• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Excellent column on Sanders for VP

Your comments and observations are encouraged.
A Sanders/Clinton ticket would be more appealing for the Sander voters and harder for Trump to beat than the other way around.




So you're saying he'd be willing to kill his integrity for Hillary.
Kill integrity for Hillary?
No, just Hillary.

 
No, he wouldn't. If Bernie agreed to be her running mate I am certain there would be some major strings attached. And as VP, an elected position, if Hillary went back on her word to him regarding those strings, he could make her life very difficult. I doubt a VP Sanders would just sit back and be a Yes Man. Which is also why I highly doubt Hillary would ask him to be her VP. I also doubt her donors would allow it.

I am personally on the fence over whether or not I would be willing to vote for her if she made Bernie her running mate. I would have to hear from Bernie what we would be getting out of it.

What do you care what Bernie says? You won't listen to him anyway. You have made up your mind to help Trump win. Just stick to that. Just remember when Hillary wins without you she has no reason to listen to Sanders or his supporters again. Just burn your bridges and chew on your nose.
 
Last edited:
What do you care what Bernie says? You won't listen to him anyway. You have made up your mind to help Trump win. Just stick to that. Just remember when Hillary wins without you she has no reason to listen to Sanders or his supporters again. Just burn your bridges and chew on your nose.

Oh my. The irony.

I remember when Gore tried this strategy. Best of luck to you.
 
Oh my. The irony.

I remember when Gore tried this strategy. Best of luck to you.

Hillary will win and when she does why should she listen to Sanders? It appears he is determined to burn his bridges...such a shame.
 
For a few weeks now I have been edging closer and closer to the idea that the Democratic Party should unite behind a ticket of Clinton & Sanders to preserve party unity and win the November election. Today, we have an excellent column from Peggy Noonan in the Wall Street Journal in which she explores the case for such a ticket. In addition ot the obvious short term advantages, she has some very insightful observations about both parties and their future.

Clinton-Sanders: Maybe That?s the Ticket - WSJ
Clinton has been hinting for at least the last week or two that she would be open to a Sanders and Warren VP nominations. Whether or not she is serious or just pandering for votes is anyone's guess but she is definitely seeing the advantage of taking a meaningful step toward mollifying most of the Sanders voters before the convention.

I'm not convinced that Sanders would be a good pick though. First, the historical comparisons to Lyndon Johnson and Henry Wallace are flawed. Johnson brought the south when the south was reliably Democractic. Today no politician, Republican or Democratic, could automatically guarantee the South's electoral votes. And Henry Wallace joined the FDR ticket with a mostly popular sitting president, and Wallace to my knowledge never called FDR unqualified or insinuated that he was corrupt. Second, Sanders has many video clips of him calling Clinton unqualified or basically a corrupt tool of Wall Street. Lyndon Johnson may have said similar things on film clips or in newspaper articles, but I don't recall reading that Nixon used LBJ's words against Kennedy in the general election campaign as Trump has shown a willingness to do with Sanders's comments. He might have, but not to my knowledge.

Sanders is also a party outsider and barely a Democrat who has attacked the very foundations of the Democratic Party, something Lyndon and Wallace never did during their presidential campaigns.

If Hillary loses California by a 10+% margin, she may have no choice but to offer Sanders the VP slot. It would be a rocky marriage to say the least. If Sanders agrees, that is. He may want to "Bern it down" with the rest of the Bernie or Bust voters and take his chances fighting the Trump presidency as a minority Senator leading the revolution for himself or Warren in 4 years.
 
For a few weeks now I have been edging closer and closer to the idea that the Democratic Party should unite behind a ticket of Clinton & Sanders to preserve party unity and win the November election. Today, we have an excellent column from Peggy Noonan in the Wall Street Journal in which she explores the case for such a ticket. In addition ot the obvious short term advantages, she has some very insightful observations about both parties and their future.

Clinton-Sanders: Maybe That?s the Ticket - WSJ

Should Sanders continue to win, especially if he wins in California, this only becomes more and more the realistic way to go the same way that JFK picked his hated opposite Lyndon Johnson in 1960 and thereby won the election.

Your comments and observations are encouraged.

You're going to have to convince the Sanders supporters to stop their chair tossing long enough to consider this.
 
You're going to have to convince the Sanders supporters to stop their chair tossing long enough to consider this.

That is a very small number and yes - they will be tamed in good time.
 
The last thing in the world I want...is Bernie Sanders as the vice presidential candidate with Hillary Clinton.

MY GUESS: Peggy Noonan, The Wall Street Journal, and the Republican Party base WOULD LOVE FOR BERNIE SANDERS TO BE THE VEEP CANDIDATE ON THE DEM TICKET.

My further guess is: The would love it because it would spell doom for the Dem ticket.

Hillary Clinton is NOT going to choose Bernie Sanders as a running mate...and since I want her to be elected, I am happy she will not.

There's not a chance I'd vote for Hillary no matter who might be on the ticket with her. But we do agree Bernie as a VP would do Hillary no good. I'd like to believe Bernie would refuse an offer.

Hillary's record is that of Democrat establishment moderate and that is all we have to go on. Hillary's position on anything is whatever will get her votes at any given time.

I'm not a Democrat but Hillary is everything I don't like about Washington. Bernie is more of what I'd like to see in Washington than any candidate I've see in a long time. Hillary and Bernie are oil and water.

No Clinton VP is going to going to have much of any influence on anything, anywhere. There are two reasons:

1. Bill Clinton. If you get one Clinton you get both. I can't even imagine both of them back in the White House. Bill will be doing whatever and with much, much more power and authority than any VP. The Hillary VP will be the Clinton's "Hey boy". The best way to neuter Sanders would be to keep him close.

2. Bernie Sanders would gain nothing to speak of by accepting. Bernie is well liked and respected. Bernie has charisma and a movement behind him. That can and hopefully will continue after the election, even if he doesn't win.

Bonus reason: Hillary would in no way want someone with more integrity and more respect as her VP.
 
What do you care what Bernie says? You won't listen to him anyway. You have made up your mind to help Trump win. Just stick to that. Just remember when Hillary wins without you she has no reason to listen to Sanders or his supporters again. Just burn your bridges and chew on your nose.

Sorry, my vote isn't owed to anyone. I will give my vote to the person who earns it. If Hillary wanted my vote she would have earned it. She didn't. Her choice. If Trump wins because Hillary doesn't earn enough votes that will be 100% on her. Though I would fully expect her to try and pass the buck. That is what she does. And it is starting to look like many of her supporters do as well.
 
Sorry, my vote isn't owed to anyone. I will give my vote to the person who earns it. If Hillary wanted my vote she would have earned it. She didn't. Her choice. If Trump wins because Hillary doesn't earn enough votes that will be 100% on her. Though I would fully expect her to try and pass the buck. That is what she does. And it is starting to look like many of her supporters do as well.

Elections are about choices. If you prefer Trump over Hillary that is your business but don't blame her for your lack of intelligence. If you throw away your vote that same logic applies. You also give up all rights to complain about whomever wins since you bailed on your responsibility as a citizen.
 
For a few weeks now I have been edging closer and closer to the idea that the Democratic Party should unite behind a ticket of Clinton & Sanders to preserve party unity and win the November election. Today, we have an excellent column from Peggy Noonan in the Wall Street Journal in which she explores the case for such a ticket. In addition ot the obvious short term advantages, she has some very insightful observations about both parties and their future.

Clinton-Sanders: Maybe That?s the Ticket - WSJ

Should Sanders continue to win, especially if he wins in California, this only becomes more and more the realistic way to go the same way that JFK picked his hated opposite Lyndon Johnson in 1960 and thereby won the election.

Your comments and observations are encouraged.

I would much rather see a Trump/Sanders ticket.
 
Sanders could bring in Vermont, a crucial swing state. I don't think Sanders supporters would be mollified by the VP proposition.

Vermont is a swing state?

How many people really live there?
 
You're going to have to convince the Sanders supporters to stop their chair tossing long enough to consider this.

Please show me the footage of someone tossing a chair.
 
I'd have to wonder if Sanders would take the VP slot. Sure, it's a pay bump, but it's a largely powerless and ceremonial position. Is the extra money worth it to serve as HRCs attack dog for 4 or 8 years? He'll be 75 on election day, so doing the 8 years for a chance to sit in the big chair isn't really that realistic, running at 83. As for the "heartbeat away", I would expect his would probably give out before HRCs.

What I do expect is Bill to die in the White House, probably late 2019.

Is he going to be visiting on that day?
 
My thinking on your questions center around the reality that Sanders has gone from a marginal quickly figure on the edges of politics to a real player and national hero to millions. And I think that changes a fellows self image and what he expects from himself. Sanders would be the proverbial heartbeat away from the oval office and that thought would both excite his supporters and scare his detractors. It would be the closest to putting a democratic socialist in the office since Henry Wallace was VP under FDR.

And, in the end, I think that allure would be far too bright for Sanders to reject and for his supporters to not get excited about and embrace.

As a Sanders supporter this is pretty much the only scenario I would even consider voting Clinton. If she made him VP and they offered a united front while incorporating some of Sanders issues into the platform I would probably go for it. I think without doing this Hillary is going to have a very hard time beating Trump.
 
Because of his use of the label Socialist.

It is my opinion that America is not ready to elect a person who claims to be a socialist at this time.

You cannot use the same logic for Presidents and Vice-Presidents. Two different animals.
 
As a Sanders supporter this is pretty much the only scenario I would even consider voting Clinton. If she made him VP and they offered a united front while incorporating some of Sanders issues into the platform I would probably go for it. I think without doing this Hillary is going to have a very hard time beating Trump.

If the Sanders supporters actually sit this election out...Trump, and the Republican Party, may very well win.

Boy...that would show those Hillary Clinton supporters how to deal with opposition!

The "never Trump" group among Republicans seems to have thinned out now that Trump appears to have his nomination sewn up. The "never Hillary" group among the Democrats are still holding their breath and kicking their heels. They may not grow up in time...which is something those of us who see danger in Republican control of the SCOTUS nominations have to live with.

We'll survive whatever happens...although if the babies get their way, it won't be pretty.
 
If the Sanders supporters actually sit this election out...Trump, and the Republican Party, may very well win.

Boy...that would show those Hillary Clinton supporters how to deal with opposition!

The "never Trump" group among Republicans seems to have thinned out now that Trump appears to have his nomination sewn up. The "never Hillary" group among the Democrats are still holding their breath and kicking their heels. They may not grow up in time...which is something those of us who see danger in Republican control of the SCOTUS nominations have to live with.

We'll survive whatever happens...although if the babies get their way, it won't be pretty.

None of this has anything against Bernie Sanders being VP.
 
You cannot use the same logic for Presidents and Vice-Presidents. Two different animals.

Actually...you can, Abba...and I'd be willing to bet the Republicans will use it in SPADES if Sanders gets anywhere near that ticket.

Fact is, they will probably use it against Hillary Clinton (by association) even if Sanders goes no further than back to the Senate.
 
Actually...you can, Abba...and I'd be willing to bet the Republicans will use it in SPADES if Sanders gets anywhere near that ticket.

Fact is, they will probably use it against Hillary Clinton (by association) even if Sanders goes no further than back to the Senate.

This topic is about Bernie Sanders becoming VP, not President. Clinton camp needs to acknowledge Sanders and his movement exist, grow up and share the ****ing demographic. No more of this 'no win for you!' attitude.
 
This topic is about Bernie Sanders becoming VP, not President.

Okay...and if he can get on the ticket with Donald Trump, I'd be delighted...because there is NO WAY a presidential ticket with a socialist on it will get elected in the United States right now.

I wish that were not so...but it is.


Clinton camp needs to acknowledge Sanders and his movement exist...

If you think the Clinton camp is NOT acknowledging Sanders and his movement...you are much more out of touch than I think you are. And I think you are VERY out of touch.

...grow up and share the ****ing demographic.

Not sure what you were trying to say here, but if you cannot do it without having words replaced with asterisks, it probably is not very important.


No more of this 'no win for you!' attitude.

Huh???
 
Back
Top Bottom