just dumbfounded at the changes today that have taken place since Obama was elected: the sea-change in how this country views gay rights, for example. The backlash against the Tea Party, once in such ascendance. The startling present and growing consciousness of income inequality and the unwillingness of Americans to accept the dismantling of SS and Medicare. And, astonishingly, the failure of Republicans to demonize Obamacare with their "socialized medicine" mantra, which used to work for them, but no more. And that is just within the last 5+ years, not 8! Fascinating to see how fast the wheels fell off so many "certainties" of that time.

The fact that the NYT is talking about two women on the Dem ticket in 2016 is astonishing enough. Stay tuned.

[Eleanors38]

61. Once a big fear is rendered a gas giant, it becomes small.

I remember bomping around Austin in the punk scene <'80> and seeing more women onstage playing instrument other than tamborines than I'd seen in any given year. God! Did most stink. But that misses the fundamental point: A huge tide of women rolling in for some time; like it or not, it seeps into everthing. Besides, the effect of politics to provide for both economic security, and protectiion of indidual rights is demished, a routine act of faith. So, a Warren, a Davis, a van de Putte can swagger. Frankly, I relate to Hendrix. "I have only one burning desire: Let me stand next to your fire."

[kcr]

46. Even better n/t

[Bluenorthwest]

14. Kamala Harris is always on my list.

She's great.

[DURHAM D]

20. Love this Annie Leibovitz pic of Kamala

https://www.myfdb.com/editorials/129144-vanity-fair-editorial-kamala-harris-july-2013

Kick Ass In Pearls

[CTyankee]

33. Oh, that is delish!

she is fabulous. Can't wait to hear more about and from her!

But wasn't she an odds-on favorite for the next SCOTUS pick?

[Blue_Adept]

5. Because we can't even get a female late night host?

I can just see some segments of conservatives gleeful about it since they could double up on the misogyny in a huge way. The backlash would be stronger in some ways than when Obama was running the first time since they had to tiptoe around it for the most part before going all-in afterwards.

[CTyankee]

8. I'm wondering, though, if this is going to go the way that marriage equality went...I know I didn't

see the huge sea-change in the public's thinking about gay marriage...and now look at what is happening with the Obamacare "campaign issue" so many Dems were fearing...if Mary Landreiu is using it POSITIVELY in LA it's another turn-around from "conventional wisdom."

[Blue_Adept]

10. Oh, I agree

What I'm saying is that I think the rhetoric and reaction of a two-women ticket will be leaps beyond the vitriol we've seen with Obama. When they can remove the racial side from it where many do try to couch it and use code words, gender bashing rhetoric is a lot more open. The backlash from all of it would be hugely divisive in so many ways that it'd just be a scorched earth campaign in total.

[CTyankee]

16. well, we could play this out a bit...

the GOP would have to be really careful because more women vote than men and the GOP has a real talent for stepping in it when it comes to women and women's issues. Ah, fond memories of Todd Aiken and "legitimate rape." It lost him an election he might have otherwise won...that's how stupid these republicans are...

[Arugula Latte]

55. Mostly true, with the exception of Chelsea Handler.

[Benton D Struckcheon]

6. Interesting.

Wouldn't want to lose Warren or Gillibrand in the Senate though (and see that someone already figured Gillibrand from a political POV is pretty much out cuz of geography). Don't know much about the others. From a purely political POV, Klobuchar sounds like she'd be an excellent idea, as she comes from the Midwest. Unfortunately for Harris, CA is pretty much a sure thing to go blue, so you need someone from a place where you could maybe blow a hole in a solid red area, although I know Minnesota's blue also.

[CTyankee]

7. I'm sure there will be some testing of this idea sometime...

CA would be a good geographic balance, altho you are right about candidates from two blue states....

I'm surprised no one has mentioned Wendy Davis, even tho she is pretty much waiting in the wings...we'll see how she fares against that a-hole Perry...

[Eleanors38]

9. Wendy and van de Putte (Lt. gov.). Few realize the historical significance:

This pair represents the first time in U.S. history where a major party has women running for the 2 top offices in a state. And it is in Texas, not CA, MA, OR, WA, etc.

[Benton D Struckcheon]

12. Whoa! Will have to talk to my brother re this.

He's in San Antonio.

[Eleanors38]

17. If my history serves me well, I believe this is true...

Davis is behind in single digits, a notable improvement. If they win, the hand-wringing over an all-female top-2 will be as relevant as a five-tube AM radio.

[CTyankee]

18. Hi, El!

That pairing will be great to watch...I think we'll all be pleasantly surprised at the results...or at least I'm hoping!

[Eleanors38]

21. Hello, CT!

Wendy is technically running against Abbott, but Perry is the foul legacy. The discussion over the advisability or not of 2 women running for the top-2 spots ANYWHERE will be a footnote, if they win in Texas. And it can be done!

Abbott will have the money spigot wide open, but Davis is raising a very respectable amount. And if my decades of activism have taught me one thing, it is you don't have to have more money, only enough.

[CTyankee]

31. ACK...of course, it is Abbott!

My CRS (can't remember sh*t) kicked in on that one...

I imagine the GOP will throw the "Hollywood money" crap at her, sort of the "He's a rock star..." ad campaign against Obama in 08 (tell me if I screwed that one up, too!)...but the way things are going that, too, may blow up in their faces...

[earthside]

11. I'd be happier with two progressives on the Dem ticket in 2016. n/t

[winter is coming]

48. ^^ This. n/t

[yuiyoshida]

22. I would love to see Barbara Boxer on the ticket...

Always loved her.

[MissMillie]

23. I'd be ok w/ an all-female ticket

But I think you'd need a female liberal Democrat from the South in the mix.

[DURHAM D]

24. Please name one. Thanks in advance.

[MissMillie]

26. Off the top of my head, I can't

I'm a New Englander and don't have any sense of the state-wide or local politics of the South, but it can't be that difficult for a VP search committee to find a liberal woman working in politics in the South.

[iandhr]

25. Thinking Warren for AG.

[MissMillie]

27. I'd rather have Warren writing laws

than enforcing them--for now anyway.

[iandhr]

29. Either way is fine by me.

She'd be great at both.

[lumberjack_jeff]

28. I really like Chris Gregoire.

Although, like Warren, she has expressed no desire to run for President.

[Logical]

30. Which two? nt

[CTyankee]

32. Not sure...but the idea alone is pretty intriguing and hey, anything

is possible, right?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

35. Fine with me...as long as one of them isn't Hillary.

[CTyankee]

36. If it is Rand Paul against HRC would you just sit it out?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

37. No. Fortunately, my ballot comes with more than 2 options and has a write in line.

[CTyankee]

38. wouldn't you be afraid that we could wind up with Rand Paul as President?

I wouldn't want that in a million years. At least, we'd have a fighting chance with HRC...

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

39. Afraid? No. Appalled, yes. But not because of my single vote.

Of course, I will be appalled if either win.

[CTyankee]

44. I can't agree in this instance. Here's why: reproductive rights hang by a thread.

that thread is the Supreme Court. HRC is pro-choice. Rand Paul is assuredly not, but anyone getting the nod from the GOP to run for president would not.

[Nye Bevan]

42. People voting for a third party to protest that the Democrat isn't perfect?

What's the problem? I mean, what could possibly go wrong?

[Donald Ian Rankin]

49. In essence, that's a "yes, but I'll pretend not to have".

In 2016, there will be three options:

a) Vote for the Democrat: +1
b) Vote for the Republican: -1
c) Do not cast a meaningful vote: 0

Whether you choose to do "c" by casting a vote for an irrelevant candidate, by spoiling your ballot, or by not turning up, makes no difference - you still won't be participating in the election in a meaningful fashion.

And, given how much massively better any Democratic candidate, including Clinton, is almost certain to be than any Republican candidate, that's a hard decision to forgive taking on ideological grounds (if you're in a safe seat, taking in on pragmatic grounds may make more sense).

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

54. Oh, well.

"Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost." John Quincy Adams

It's not "ideological" grounds completely. It's a repugnance for politicians who play to the crowd and show off their "toughness" by supporting wars and killing to win nominations and/or elections.

[oldandhappy]

40. We need Warren in the Senate.

She is wonderful and I think she is unusually effective.

[The Straight Story]

41. The RW will jump on the band wagon: Nancy Grace/Ann Coulter

Their whole platform would be about missing blonde white girls and how if we listened to Ayn Rand they wouldn't be missing.

[Matariki]

43. I would like to see the day where this scenario doesn't even warrant discussion

Not the particular choices, but the what-if of two women on the ticket.

[CTyankee]

45. In other democracies around the world that day has come. We are woefully behind in this

country...

[Donald Ian Rankin]

47. Because it's 2014, and we should focus on this autumn.

There would, of course, be nothing wrong with an all-female Democratic ticket in 2016.

It may be that, in 2016, there will be two women who would make a good ticket together.

But
a) a week is a long time in politics; it's far too soon to predict who will or won't look like good candidates in 2016,
b) before 2016, there are the less glamorous but immensely important senate elections this autumn.

[CTyankee]

51. You are absolutely correct...and I plan on doing just that!

I just thought this was a rather intriguing proposition.

But we have to keep our eyes on the prize in 2014: keep the Senate and win back the House (or come damn near and break the back of the Tea Party).

[mike_c]

52. as long as none of them are named Clinton....

eom

[DemocraticWing]

56. How about Elizabeth Warren and Tammy Baldwin?

Now THAT would be a great ticket!

[CTyankee]

58. She's great and a terrific mid-west pick.

We don't hear a lot about her and that's too bad. She should have been mentioned in this article!

[IronLionZion]

59. Palin/Bachmann 2016!!

[CTyankee]

60. Oh, that would be too much heaven to wish for!

I giggle just thinking about the two of them up against Hillary and say, Kamala Harris...how embarrassing for the repukes!