A bunch of anonymous dicks from Wall Street are anonymously warning Politico that if Hillary Clinton picks Elizabeth Warren as her vice presidential nominee, the relationship between Clinton and hedge funds will be "poisoned," and they "will not give her any money," and the American economy will be "bad."
Realistically, Warren doesn't have enough seniority to lead. Thats what its based on there. Best she can do is get one vote, filibuster, and yell at her fellow Congresspeople. Most of the time her work is wasted. I've heard that she is interested in the veep for the platform idea. Her yelling would get national attention, not just from cspan wonks.
I'm not wild about Warren as veep, but if we imagine a successful impeachment--which requires only a bunch of Republicans--which of the veep candidates do we prefer immediately being forced to take over the Presidency?
When properly structured, the wealthy show no income off their wealth and accumulate billions without showing capital gains. Me? My wealth is in my home and cars, and I pay a proportional "wealth tax" on their value. Why not them?
If the Dems retake the Senate, she'll move up quite a bit, and she has good committee assignments. Plus, she raises a shit-ton of cash for the Party, so she will get a spot in the leadership. Not a back-bencher by any means.
I still think Sen. Warren is most needed in the Senate. She is the first articulate, outspoken legislator in a long time to seriously and effectively advocate for the 99%.
We must stop electing people who bend us over to be fisted by Big Business and Wall Street money changers.
Methinks the MOU whine a little too much with this one. Getting their worst enemy out of the Senate, defanged and into the friendly cage of the VPs office would thrill them to no end. And we would lose one of our best advocates just as surely as if some busboy had shot her in the hotel kitchen.
Hillary is not foolish enough to choose Warren as her running mate. Why sacrifice a secure senate seat when she will win with literally anybody as VP? Remember, Massachusetts has a GOP governor who would appoint Warren's replacement and the Democrats really do want to win back the senate.
Realistically, Warren doesn't have enough seniority to lead. Thats what its based on there. Best she can do is get one vote, filibuster, and yell at her fellow Congresspeople. Most of the time her work is wasted. I've heard that she is interested in the veep for the platform idea. Her yelling would get national attention, not just from cspan wonks.
I'm not wild about Warren as veep, but if we imagine a successful impeachment--which requires only a bunch of Republicans--which of the veep candidates do we prefer immediately being forced to take over the Presidency?
I have a fantasy, that I fap to, and it involves Madame Pres., VP Warren and Rachel Maddow as Press Secretary.
Mine as well. Haven't seen it since.
I think you mean "humane", followed by a sarcasm emoji.
When properly structured, the wealthy show no income off their wealth and accumulate billions without showing capital gains. Me? My wealth is in my home and cars, and I pay a proportional "wealth tax" on their value. Why not them?
Please, tell me more about how a couple of Wall Street toilet zealots can make the economy "bad" all by their little lonesomes.
Hey, that base is yooooge
I think Wall St. could be that short-sighted. I'm reminded - again - of the scene from the species finale of Dinosaurs:
Earl: I think you're missing the point, sir. The world may be coming to an end! Mr. Richfield: Well, that's a fourth quarter problem.
If the Dems retake the Senate, she'll move up quite a bit, and she has good committee assignments. Plus, she raises a shit-ton of cash for the Party, so she will get a spot in the leadership. Not a back-bencher by any means.
Oh, be still my heart, how wonderful would that be? Maybe Liz AND Barry Bamz?
I still think Sen. Warren is most needed in the Senate. She is the first articulate, outspoken legislator in a long time to seriously and effectively advocate for the 99%.
We must stop electing people who bend us over to be fisted by Big Business and Wall Street money changers.
if she was the veep, they would leave hillz alone, for fear of liz as the prez, after they sent her packing. so, win, win.
Exactly! Warren is far more effective as an articulate, assertive legislator than a sidelined, speech-giving VP.
but then they would have to be happy with hilliary, cause if they get rid of her, guess who's coming to dinner?
Methinks the MOU whine a little too much with this one. Getting their worst enemy out of the Senate, defanged and into the friendly cage of the VPs office would thrill them to no end. And we would lose one of our best advocates just as surely as if some busboy had shot her in the hotel kitchen.
Hillary is not foolish enough to choose Warren as her running mate. Why sacrifice a secure senate seat when she will win with literally anybody as VP? Remember, Massachusetts has a GOP governor who would appoint Warren's replacement and the Democrats really do want to win back the senate.