Home | About | Donate

Carpe Diem, Senator Warren


Carpe Diem, Senator Warren

Hank Edson

With yesterday’s dead-heat contest in Iowa between Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton, the moment has arrived when Elizabeth Warren’s commitment to fixing our democracy and our economy is being put to the test.

A person can have great judgment and intellect, but if their timing is off, ultimately even those strengths are proven flawed and inadequate. We must have real results if this person is going to be a real leader. Often this person is going to have to take real risks to get real results.


Right-on, Mr. Edson!

I hope Ms. Warren reads this and is moved by it (or by someone else delivering a similar message):

"Warren’s timing, judgment and courage are all now being challenged. It’s not enough to be independent, articulate, and passionate from the bully pulpit. Achieving leadership’s full capacity inevitably involves taking a stand that is by nature risky, but all the more necessary because one’s deepest convictions will not allow any other course of action. One feels compelled within to seize the moment."

If not, I suspect Ms. Warren will later experience a "Colin Powell" moment... in the form of a lifetime of regrets.


She would really have to show her Oklahoma roots to deflect having two northeastern candidates. As much of a fan of hers as I am, I think the know-nothings would have a field day painting Bernie and Liz as two "pointy-headed intellectuals". I am just being a realist here, as she has stirred as much positivism in me as has Bernie.


Maybe, maybe not. Historically, we had the Clinton/Gore ticket in 1992. Different times, though.

Then again, Bernie and Liz may have already had this conversation, and her options made quite clear to him.


Living in San Francisco's rarified air totally detached from the political and economic reality of 90 plus % of the US population inhabiting 99% of the US land mass, Edson's proposal is 180 degrees from what the 2016 landscape will look like. A ticket with both candidates from New England would give the GOP and others a huge lever to serially remind voters of how the east and west coast elites are shafting heartland dwellers.

Also a Sanders/Warren ticket would consist of two heavy hitters on the same ticket. Deploying a relatively progressive heavy hitter to the office of vice president when the House and Senate are so devoid of progressives is very bad strategy. President Sanders will need lots of House and Senate help to move his agenda forward and Warren is a key player he will need in the Senate.

A woman VP candidate from anywhere except the east or west coast will be the winning formula for Sanders.


It seems to me if Warren endorsed Clinton it would give her campaign a big boost but I don't see how an endorsement for Sanders would help him much. Probably almost everyone who would be positively affected by a Warren endorsement for Sanders is already supporting Sanders. If Warren isn't sure what to do it may be because she cannot figure out how Sanders could ever win in the general election. Being a Democratic senator she probably has had a number of discussions with her colleagues on this matter and they probably all believe Sanders can't win. His campaign is not aimed for the general election at all and I think this has really raised concerns among members of the Senate.


I think Liz is waiting around to see which candidate is winning and go with the winner. She is the obvious VP choice for either candidate.

On the other hand, Hillary is a Wall Street millionaire and Warren is a regulator. Still, Hillary wants the Presidency so badly that she might just pick Warren to assure victory.

The longer Liz waits to go with Bernie, the more her commitment to fairness could become an issue.


I am pleased Hank Edson articulates this argument. Yet, I am too busy and too ill-prepared to assess all the things needing assessing to say he is either right or jumping the snark. What is wrong with letting Bernie assess his options as he trucks along and holds the momentum? Surely his options will not diminish if he and Elizabeth take another month to make this call. Or, at least, until they/we are closer to South Carolina to decide if her presence will be more or less of an asset by then. In any event, I am pleased the discussion is launched.


The entire premise of this article is wrong: Sanders/Warren is NOT our dream ticket. Bernie will need a running mate with a different set of experience than his (outside the Senate, non-Washington, executive branch, etc.). Further, whether or not Bernie wins the White House, we NEED Elizabeth Warren in the Senate. ESPECIALLY if Bernie wins, we'll need her to help push for many of the programs he's proposing. Of course, it won't happen unless we also elect other progressive Senators and Representatives too, but for the time being at least, Elizabeth Warren is playing an incredibly important role, and it would be a loss for all of us if she were to step aside from that to be merely the Vice President in a Sanders administration.


Where do you come up with this stuff? You know this how? Go troll someplace else.


I agree with Hank. Of course we want Liz on the ticket. She's the one: WHY CAN'T WE HAVE TWO PRESIDENTS, SERVING TOGETHER.
One thing that I have observed is we (progressives, plus others)) are all pretty much on the same page and even sentence, and sometimes word. Which I think is good. It's going to help us figure out how best to help Bernie and Liz get elected.
If Liz is not the one, it may break my heart, and I'm sure many other of you feel the same, but the movement will continue to expand rapidly. Nothing can stop it. It's main connection to human spirituality is deep.


I don't doubt it would be a wonderful timely thing for Sen. Warren to be asked to join Sen. Sanders on his ticket, Short of that, if she simply comes out now and endorses him it would also be grand and would rally many more to his banner. Sitting on the sidelines though and not acting now IMO will ultimately put a stain on her Progressive credentials.


That's one of the ONLY responsibilities the VP has in the Senate. As a Senator, she introduces bills and amendments, sits on committees, sub-committees, and caucuses, call and question witnesses at hearings, etc.. Right now, she has a particularly potent ability to effect positive change on Capitol Hill, and to fight against harmful bills. That would all be lost if she were merely the largely ceremonial "President of the Senate".


Nice idea Hank and I believe it could work but Sen Warren is misguided in believing she can do more good in the Senate. If Hillary winds up as First Lady she will marginalize Warren as she (HRC) starts pushing more status quo incremental legislation, telling the middle-class to be patient. It will be Obama's half a loaf BS and when Warren protests she be branded as too far left, magic pony, blah blah blah. That's the plan.

I remember when Gov Cuomo (Mario) decided not to take the bait against Bush Sr in a run for the WH. I think his ego got in the way and Clinton, who was really just along for the ride at the time, trying to develop some brand identity, saw opportunity, seized it, and won the WH.

Warren had best decide soon.


Now is the time for Senator Warren to endorse Bernie and accept the VP nod. Coming just before the New Hampshire primary, this will serve to strengthen Bernie's lead in that state and help him trounce Hillary. A thorough lashing of Hillary in NH coming on the heels of essentially a Bernie victory in Iowa could cause the Clinton campaign to deflate like it did 8 years ago. Bernie is going to be a one termer due to age and that is OK. Senator Warren will be there to continue the revolution.


You had me on the first part of your argument (Most Warren fans are probably already Sanders fans). But the 2nd half of your post is exactly the Clinton argument about "electability" that's being rejected by the millions of people donating and showing up for Bernie, and that was rejected by almost exactly half of the Democratic caucus-goers last night in Iowa


What makes anyone think that Sen Warren has not seized the day and preferred to continue playing coy about her options. We know that the blonde certainly looks good in blue! Other than that who knows what is written on the blank slate of her political mind?


p.s. Most candidates don't select their running mate until AFTER they've wrapped up the nomination. That's why the VP candidate is often someone who had just been a political opponent (Obama-Biden, Clinton-Gore, Reagan-Bush, JFK-LBJ, etc.)


This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


Part of the consideration for all of them has to be: party central as well as the Clinton apparatus will see to it that whomever sides with Bernie, and Clinton is the nominee, will get no tea and crumpets on the day of the coronation. And we used to think the democrats were so feckless and disorganized - and here they've gone and organized themselves into a virtual brick wall.