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 Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
70 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Mark my words: it will be Clinton/Warren in 2016 (Original Post) JaneyVee Mar 2016 OP
No way, warren know Hillary too well. Nt Logical Mar 2016 #1
Which is why she urged HRC to run. JaneyVee Mar 2016 #6
Where did you read that? revbones Mar 2016 #23
Elizabeth Warren: I hope Hillary Clinton runs for president brooklynite Mar 2016 #29
Saying "I hope she does" in that context isn't quite the same as "urging" is it? revbones Mar 2016 #32
"noting that she was one of several senators to sign a letter urging Clinton to run in 2016. " brooklynite Mar 2016 #39
What a pickle for the 'Not Hillary' Party. onehandle Mar 2016 #2
Actually, we vote based on values, not personality. Also, we're not a monolith JonLeibowitz Mar 2016 #17
Exactly nichomachus Mar 2016 #53
not a chance in hell litlbilly Mar 2016 #3
Oh its happening. JaneyVee Mar 2016 #7
There is no way nichomachus Mar 2016 #54
What? Sure there is; other than Castro, Warren is the most obvious pick Recursion Mar 2016 #55
Warren will never go with hillary, Bernie, absolutely litlbilly Mar 2016 #62
Why did Warren endorse Clinton's Wall Street reform plan, then? Recursion Mar 2016 #64
I hope not. I want a VP young enough to run in 8 years Godhumor Mar 2016 #4
I really doubt that. BillZBubb Mar 2016 #5
Bookmark this thread. JaneyVee Mar 2016 #9
Maybe, but fans of Elizabeth Warren should vote for Bernie as the one more likely to make her VP. Eric J in MN Mar 2016 #8
Hillary likes working with women. JaneyVee Mar 2016 #11
She may choose a woman who endorsed her early if she's the presidential nominee. NT Eric J in MN Mar 2016 #15
That seems sexist. n/t JonLeibowitz Mar 2016 #18
Sorry you feel that way, Jon. JaneyVee Mar 2016 #26
Nonsense. JackRiddler Mar 2016 #48
No I have no problem with working well with women. JonLeibowitz Mar 2016 #50
Even just geographically she's an awful VP pick for him Recursion Mar 2016 #57
Fffft NV Whino Mar 2016 #10
here's what Liz had to say about the election Autumn Mar 2016 #12
A Huffpo blog! JaneyVee Mar 2016 #21
Deflection. You ignore what Liz said, since it doesn't quite fit your narrative. Autumn Mar 2016 #27
Taking a soundbite during a speech on a totally different subject.... JaneyVee Mar 2016 #33
I doubt Liz would consider actual words she has spoken to be an insult. She strikes me as a woman Autumn Mar 2016 #45
Unbelievable. Its getting weird around here. JaneyVee Mar 2016 #46
"When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." hobbit709 Mar 2016 #49
The speech was not on a different subject. Here is the speech: JackRiddler Mar 2016 #51
Then at least we would have Warren when Hillary is indicted, I suppose. nt Live and Learn Mar 2016 #13
Only people I ever heard use the word indicted... JaneyVee Mar 2016 #14
Well now you have heard it from a leftwinger. I suggest you get use to it. nt Live and Learn Mar 2016 #16
I wonder what they'll be calling Loretta when she (hopefully) brings the charges forward. JonLeibowitz Mar 2016 #19
It won't be pretty, that is for sure. nt Live and Learn Mar 2016 #20
Thats some intersection. JaneyVee Mar 2016 #22
Then all of us that wanted Nixon indicted are RWers? hobbit709 Mar 2016 #41
Didnt he break some law. JaneyVee Mar 2016 #43
+1 Historic NY Mar 2016 #59
Okay.... I'll get my crayons out... MrMickeysMom Mar 2016 #24
I think it is Castro. Two women is unfortunately, still a non-starter in the USA> bettyellen Mar 2016 #25
A non starter? JaneyVee Mar 2016 #30
dead out of the gate? not allowed? bettyellen Mar 2016 #36
Says who? JaneyVee Mar 2016 #40
just my opinion. I don't think the party is ready. And she needs someone from a further region bettyellen Mar 2016 #44
Great idea, but I'd bet that Warren has other plans. nt kstewart33 Mar 2016 #28
That would be as disappointing as shocking n/t whatchamacallit Mar 2016 #31
It wouldnt happen until after Bernie dropped out though. JaneyVee Mar 2016 #37
I know you'll disagree, but whatchamacallit Mar 2016 #65
Bookmarking lol Arazi Mar 2016 #34
Right, because they're so similar, right? elleng Mar 2016 #35
Thee will not be an all woman ticket. Agnosticsherbet Mar 2016 #38
What? Why? JaneyVee Mar 2016 #42
Because Warren doesn't want that job . She could have run but chose the Senate. Agnosticsherbet Mar 2016 #52
There have been 86 all male tickets so far, why not an all-female ticket? Recursion Mar 2016 #63
Conventional wisdom would say no: 2 women, and warren is from Mass - a sure bet for a Dem to win. kerry-is-my-prez Mar 2016 #47
Never. 7wo7rees Mar 2016 #56
That would be cool, but I doubt it. Sanders and/or Warren in cabinet would be cool too. Hoyt Mar 2016 #58
Won't be enough for me. 2pooped2pop Mar 2016 #60
I like the concept, but I don't want to poach from the Senate NBachers Mar 2016 #61
That would be great! If the Clinton part was removed. Tierra_y_Libertad Mar 2016 #66
want to make a friendly large bet? SoLeftIAmRight Mar 2016 #67
You are probably the last person around here whose words I would mark tularetom Mar 2016 #68
This is definitely the Bill Clinton strategy. Pick someone like yourself (demographic) to prove your McCamy Taylor Mar 2016 #69
Reminds me of the Warren is going to run for President claims earlier. longship Mar 2016 #70

brooklynite

(94,502 posts)
29. Elizabeth Warren: I hope Hillary Clinton runs for president
Tue Mar 1, 2016, 01:18 AM
Mar 2016
Sen. Elizabeth Warren says she hopes Hillary Rodham Clinton runs for president in 2016 — the latest in a series of declarations of support by the Massachusetts Democrat, who some have speculated could seek the Oval Office herself.

"All all of the women — Democratic women I should say — of the Senate urged Hillary Clinton to run, and I hope she does. Hillary is terrific," Warren said during an interview broadcast Sunday on ABC's "This Week," noting that she was one of several senators to sign a letter urging Clinton to run in 2016.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2014/04/27/elizabeth-warren-i-hope-hillary-clinton-runs-for-president/


This isn't news.

onehandle

(51,122 posts)
2. What a pickle for the 'Not Hillary' Party.
Tue Mar 1, 2016, 01:01 AM
Mar 2016

After all, Elizabeth was their first choice. They settled for Sanders.

JonLeibowitz

(6,282 posts)
17. Actually, we vote based on values, not personality. Also, we're not a monolith
Tue Mar 1, 2016, 01:11 AM
Mar 2016

There are many varied reasons to never ever vote for Hillary. We have a diversity of reasons to choose from.

nichomachus

(12,754 posts)
54. There is no way
Tue Mar 1, 2016, 01:34 AM
Mar 2016

Hillary is going to have a VP who is smarter than she is, more popular than she is, and more honest than she is. Not - gonna - happen.

Recursion

(56,582 posts)
55. What? Sure there is; other than Castro, Warren is the most obvious pick
Tue Mar 1, 2016, 01:34 AM
Mar 2016

You don't actually think either Warren or Sanders really feel about Clinton the way the DU Sanders brigade does, do you?



Oh, that's hilarious. You're being used and you don't even realize it. That's very cute.

Anyways: Warren would be more than happy to be her VP pick. For that matter so would Sanders, though that's less of a good choice.

BillZBubb

(10,650 posts)
5. I really doubt that.
Tue Mar 1, 2016, 01:03 AM
Mar 2016

Warren would be tied to Hillary's policies. I doubt she wants that anchor around her neck.

Eric J in MN

(35,619 posts)
8. Maybe, but fans of Elizabeth Warren should vote for Bernie as the one more likely to make her VP.
Tue Mar 1, 2016, 01:04 AM
Mar 2016

For Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren would probably be the first person he asks, and he'd probably only consider other choices if she says No.

For Hillary Clinton, Elizabeth Warren would probably be one of 15 people on a list of possible VPs.

 

JackRiddler

(24,979 posts)
48. Nonsense.
Tue Mar 1, 2016, 01:28 AM
Mar 2016

It looks and is great. I'd love to see A LOT more of this. You would not think for a minute if it was five men in the picture.

Too bad these particular women - Jarrett, Rice, Clinton, Power behind them - are in the business of creating wars. Always with humanitarian justifications of course. We came, we saw, he died, ha ha ha. Also, Power is the one who called Clinton a "monster." But anyway.

JonLeibowitz

(6,282 posts)
50. No I have no problem with working well with women.
Tue Mar 1, 2016, 01:30 AM
Mar 2016

The implication was that Clinton was more willing to hire a woman as VP because she likes working with women. That is sexist.

I agree with the rest of your post.

Recursion

(56,582 posts)
57. Even just geographically she's an awful VP pick for him
Tue Mar 1, 2016, 01:50 AM
Mar 2016

You don't double down on liberal New Englanders. He'd get somebody from the west or south, and from the other end of the ideological spectrum. Landrieu or something (southerner, conservative, crucial in getting ACA passed -- it's actually a decent idea).

Autumn

(45,056 posts)
12. here's what Liz had to say about the election
Tue Mar 1, 2016, 01:08 AM
Mar 2016
A new presidential election is upon us. The first votes will be cast in Iowa in just eleven days. Anyone who shrugs and claims that change is just too hard has crawled into bed with the billionaires who want to run this country like some private club.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/liam-miller/elizabeth-warren-sinks-clintons-hopes_b_9058526.html?


Out of the 2 candidates on our side that only seems to fit one of them. And that sure as hell isn't Bernie.

Autumn

(45,056 posts)
27. Deflection. You ignore what Liz said, since it doesn't quite fit your narrative.
Tue Mar 1, 2016, 01:17 AM
Mar 2016
Nice try JaneyVee.
 

JaneyVee

(19,877 posts)
33. Taking a soundbite during a speech on a totally different subject....
Tue Mar 1, 2016, 01:20 AM
Mar 2016

And using it to attack another candidate based on no evidence is not only shallow, but an insult to Liz.

Autumn

(45,056 posts)
45. I doubt Liz would consider actual words she has spoken to be an insult. She strikes me as a woman
Tue Mar 1, 2016, 01:26 AM
Mar 2016

who stands by what she says and believes. Unlike Hillary who backtracks frequently on what she says. Again. Nice try but you missed. Anyway I'm bored with this conversation so bye.

 

JackRiddler

(24,979 posts)
51. The speech was not on a different subject. Here is the speech:
Tue Mar 1, 2016, 01:31 AM
Mar 2016

The quoted sentence was the thesis statement of the speech.



By the way, the author of the above video is not "youtube.com." I know some people seem to have (selective!) difficulties with the idea that the location of a web page does not always indicate the value or meaning of the content.
 

bettyellen

(47,209 posts)
44. just my opinion. I don't think the party is ready. And she needs someone from a further region
Tue Mar 1, 2016, 01:25 AM
Mar 2016

who can either get her a state or a demographic she needs to strengthen.
I cannot wait for the day a two women team is no big deal!

whatchamacallit

(15,558 posts)
65. I know you'll disagree, but
Tue Mar 1, 2016, 02:13 AM
Mar 2016

I don't think the folks who are purchasing Clinton have much love for Warren. She's the last person they want waiting in the wings.

Agnosticsherbet

(11,619 posts)
38. Thee will not be an all woman ticket.
Tue Mar 1, 2016, 01:22 AM
Mar 2016

If Warren wanted to be President, she could have run.

She has an agenda she wants to pass in the Senate, but needs a Democratic President, Senate, and House.

Agnosticsherbet

(11,619 posts)
52. Because Warren doesn't want that job . She could have run but chose the Senate.
Tue Mar 1, 2016, 01:31 AM
Mar 2016

Because Clinton will choose someone for a strategic value who will help with a significant constituency. I think her VP will be an Hispanic.

I thing three should be two women tickets, just as I agree with Ginsburg that there will be enough women on the Supreme Court When there are nine of them. If you can have two men tickets and nine men on the supreme court, why not.

It won't happen this time. The country is changing and shift left, but we have a ways to go.

Recursion

(56,582 posts)
63. There have been 86 all male tickets so far, why not an all-female ticket?
Tue Mar 1, 2016, 02:09 AM
Mar 2016

And remember the VP has considerable power in the Senate, in some senses more than an individual Senator would.

kerry-is-my-prez

(8,133 posts)
47. Conventional wisdom would say no: 2 women, and warren is from Mass - a sure bet for a Dem to win.
Tue Mar 1, 2016, 01:28 AM
Mar 2016

Although she may decide she really needs someone progressive. I could see her trying to get Sanders. Sanders may feel that he is needed to be in a leadership position and not go back to just being a senator. It's hard enough to get a woman elected much less two on the ticket.

I hope you're right though - this is a one of a kind election......

 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
58. That would be cool, but I doubt it. Sanders and/or Warren in cabinet would be cool too.
Tue Mar 1, 2016, 01:57 AM
Mar 2016

They can also be major allies that get some good stuff enacted.

tularetom

(23,664 posts)
68. You are probably the last person around here whose words I would mark
Tue Mar 1, 2016, 03:09 AM
Mar 2016

If Warren hasn't endorsed anybody yet, she isn't going endorse anybody period.

She has a lot of credibility in the party now, the minute she makes an endorsement, she pisses off half the party and whooosh, the credibility is gone.

McCamy Taylor

(19,240 posts)
69. This is definitely the Bill Clinton strategy. Pick someone like yourself (demographic) to prove your
Tue Mar 1, 2016, 03:27 AM
Mar 2016

self confidence. I really like Julian Castro and hope she goes with him. But I can get on board Clinton/Warren, too.

longship

(40,416 posts)
70. Reminds me of the Warren is going to run for President claims earlier.
Tue Mar 1, 2016, 04:40 AM
Mar 2016

Even after she had said multiple times that she was not interested.

I'll bet my bottom dollar that she wouldn't say yes to this either.

Plus, although I am not supporting Hillary for the nomination, even she knows better than to select Warren as Veep. Why don't people here?

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Mark my words: it will be...