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 Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Mc Mike

(9,247 posts)
9. You're right, on some points.
Fri Jul 1, 2016, 01:45 PM
Jul 2016

The more corporate-inclined in the leadership would not want her to be a functional V.P. Both those bad activist VPs did have a lot of previous time around various sectors of gov and politics.

But I don't see her wanting to chair a pro corporate powerful and secret energy task force, get involved in handing out sweetheart contracts to privatized military adventures, or head the anti-drug and anti-terror efforts. She could bring her knowledge and activism to bear in the areas of Health Care expansion, since she was an expert witness for the gov on massive home foreclosures caused by medical cost induced bankruptcies, and CFPB enforcement.

Warren's trajectory, if she rose to VP or Prez, would be much the same as that of Prez Obama. He hasn't delivered on a lot of progressive things I would have liked, but did an astounding job in many respects. Much better than the job done by Poppy bush, who had gov experience coming out the wazoo.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Rachel building strong ca...»Reply #9