2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumThe more I think about it, and as ridiculous as it sounds, a Sanders/Clinton ticket...
...is our best hope. Bernie leading the charge for the big things at the top, Clinton getting it done as President of the Senate. Maybe after they battle it out, they can just team up and do us all a gigantic favor. There is still the issue of Hillary's money taking and people really don't like her, but I wonder if that could be overcome by both sides coming together for what one believes, and the other says they believe.
kgnu_fan
(3,021 posts)...If he could somehow convince Warren to join his ticket that'd be awesome.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)bravenak
(34,648 posts)Why? I do not understand this mentality that she should step back and let him be president and just be vice president. Why not him be vice president?
AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)That's why. Plus Bernie beats ALL Repubs, Hillary loses to Cruz, Rubio, Kasich & tied with Trump.
HEAD-TO-HEAD MATCHUPS:
Against Trump:
Hillary 44, Trump 43
Bernie 48, Trump 42
Against Cruz:
Hillary 43, Cruz 46
Bernie 49, Cruz 39
Against Rubio:
Hillary 41, Rubio 48
Bernie 47, Rubio 41
Against Kasich:
Hillary 39, Kasich 47
Bernie 45, Kasich 41
Against Jebra (who has since dropped out)
Hillary 43, Jebra 44
Bernie 49, Jebra 39
FAVORABILITY:
Bernie +15 (he is the only candidate on either side above water).
Hillary -21 (she has worst rating of both parties).
Lucinda
(31,170 posts)Vote2016
(1,198 posts)TTUBatfan2008
(3,623 posts)He fundamentally disagrees with the Clinton way of doing business with lobbyists. She would not want such an old guy on her ticket. She would need someone much younger. One of the Castro twins is much more likely as Clinton's running mate.
TCJ70
(4,387 posts)...she shouldn't be at the top of the ticket. At the moment, she wins against Trump...by one.
Jester Messiah
(4,711 posts)She can either be Vice-president, or she can be the nominee and lose the general election due to the overwhelming hatred she inspires in damn near everyone. Honestly I think she'd be a drag on the ticket, there's a reason Obama picked Biden.
bravenak
(34,648 posts)Jester Messiah
(4,711 posts)You did ask.
treestar
(82,383 posts)zappaman
(20,606 posts)pretty much the only thing you said that makes sense.
TCJ70
(4,387 posts)...I don't expect myself to make sense. LOL.
pangaia
(24,324 posts)Or... blokess..?? Is that a word?
TCJ70
(4,387 posts)It's bloke, by the way!
aidbo
(2,328 posts)pangaia
(24,324 posts)LiberalElite
(14,691 posts)aidbo
(2,328 posts)I think the saying goes: "I before E except after C, and all those other fucking times it's E before I"
'Scuse my German.
LiberalElite
(14,691 posts)aidbo
(2,328 posts)AHD1, following Pokorny, derived "feud", "fey", "fickle", "foe", and "fuck" from an Indo-European root peig2 = "hostile"; but AHD2 and AHD3 have dropped this connection for "fuck" and give no pre-Germanic etymon for it. Eric Partridge, in the 7th edition of Dictionary of Slang and Unconventional English (Macmillan, 1970), said that "fuck" "almost certainly" comes from the Indo-European root *peuk- = "to prick" (which is the source of the English words "compunction", "expunge", "impugn", "poignant", "point", "pounce", "pugilist", "punctuate", "puncture", "pungent", and "pygmy" . Robert Claiborne, in The Roots of English: A Reader's Handbook of Word Origin (Times, 1989) agrees that this is "probably" the etymon. Problems with such theories include a distribution that suggests a North-Sea Germanic areal form rather than an inherited one; the murkiness of the phonetic relations; and the fact that no alleged cognate outside Germanic has sexual connotations.
http://www.snopes.com/language/acronyms/fuck.asp
Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)aidbo
(2,328 posts)Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)or here
https://books.google.co.jp/books?id=-gY_CQAAQBAJ&pg=PT164&lpg=PT164&dq=%22Bruces+and+Sheilas%22&source=bl&ots=Zk1NlEdQy5&sig=JfD-C56pIJOrTXD6l-1PIsE4J_w&hl=ja&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi2oM_U-4zLAhXmGKYKHaDLDGQQ6AEIRDAG#v=onepage&q=%22Bruces%20and%20Sheilas%22&f=false
AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)nc4bo
(17,651 posts)PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)Zorra
(27,670 posts)pangaia
(24,324 posts)Jester Messiah
(4,711 posts)I don't want her as VP for probably the same reasons Obama didn't. If Bernie doesn't win the nomination I'd like him back in the Senate being the the thorn in her side as she"get's things done" by taking us further into Republicanville.
drm604
(16,230 posts)Although I do think that if Sanders were to win the nomination the majority of Clinton supporters would vote for him, there would be some who wouldn't, and they might be swayed by Clinton being on the ticket, especially given Sanders' age.
TDale313
(7,820 posts)Bridges well and truly burned, particularly by the Clinton camp.
TCJ70
(4,387 posts)...outweighs my dislike of Clinton. She's definitely done herself in for the GE if she makes it there.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)ebayfool
(3,411 posts)No way. She's toxic.
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)loyalsister
(13,390 posts)It sounds good on the surface, but I prefer to have a VP candidate who I am confident will be in good health 8 yrs. from now. In 8 yrs. Hillary will be almost 80. Natural bodily changes that make the world more difficult to negotiate are a function of aging.
JackRiddler
(24,979 posts)I'm sure it will be called "natural causes."
cascadiance
(19,537 posts)There would be some that would want to install someone to serve oligarchs to replace him in that fashion, as ugly as it might sound.
And likewise, I wouldn't want Sanders being a VP to Clinton either, for the same reason, as there are crazies out there that might want to put Bernie in power that way too. And that scenario would also take Bernie out of power from the Senate too.
The best VP Sanders could have is someone that is a lot like him in terms of where that person's political philosophy is, as there would need to be a double assassination to change the seat of power then to whoever is Speaker of the House, and I think the possibility of being caught is far more in that case making it not worth there while.
And we will likely need two consecutive presidencies to fix the problems facing us with this economy and climate change, etc., which is why I still think someone like Elizabeth Warren would be the perfect solution, since she would give those wanting a woman president a short wait to have that likely happen right after Bernie being in office then.
tularetom
(23,664 posts)Yeah, that'll work.
Actually, I'd be happier if that ticket were reversed. Then when Clinton goes to jail, we get a president we can trust.
Good thinking, Tom.
grasswire
(50,130 posts)Too many people hate and distrust Clinton.
Plus she would never settle.
Plus the VP needs to be more youthful, to build on the next 8 years after 2020.
demwing
(16,916 posts)Why in the world would we want an ambitious, corrupt, liar just a single 74 year old Bernie heartbeat away from the office?
Bernie may as well just get one of those nascar suits with the corporate logos on it if he picks her as VP.
Qutzupalotl
(14,317 posts)She would work behind the scenes to get him impeached so she could be president.
He chose her as SoS partly because of her prior contacts around the world, but mostly to keep her a team player and not a challenger in 2012.
malokvale77
(4,879 posts)Personally I think he had her logging all those hours, flying to obscure places, just to keep her out of his way.
SamKnause
(13,108 posts)Just say no to the Bush family.
Just say no to the Clinton family.
The pain, destruction, and death these two families have caused
this country and the world is incalculable.
workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)Why would a senator give up his seat to be VP?
Pretty sure Bernie would not want to do that.
Karma13612
(4,552 posts)VulgarPoet
(2,872 posts)Matariki
(18,775 posts)Can't see Sanders as VP in a Clinton administration, and I'd fear for his life if the ticket were reversed.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)be in some peoples minds. We have a nation of many assassinations, no reason TPTB would stop now. Even without Clinton as VP he would seriously have to watch himself and trust no one.
.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)Skwmom
(12,685 posts)tokenlib
(4,186 posts)I remember eight years ago, some of us thought the hope/change theme of Obama would be a progressive break from Clintonism and we deceived ourselves. Obama gave us Rahm the Chief of Staff and more Wall Street insiders. If we don't get the break now, it may be a decade or more before we get it.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)LiberalElite
(14,691 posts)napi21
(45,806 posts)Second, lets face it, they're both old! Neither is too old to govern as a great President, but many people want the safety net of a younger person as VP. The third thing is a candidate typically chooses someone from a purple state that they need to win.
LiberalElite
(14,691 posts)napi21
(45,806 posts)She was the Senator from NY. They LIVE in NY. Both she & Bill are more associated with NY/DC than they are Ar.
thesquanderer
(11,989 posts)I think he chooses someone who further motivates his base and/or someone who increases his appeal to independents. Hillary does neither.
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)Autumn Colors
(2,379 posts)Autumn Colors
(2,379 posts)Also, If it were Sanders/Clinton, how long do you honestly think it would be before Bernie met with some sort of unfortunate accident ... small plane crash, etc.?
Terrible idea.
treestar
(82,383 posts)Picking the evil Hillary as his running mate? OMG. That would mean he is a slave of Wall Street!!!
If Bernie accepted to be Hillary's running mate, shouldn't he go under the bus for caving to Wall Street?