There will be no unity without a ticket that has *both* Clinton AND Sanders on it

[friendly_iconoclast]

In either order.

If Clinton gets the presidential nod, she'll need Sanders to campaign for her and if
she wins she'll need at least one person around not inclined to genuflect.

If it's Sanders, Hillary can be his devil's advocate and tell him when neccessary
"Bernie, that shit ain't gonna happen, and here's why".

If this sounds unlikely, consider John F. Kennedy's choice of Lyndon Johnson as VP
after Johnson tried to defeat Kennedy in the 1960 primaries:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyndon_B._Johnson#Nomination

Or the vice-presidency of Henry A. Wallace, a guy who made FDR look like
Warren B. Harding:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_A._Wallace


http://www.britannica.com/biography/Henry-A-Wallace

[beachbumbob]

1. Highly unlikely

Sanders has little credibility left

[CrowCityDem]

2. We united just fine in 08 without doing that.

[Hortensis]

36. Exactly. As for that dreadful ticket, some

marriages were not meant to be. And no one knows that better than the two of them, I'm sure.

You know, psychologists say that ideological personality compatibility is a much stronger factor in matches than any other--income, education, background. Bernie has a rigid radical, intolerant streak that definitely grates on, and dis-impresses, people without it, while he apparently can't respect people without it, literally sees all liberal politicians as intrinsically corrupt.

Nooope--if they were two ordinary people their friends wouldn't even have bothered setting them up for a first date.

[ecstatic]

3. No. nt

[sufrommich]

4. No. Not going to happen. nt

[eastwestdem]

5. Trying to be objective here...if Hillary is looking for someone to step in if anything should happen

to her, shouldn't she go with someone younger? Maybe from a swing state?

Also, is there any indication that Sanders would even accept the VP spot?

[friendly_iconoclast]

7. Johnson was older than JFK, and did not do nearly as well in the '60 primaries as Sanders has

[eastwestdem]

9. A little different, since JFK was so young. nt

[PJMcK]

43. JFK needed LBJ's pull in the South

Then-Senator Kennedy knew that he'd need Senator Johnson's help in the southern states. In the OP's scenario, what regional strength does Senator Sanders bring to the Clinton campaign?

[Lord Magus]

17. Of course you aren't.

You're also not interested in democracy, since you want Sanders to be handed the nomination.

[basselope]

8. Sorry, but even if Sander is VP, I still couldn't vote for Hillary.

[friendly_iconoclast]

11. I do hope you'll change your mind- I'm no great fan of Hillary, but Trump is truly vile.

[pangaia]

15. Stop with the trump shit.

If Clinton were a better candidate it wouldn't even be an issue...

If she is the nominee and looses to that fuckwad, it is on her and the DNC, DLC, Third-wayers, corporatists, et al...

[friendly_iconoclast]

18. I will not, the man is a flat-out fascist.

[Maedhros]

20. Then the Democrats should nominate a better candidate if they want to beat Trump.

They were dead-set on Hillary from the start, even after they learned that people don't like her and don't want her to be President.

That's on Democrats.

[pangaia]

24. Vile yes. I won't argue with you there.

But if Clinton is the dem nominee, do not blame any possible loss on Bernie Sanders.

[jamese777]

25. The Better Candidate...

is the person who gets the most votes.

Democratic Primaries popular vote as of June 6th
Hillary Clinton: 13,297,176 (55.4%)
Bernie Sanders: 10,247,986 (42.7%)

Clinton over Sanders: 2,999,190

Hillary Clinton: 1,811 pledged delegates
Bernie Sanders: 1,526 pledged delegates

Hillary Clinton: 548 Superdelegates
Bernie Sanders: 46 Superdelegates

Hillary Clinton: 2,359 total delegates
Bernie Sanders: 1,572 total delegates

Hillary Clinton: 29 contests won
Bernie Sanders: 21 contests won

Hillary Clinton needs 24 delegates.
Bernie Sanders needs 811 delegates.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries,_2016

[dana_b]

41. ridiculous

The "better" candidate is not always the one who gets nominated/elected

[pangaia]

42. Noooo, that's not accurate.

The person who gets the most votes is the person who gets the most votes, well....usually.

[basselope]

44. 6 of one... I'll vote for neither.

[dana_b]

40. I would consider it pandering and I'll bet a lot of others would too

It would not fly.

[annavictorious]

10. No thanks.

You don't get to spend six months vilifying someone and then ride her coattails to Blair House.

[friendly_iconoclast]

16. JFK needed Johnson's voters, and Clinton needs Sanders voters

Like said up above, Sanders has done far better against Clinton than Johnson did against
Kennedy, and the 1960 election was still close.

I'm willing to sacrifice purity in order to not have to say "President-elect Trump"

Are you?

[jwirr]

12. The examples you gave were all going in the same direction.

Progressive. This time both of our candidates are going in opposite directions. What you suggest would be like putting a donkey on each end of the cart and letting them start pulling. They either would not get anywhere or they would pull the cart in half.

[SidDithers]

13. Hard no...nt

Sid

[Trust Buster]

14. A 69 year old nominee from the northeast will not pick a 74 year old from the northeast.

The V.P. must be able to assume the office if a health crisis besets the President. Your idea would be very irresponsible.

[Miles Archer]

19. I'm a Sanders supporter and I don't want to see that happen.

It just registers an immediate "no thank you."

[Maedhros]

21. "Bernie, that shit ain't gonna happen, and here's why".

That's what they said about freeing the slaves, suffrage, 40-hour work week, weekends, the Civil Rights Act, and a black president.

We've got to stop telling ourselves that things are impossible before even trying them.

[MFM008]

22. a couple weeks ago I agreed Sanders for VP

we will see what he does after tomorrow.

[MyNameGoesHere]

23. Even If Sanders were a Democrat it would be impossible

Being that he is a Democrat of convenience, I would say are you FUCKING kidding me?

[Recursion]

26. Nah. It will be somebody young and from the West (nt)

[MoonRiver]

28. Ridiculous

[doc03]

29. There aint no way that will happen n/t

[gollygee]

30. It isn't a good idea to have a President and VP who are both their age

We need a younger VP.

I do hope she'll put Bernie on her cabinet or something. He has a real sense of vision and future.

[qdouble]

31. Even if Hillary was kind enough to offer, Bernie's ego wouldn't let him accept.

No thanks.

[seabeyond]

32. Nope. He would not respect the presidency, know his place, be supportive. In essence, we can't do

The job.

[MohRokTah]

33. BWAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!

[lib87]

39. My Same Response

HC doesn't need BS when she wins & BS wouldn't need HC if he won.

[rock]

34. That is a really bad idea

[hack89]

35. If we want a Dem the White House in 2024

Then we need someone younger who can run in 2024 and serve until 2032.

[TeamPooka]

37. That is adorable. nt

[justiceischeap]

38. If Clinton chooses Warren, that takes care of a lot of Sanders supporters

right there. It's very unlikely that Sanders will get the VP nod, not after all the shade he has thrown at the Democratic Party.

[enid602]

45. Hill

I think Pres Clinton should offer (and Sen Sanders should accept) a cabinet level post as ACA Czar. While we've been fiddling, Rome is burning. New challenges to ACA have arisen from the courts and the insurance companies. We need someone who is driven, feisty, unwielding, crusty and devoted to Universal Health Care. Ironically, Sanders can do more for health care as a cabinet level executive than he could ever thought of doing as Pres. Let him make our ACA more like Denmark's! Hill's attention will be diverted in a thousand different ways after inauguration; she needs a pit bull who can live, breath and concentrate on health care and health care only. What better way to preserve Obama's legacy, and get us to where we need to be with regard to Universal Health Care.

ps: We might even unite the party.