Ryan Cooper thinks it would be good for her-and, of course, questions how good it would be for Bernie.
So he envisages her asking him and that he should piously say no way.
I doubt very much she would ask him anyway. Nor should she.
"The first and most obvious reason to do so is to try and get Sanders' voters on board with the Democratic Party. It's been a fairly acrimonious primary, and Sanders has been winning stunning margins among young people in many states. The youth vote is a key part of the Obama coalition, particularly in the swing states where Sanders has been doing better. Having him on the ticket would go a long ways towards convincing young voters who might have been turned off by Clinton's dishonest attacks on single-payer health care."
"Of course, Sanders is an old white guy in a diverse and younger party. The Clinton campaign might calculate that tapping a younger minority politician would be a better choice, but on the other hand, polling shows that today's young people are actually ideologically left-wing, and pandering with mere representation (as opposed to co-opting Sanders' platform, or at least a weaker version of it) might actually backfire, as with the god-awful abuela listicle affair. A young minority candidate with leftist views might be the ideal choice, but that would mean foregoing Sanders' built-up base of support, high popularity, and huge reserves of credibility."
http://theweek.com/articles/609864/should-hillary-clinton-pick-bernie-sanders-running-mate
I don't think Hil is thinking of him. Obama himself had considered her as his VP in 2008 but his staff talked him out of it. He did though insist on making her SOS.
But HRC and Obama are fairly similar Democrats on the same page. Bernie has spent his whole life as a scourge of the party. No way would she or the rest of the party elevate him to this extent.
It may well be that over time some of what Bernie has talked about will be co-opted. But him in the WH would be a bridge too far.
My guess is that her likely choice for VP is Julio Castro.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-electon-clinton-idUSKCN0S92Q820151015
Cooper in talking about Bernie's 'stunning' numbers with the young ignores that this is only regarding white millennials. Black millennials didn't go for him in anywhere near the same numbers.
Back to Cooper:
Sanders would be taking an awful risk signing up to be Clinton's running mate. They are not on the same political page, at all. He comes from the old New Deal tradition, and is running to build and extend it to full Nordic-style social democracy. She comes from a party tradition that was founded to overthrow those old ideas as electoral failures, to be replaced with a lot of fiddly tax credits heavily slanted towards the rich."
But how is Bernie risking anything? It''s not like he's achieved Nordic social democracy sitting in the Senate all these years.
Anyway, I've chronicled a number of times, that by Bernie's standards of what a 'True Progressive' is, even FDR wouldn't pass the mustard-as he took Wall St. donations and put people from Wall St. in charge of financial regulation. His premise was that you want the folks who know how to cheat in charge of regulation as they will know how to stop it.
And let's face it, the Dems had a lot of electoral failure before Bill Clinton, something which Clinton haters never acknowledge. But again, unlike the Bernie folks, evolution happens. Hillary would not be as conservative as her husband as today's Dem party is more liberal than it was in the 90s.
"Furthermore, the Clintons are fairly cynical politicians who highly prize personal loyalty. There is every reason to think that they would completely ignore Sanders as soon as the election was over — and with basically zero institutional power as vice president, he'd be stuck twiddling his thumbs for the rest of his career. Better from his perspective to stay in the Senate, if that's the case."
But is it cynical to want someone on the same page as you in the White House? This is why I don't think she would ask him anyway. Name me the President who has ever nominated someone who would actively undermine him-or now her-in the policy area?
Obama had to let Biden know early to stay on the same page. If she were calling for Policy A and Bernie as VP was saying 'You only want Policy A because you got paid in a speech' how would that work?
P.S. Ok. So what I do think is plausible is that there may be some bills she works on where Bernie is able to confer with her and have some input. Her team actually keeps in frequent contact with Elizabeth Warren on financial policy.
So he envisages her asking him and that he should piously say no way.
I doubt very much she would ask him anyway. Nor should she.
"The first and most obvious reason to do so is to try and get Sanders' voters on board with the Democratic Party. It's been a fairly acrimonious primary, and Sanders has been winning stunning margins among young people in many states. The youth vote is a key part of the Obama coalition, particularly in the swing states where Sanders has been doing better. Having him on the ticket would go a long ways towards convincing young voters who might have been turned off by Clinton's dishonest attacks on single-payer health care."
"Of course, Sanders is an old white guy in a diverse and younger party. The Clinton campaign might calculate that tapping a younger minority politician would be a better choice, but on the other hand, polling shows that today's young people are actually ideologically left-wing, and pandering with mere representation (as opposed to co-opting Sanders' platform, or at least a weaker version of it) might actually backfire, as with the god-awful abuela listicle affair. A young minority candidate with leftist views might be the ideal choice, but that would mean foregoing Sanders' built-up base of support, high popularity, and huge reserves of credibility."
http://theweek.com/articles/609864/should-hillary-clinton-pick-bernie-sanders-running-mate
I don't think Hil is thinking of him. Obama himself had considered her as his VP in 2008 but his staff talked him out of it. He did though insist on making her SOS.
But HRC and Obama are fairly similar Democrats on the same page. Bernie has spent his whole life as a scourge of the party. No way would she or the rest of the party elevate him to this extent.
It may well be that over time some of what Bernie has talked about will be co-opted. But him in the WH would be a bridge too far.
My guess is that her likely choice for VP is Julio Castro.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-electon-clinton-idUSKCN0S92Q820151015
Cooper in talking about Bernie's 'stunning' numbers with the young ignores that this is only regarding white millennials. Black millennials didn't go for him in anywhere near the same numbers.
Back to Cooper:
Sanders would be taking an awful risk signing up to be Clinton's running mate. They are not on the same political page, at all. He comes from the old New Deal tradition, and is running to build and extend it to full Nordic-style social democracy. She comes from a party tradition that was founded to overthrow those old ideas as electoral failures, to be replaced with a lot of fiddly tax credits heavily slanted towards the rich."
But how is Bernie risking anything? It''s not like he's achieved Nordic social democracy sitting in the Senate all these years.
Anyway, I've chronicled a number of times, that by Bernie's standards of what a 'True Progressive' is, even FDR wouldn't pass the mustard-as he took Wall St. donations and put people from Wall St. in charge of financial regulation. His premise was that you want the folks who know how to cheat in charge of regulation as they will know how to stop it.
And let's face it, the Dems had a lot of electoral failure before Bill Clinton, something which Clinton haters never acknowledge. But again, unlike the Bernie folks, evolution happens. Hillary would not be as conservative as her husband as today's Dem party is more liberal than it was in the 90s.
"Furthermore, the Clintons are fairly cynical politicians who highly prize personal loyalty. There is every reason to think that they would completely ignore Sanders as soon as the election was over — and with basically zero institutional power as vice president, he'd be stuck twiddling his thumbs for the rest of his career. Better from his perspective to stay in the Senate, if that's the case."
But is it cynical to want someone on the same page as you in the White House? This is why I don't think she would ask him anyway. Name me the President who has ever nominated someone who would actively undermine him-or now her-in the policy area?
Obama had to let Biden know early to stay on the same page. If she were calling for Policy A and Bernie as VP was saying 'You only want Policy A because you got paid in a speech' how would that work?
P.S. Ok. So what I do think is plausible is that there may be some bills she works on where Bernie is able to confer with her and have some input. Her team actually keeps in frequent contact with Elizabeth Warren on financial policy.
No comments:
Post a Comment