Posted on 06/27/2016 9:04:05 PM PDT by Mariner
WASHINGTON -
As Hillary Clinton campaigned with Elizabeth Warren for the first time Monday, the joint appearance raised the question: Is America ready for two women on a presidential ticket?
Clinton is, of course, the first woman ever to clinch a major-party nomination for president. And she’s considering adding a second woman to the ticket, with Warren, a Democratic senator from Massachusetts, as a running mate.
“There is a wow factor to having two women on the ticket,” said Jim Hodges, a former governor of South Carolina and a Clinton ally who urged the campaign to select a woman. “It’s a change message, particularly in this climate.”
Clinton will pick a running mate before Democrats hold their national convention July 25-28 in Philadelphia.
Clinton and Warren appeared together at Cincinnati Museum Center at Union Terminal, the kind of test run that presumptive nominees often use to measure face-to-face campaign chemistry as they narrow their choices. Clinton and Warren grasped hands in front of about 2,600 enthusiastic supporters.
“Hillary has brains, she has guts, she has thick skin and steady hands, but most of all she has a good heart, and that is what America needs and that is why I’m with her,” Warren told the crowd. “Are you with her?”
Clinton described Warren as a friend and a great leader, saying, “You just saw why she is considered so terrific, so formidable, because she tells it like it is.” Clinton herself said recently that the country probably was ready for two women on a ticket.
(Excerpt) Read more at sacbee.com ...
Is America ready for an ultra-corrupt lying, thieving, murdering female ticket?
Good point, I have to tweak that one a bit... My future ex-wife and her mother...
Granny and Mawmaw. Stronger together.
There is a zero% chance it will be Sanders. And he would be terrible choice. (Note being a “good” or “bad” choice means from Hillary’s POV does the choice help her win)
Warren would be terrible as well imo. The Stalinist lunatics, girl power brigade and members of the press who would be exited by her on the ticket are voting for Shillery anyway. I think the idea that she needs a Bernout whackadoo on her ticket is flawed, they would turnoff the swing voters and RINO defectors that she needs to win.
A smart pick for Hillary would be
A)Castro, to gin up Hispanic turnout with “history”
or
B)Kaine, help win VA/impress people who actually want someone who’s qualified (Castro isn’t and neither is Warren).
I hope she chooses Warren. Warren is nothing but a big old target for Trump.
I don’t know Impy Sanders is against the same trade deal’s that Trump is against he could possibly help Hillary with the bluecolor and union vote in the rustbelt belt States plus, he’ll bring Hillary Clinton the Youth vote as well.
He’s not being vetted, per media reports.
I think protectionists vastly overestimate their pet issue (a tax hike on American consumers) as a vote-getter.
Sanders would scare the s out of middle America once the guns are trained on him, that’s why I thought he was always a weaker general election candidate than Hillary, despite polling better.
As for young voters, unless Hillary adopts his free college plan (and gives full support to legalizing weed), it’s not gonna be the close to same level of enthusiasm.
I think a better bet for her would be to pander to Hispanics.
She can still have all the benefits of having Bernie and Warren campaign for her without actually having to put them on the ticket.
“Elizabeth Warren is a formidable Democrat candidate because she tells the left of the party exactly what it wants to hear. Which is not precisely the same as telling it like it is.”
And: “I think Bernie is a more likely choice.”
Exactly! I wish more FReepers could see this. If Hillary doesn’t pick Bernie as her running mate, many of his supporters will stay home. If she chooses Warren, MOST, if not all, of Bernie’s supporters will hold their nose and vote for Hillary just because Warren is on the ticket. Lots of crossover appeal It would be much the same scenario as how many/most of us got excited when McCain added Palin to the ticket. Personally, I had no desire or enthusiasm to vote for McCain, but once he added Palin, I was definitely going to vote for the ticket.
Now, there’s millions of fanatical disenfranchised Bernie supporters that come close to hating Hillary and may stay home on Election Day. If Hillary adds Bernie, they’ll all show up at the polls. Likewise, I believe there is plenty enough crossover appeal with Warren to draw out those Bernie supporters. Either a Clinton/Sanders ticket or a Clinton/Warren ticket is probably the most formidable opponent Trump/we have. The question is, for old time democrats who still don’t realize how their party is now the socialist party, will they find Bernie more appealing, with all the nutjob supporters he has, or Warren more appealing, despite it being two women placed in charge. The old time traditional Dems are the ones in question on either of those tickets because it is a given that the far leftists and socialists will be very comfortable with either Bernie OR Warren as VP.
People who do not recognize this threat have not thought about it very well.
On second thought, those “old time traditional Dems” will vote Dem no matter who is on the ticket. If they’re too stupid to know by now that their party has been taken over, then they’ll just keep voting Dem no matter what. It’s all the die hard young socialists and the aging hippies that are in play, and both Bernie and Warren excite them.
Good one!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.