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

Nonhlanhla

(2,074 posts)
4. I think Warren would be an intriguing choice
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 08:43 AM
Jun 2016

It would signal that Hillary plans to be a more progressive president than Bill was. I suspect she will be, in fact, both because I think she might be more progressive than Bill, and because these are different times. (In fact, I think Bill would have been a more progressive president this time around, given the changes in the country and the fact that this time around he would not have been the Dem president that follows the Reagan era.)

Regarding the two concerns raised here, I think those are valid concerns, but I also think that there are ways around it. I think both Hillary and EW are cognizant of the fact that if they want to team up, they need to make sure that EW resigns in time for there to be an election for her seat and not an appointment. EW will have to decide if she wants to risk that.

Secondly, I don't think EW will sign up for a mere ceremonial role. Despite the role that I suspect Bill play in a Hillary presidency, I think there is good reason to believe that Hillary will want an active VP, much like Gore was a very active VP under Bill even though Bill also gave Hillary an active role (initially). The Clintons are savvy political players, but they're also team players, as we've seen time and time again.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Sure I'd like to see HRC ...»Reply #4