BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
BUT... Wall Street 
all of those anonymous CEOs warned her.
Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
all of those anonymous CEOs warned her.Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
2016 US Presidential Election Thread Part X
- Thread starter DaveC
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
- Status
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
BUT... Wall Street
Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
I wonder if the millions and millions of Bernie supporters will ever speak to her again?
deep
Blue Crack Addict
Warren won't be the VP
Warren does have some core values, I think it is the Comanche in her
and Hillary will not risk giving Goldman Sachs anything to worry about with a Warren pick or elevation. And those recent GOP endorsements are just the type of elites that would pick Goldman Sachs crooked Hillary
Warren does have some core values, I think it is the Comanche in her
and Hillary will not risk giving Goldman Sachs anything to worry about with a Warren pick or elevation. And those recent GOP endorsements are just the type of elites that would pick Goldman Sachs crooked Hillary
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
Warren is part Cherokee, deep.
It's HRC with the Comache values.
It's HRC with the Comache values.
PhilsFan
Blue Crack Addict
The concern with picking Warren as VP is more about losing her in the Senate than anything to do with alienating the electorate, isn't it?
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
The concern, as I understand it, is that Wall Street apparently threatened to withhold support of HRC because they don't like Warren.
I would think Massachusetts could find another D for the Senate.
Like the VP matters one iota after election day.
Whoever brings in the most votes should be picked, even though it looks more and more like it won't matter.
Whoever brings in the most votes should be picked, even though it looks more and more like it won't matter.
Mack_Again
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
yeah I think losing someone as restless and hard-working as Elizabeth Warren in the Senate isn't too good for Dem. or even the general public as she has worked hard to push her agenda of regulating Wall Street properly and all that. And i don't think making Warren as VP for Hillary won't really help both sides (Hill and Warren, I mean).
LuckyNumber7
Blue Crack Addict
I disagree though. I think it helps bring back some of the disaffected Sanders supporters. They still love goofy Liz, in theory. Could help bring that group back, without Sanders having to sell out.
Mack_Again
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
as one of so called "Sanders-nistas" (i just made that term up), I do believe that Elizabeth Warren could bring some votes from Sanders supporters. but again, some hardcore believers could be pretty torn by that because Elizabeth Warren has expressed some hate/disagreements toward Hillary before (like thing about bankruptcy bill, there should be good number of Youtube vids about that), so some may consider that move "selling out"(whatever that means). I'm not opposed to the idea of Warren as VP but....i can't really think that there would be another great senator after her (at least for a while), so i can't really like the idea.
LuckyNumber7
Blue Crack Addict
As headache said... whoever brings the most votes in should be picked. I imagine that's either Warren or Sanders himself. Of course they'll be criticized, but they'll probably win.
I think Elizabeth Warren could energize the ticket and should be picked for that reason.
She would be a loss in the Senate but if the Democrats are stupid enough to nominate somebody in MA who can't win, then they don't deserve the seat.
She would be a loss in the Senate but if the Democrats are stupid enough to nominate somebody in MA who can't win, then they don't deserve the seat.
Popmartijn
Blue Crack Supplier
But does the ticket needs more energy? Clinton might not be the ideal candidate, but she has the Democrat votes (I just read that only 8% of those who voted for Sanders still don't want to cast their vote for Clinton now, down from 20% a few weeks ago). So she doesn't need Warren for more votes from the left. And with Trump imploding, she can capture more of disillusioned Republicans.
It'll also be a strange move for Warren. She's a powerhouse now in the Senate. She'll have much more influence there for her progressive agenda than as a vice-president. There's no real need to be an advisor to Clinton as Hillary is already one of the most experienced politicians in the world today. Plus, Hillary's husband knows quite a bit about politics and the job of a president too.
PhilsFan
Blue Crack Addict
womanfish
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
Warren should be and will be Clinton's VP.
What does Clinton need?
1. A bridge for Sanders supporters and more liberal wing of the party to consolidate behind Clinton. A dwindling percentage of Berniebots will argue that Warren criticized her for the bankruptcy bill decision. blah blah. First, that was 15 years ago. Second, that bill was CHANGED. She supported the initial version which she had put pieces in to protect families against aggressive collections i believe. This was stripped out of the later version by the GOP. She voted no on the changed bill. sorry, I digress.
But Warren gives progressives a strong assurance that Clinton will stick by her statements and promises of the campaign and will be better advised on trade and bank issues.
2. She needs younger voters, and more so, young women voters that she has struggled with. I believe a double female ticket, with a progressive message will be a boon for for this demographic.
3. Energy and excitement. Not sure if you all caught the Ohio rally with Warren and Clinton yesterday. But - WOW. Warren has something that even Sanders doesn't have. She can step in front of an arena full of people and have them jumping to their feet while hitting them on a down to earth, emotional level.
On a side note - They looked like they have been on the campaign trial for months together. They had a palpable chemistry and I don't think I've seen Clinton look as young, happy and refreshed looking in at least a year.
4. She needs a twist. Lets face it, this is not your normal election year. An historic ticket of 2 women would be the type of attention grabbing and holding thing she needs. And what is more normal than Tim Kane... ugh.
5. She needs someone that can actually take on Trump. And i don't mean take him on like Marco Rubio tried to do. I picture in my head - Kane or Brown trying to land solid punches on Trump. Nope. Not gonna happen. Warren? Dear God, she has torn him UP for the last month and shows no signs of slowing down. Why does it work for her? She has that spirited genuineness that sucks people in and people believe what she said.
Her line yesterday, that Trump is someone who just takes for himself, and in the process, "He will crush you into the dirt" I watch a lot of political speechifying, and that line hit me in a real way.
And for those reasons, she will be the VP. I also can't see Clinton going on the road to rallies with her and NOT picking her. But crazier things have happened.
I for one am really, really excited for this ticket.
What does Clinton need?
1. A bridge for Sanders supporters and more liberal wing of the party to consolidate behind Clinton. A dwindling percentage of Berniebots will argue that Warren criticized her for the bankruptcy bill decision. blah blah. First, that was 15 years ago. Second, that bill was CHANGED. She supported the initial version which she had put pieces in to protect families against aggressive collections i believe. This was stripped out of the later version by the GOP. She voted no on the changed bill. sorry, I digress.
But Warren gives progressives a strong assurance that Clinton will stick by her statements and promises of the campaign and will be better advised on trade and bank issues.
2. She needs younger voters, and more so, young women voters that she has struggled with. I believe a double female ticket, with a progressive message will be a boon for for this demographic.
3. Energy and excitement. Not sure if you all caught the Ohio rally with Warren and Clinton yesterday. But - WOW. Warren has something that even Sanders doesn't have. She can step in front of an arena full of people and have them jumping to their feet while hitting them on a down to earth, emotional level.
On a side note - They looked like they have been on the campaign trial for months together. They had a palpable chemistry and I don't think I've seen Clinton look as young, happy and refreshed looking in at least a year.
4. She needs a twist. Lets face it, this is not your normal election year. An historic ticket of 2 women would be the type of attention grabbing and holding thing she needs. And what is more normal than Tim Kane... ugh.
5. She needs someone that can actually take on Trump. And i don't mean take him on like Marco Rubio tried to do. I picture in my head - Kane or Brown trying to land solid punches on Trump. Nope. Not gonna happen. Warren? Dear God, she has torn him UP for the last month and shows no signs of slowing down. Why does it work for her? She has that spirited genuineness that sucks people in and people believe what she said.
Her line yesterday, that Trump is someone who just takes for himself, and in the process, "He will crush you into the dirt" I watch a lot of political speechifying, and that line hit me in a real way.
And for those reasons, she will be the VP. I also can't see Clinton going on the road to rallies with her and NOT picking her. But crazier things have happened.
I for one am really, really excited for this ticket.
womanfish
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
Yeah, I dont think the Dems are that worried about being able to reclaim that seat. They will just have to endure a GOP pick for the interim.
Moonlit_Angel
Blue Crack Addict
Yeah, I totally understand people's arguments about Warren making waves in the Senate-she has been fighting the good fight thus far...but dang, the prospect of a Clinton/Warren ticket does sound incredibly appealing... I'd wholeheartedly support that.
womanfish
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
read an interesting post this morning that made sense. She could continue in her Senate role, struggling to convince 99 of her colleagues to support her ideas, only to have them swatted away by Congress. Or she could be in the second most powerful seat in the world, only needing to convince 1 person.
Thinking about it this way, puts it in some perspective. I mean, lets be honest, Sanders is a progressive powerhouse, but after almost 30 years in DC... what has come of it?
I believe that Warren could actually bring more change and have a stronger voice as VP.
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
the best tickets tell an emotional story -- the Man from Hope, Yes We Can.
the two ladies together could spark imagination and emotion.
i think there are drawbacks, especially on paper, but Hillary lacks that magic. together, they could be magic. what she needs is turnout. she has the rational vote locked down. she needs to get people to the polls.
the two ladies together could spark imagination and emotion.
i think there are drawbacks, especially on paper, but Hillary lacks that magic. together, they could be magic. what she needs is turnout. she has the rational vote locked down. she needs to get people to the polls.
Last edited:
Phantom Dreamer
Acrobat
Warren is a fake progressive. To see her align herself with Clinton says it all. Warren, at this point, is only known for attacking the low hanging fruit that is Donald Trump. Meh.
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
Aren't they all just fake progressives? Who would you consider a real progressive?
Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
Hewson
Blue Crack Supplier
Hewson
Blue Crack Supplier
Scotty's a New Hampshire boy now.
Moonlit_Angel
Blue Crack Addict
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
Oregoropa
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
Scott is definitely a Faceman (my heterosexual acknowledgment of a good looking dude)
Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
phanan
Blue Crack Addict
Warren is a significantly better choice than Sanders, as she'll be able to attract Sanders' voters (even though most will vote for Hillary anyways), but without being such a snivelling cunt about it.
Oregoropa
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
Warren is a bit of a double edged sword. Sure you can attract the Bernie crowd and liberal base, but you may risk other votes.
Personally I think it's just fine to have two women on the ticket. However the broader electorate may not be ready for it especially men. Call it sexist, old fashioned, or a desire for balance, it may produce a wash, where for every Bernie voter you pick up you lose another Independent male voter. The demographics are changing in the country but this election will be won or lost on the margins. A Clinton-Warren ticket may push even more white males into the Trump column.
Just playing Devil's Advocate.
Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
Personally I think it's just fine to have two women on the ticket. However the broader electorate may not be ready for it especially men. Call it sexist, old fashioned, or a desire for balance, it may produce a wash, where for every Bernie voter you pick up you lose another Independent male voter. The demographics are changing in the country but this election will be won or lost on the margins. A Clinton-Warren ticket may push even more white males into the Trump column.
Just playing Devil's Advocate.
Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
trojanchick99
Rock n' Roll Doggie FOB
Misogyny is alive and well in the US, that's for sure. Still, I think the pros of Warren as VP outweigh the cons.
- Status
Similar threads
- Sticky
