seat as we did during pres. Obama's tenure. Mass has a GOP governor and voted for Scott Brown...we simply can't risk it. Mass has elected Republicans. Without the Senate, we accomplish nothing...not even judges.

I believe it's called the Kennedy rule.

Sets up an ironic scenario Kennedy beating Markey in the primary and winning the election Warren seat becomes available Markey runs for it in 90 days making Kennedy the senior senator from Massachusetts due to the Kennedy rule.

...but you could similarly envision a scenario where the strength of the ticket with Warren as VP actually helps GAIN us one or even multiple Senate seats from states other than MA.

And of course the MOST important part is being sure to win the presidency, and if Warren as VP is actulayy our best shot at that, the rest is nearly moot.

I'm sure the Lt. Governor is a very nice man, frankly I don't even know his name, but I don't want Gretchen to leave.
the Michigan House and Senate are firmly in republican control and I'm afraid they'll walk all over the Lt. Governor.

Plus, I love how she pissess off the right winger, and we got a lot of them.

That Sen. Warren has a strong appeal to middle of the road suburban and career women whose disgust for the cheap thug is one of the principal drivers of this election.


"Defeat of a hated enemy is something to be for."

Democratic governors will not suppress votes. In this case, all states are not created equal. But we should fight for every state. Our odds are better in states without Republicans running the election.

Like you, I would love to see this same poll for those swing states.

Jesus, can we move out of the the fucking 1940s already? Why does EVERY presidential election have to have someone born in the ‘40s on one of the two tickets? It’s so ridiculous.

I like her too, but that Senate seat is way too important!

but we absolutely can not take a chance on losing her senate seat. it will likely be Harris.