• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons 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!

Sanders as VP -now mandatory for victory?

haymarket

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 3, 2010
Messages
120,954
Reaction score
28,528
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
It looks like Bernie Sanders may end up winning 24 or 25 states. And it looks like he may do very well over the last four weeks of primary season causing Clinton to fall face first over the finish line badly bruised and damaged and looking not at all like somebody who just won something to be proud of.

Would the Democratic ticket be better off with Sanders as the Clinton VP? Would it shore up her falling numbers? Would it energize the ticket with the younger Sanders supporters then staying in the fold?

Or would the socialist label be used as a club against the ticket hurting it in the long run?

And if Bernie can win over the next several weeks - especially out west along the coast climaxing with California - what do you think the possibility is that this becomes almost mandatory in the way that JFK picked LBJ in 1960 and then won the election?
 

OrphanSlug

A sinister place...
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 24, 2011
Messages
24,392
Reaction score
21,370
Location
Atlanta
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Another important question to throw into the mix... can Hillary and Sanders ideologically get along enough to have an effective campaign together against Trump and whoever that asshat picks?
 

Cyrylek

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 27, 2013
Messages
3,467
Reaction score
1,715
Location
Boston
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
A lot of conservatives, moderates and libertarians are prepared to vote for Hillary: This time, incredibly, she is the lesser evil.
There's very little she can do to change their minds - except for putting Bernie on the ticket.
 

tres borrachos

HoHoHo
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 20, 2012
Messages
80,494
Reaction score
55,676
Location
New England
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
It looks like Bernie Sanders may end up winning 24 or 25 states. And it looks like he may do very well over the last four weeks of primary season causing Clinton to fall face first over the finish line badly bruised and damaged and looking not at all like somebody who just won something to be proud of.

Would the Democratic ticket be better off with Sanders as the Clinton VP? Would it shore up her falling numbers? Would it energize the ticket with the younger Sanders supporters then staying in the fold?

Or would the socialist label be used as a club against the ticket hurting it in the long run?

And if Bernie can win over the next several weeks - especially out west along the coast climaxing with California - what do you think the possibility is that this becomes almost mandatory in the way that JFK picked LBJ in 1960 and then won the election?

IMO she doesn't need Sanders to win. I think most of his supporters will vote for her, especially when they look at the alternative on the ballot. Just like her supporters came out for Obama.

I think she'll pick someone who is Hispanic.
 

Skeptic Bob

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 6, 2014
Messages
16,626
Reaction score
19,488
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
I think Bernie on the ticket would help her numbers. But the only way Bernie would agree to that is if Hillary met a lot of his demands, policy-wise. She won't do that. Because if she broke her word to Bernie, Bernie would be vocal about it. And as the elected VP Hillary couldn't fire him.
 

Helix

Administrator
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 1, 2011
Messages
73,549
Reaction score
56,828
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Sanders as VP -now mandatory for victory?

not only not mandatory, also not gonna happen. Vermont is not in play, as far as i can see. she needs someone from a rust belt swing state who actually seems likable and truthful.

her weaknesses :

1. unlikable legacy candidate who shifts positions depending on the political climate

2. everything she says sounds scripted, and even in private interviews, she seems to be acting. i can't think of one situation in which she didn't look like she was playing a role. even when she had the beer. this, the legacy candidate thing, and the 47% thing killed Romney's chances four years ago.

3. dumb policy priorities. STFU about guns and coal during the election, and talk about jobs and workers.

she needs a VP who is going to fix that for her. right now, her main strength is that Donald Trump is an unfit for office joke. most of the other candidates (excluding Cruz) would have wiped her out in the general.

so, who does she pick? she can't afford to lose midwestern swing states (or PA.) i'd look there first, and find someone who is liked by pretty much everyone.
 

Casper

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
26,735
Reaction score
11,510
Location
Elsewhere
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
A lot of conservatives, moderates and libertarians are prepared to vote for Hillary: This time, incredibly, she is the lesser evil.
There's very little she can do to change their minds - except for putting Bernie on the ticket.

I agree. Disagree with Bern's plan to bankrupt us all and make the Nation less safe, Hillary should stick with a moderate and ride the easy train all the way into the Oval Office, oh and May God Help Us All.
 

Helix

Administrator
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 1, 2011
Messages
73,549
Reaction score
56,828
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
also, i should add to my previous comment :

i voted for Sanders, and think that he should have been the nominee. a combination of inevitability and closed primaries hurt him.
 

Ntharotep

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 18, 2015
Messages
1,503
Reaction score
663
Location
Florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Another important question to throw into the mix... can Hillary and Sanders ideologically get along enough to have an effective campaign together against Trump and whoever that asshat picks?

Clinton has an ideology?

I don't see a Clinton Sanders ticket at all in the real world.
 

CanadaJohn

Canadian Conservative
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 27, 2013
Messages
28,729
Reaction score
20,428
Location
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
It looks like Bernie Sanders may end up winning 24 or 25 states. And it looks like he may do very well over the last four weeks of primary season causing Clinton to fall face first over the finish line badly bruised and damaged and looking not at all like somebody who just won something to be proud of.

Would the Democratic ticket be better off with Sanders as the Clinton VP? Would it shore up her falling numbers? Would it energize the ticket with the younger Sanders supporters then staying in the fold?

Or would the socialist label be used as a club against the ticket hurting it in the long run?

And if Bernie can win over the next several weeks - especially out west along the coast climaxing with California - what do you think the possibility is that this becomes almost mandatory in the way that JFK picked LBJ in 1960 and then won the election?

I find it hard to believe that young people who support Sanders over Clinton would be swayed by Sanders as VP to Clinton. I find it even harder to believe that a man who claimed to be running on principle and who opposes so much of what Clinton stands for would be swayed to accept an offer to run on the ticket with her.

One of the best if only good things to come out of the Republican primary debacle is that so many principled conservatives have said there's no way they're supporting Trump. Sanders accepting such an offer, if presented, would cement the notion that Democrats lack any principles other than a greedy desire for power.
 

haymarket

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 3, 2010
Messages
120,954
Reaction score
28,528
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I find it hard to believe that young people who support Sanders over Clinton would be swayed by Sanders as VP to Clinton. I find it even harder to believe that a man who claimed to be running on principle and who opposes so much of what Clinton stands for would be swayed to accept an offer to run on the ticket with her.

One of the best if only good things to come out of the Republican primary debacle is that so many principled conservatives have said there's no way they're supporting Trump. Sanders accepting such an offer, if presented, would cement the notion that Democrats lack any principles other than a greedy desire for power.

WOW!!!!! You do realize we are talking about politics and politicians here right?
 

CanadaJohn

Canadian Conservative
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 27, 2013
Messages
28,729
Reaction score
20,428
Location
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
WOW!!!!! You do realize we are talking about politics and politicians here right?

Yes, I do. There are several Republican politicians, both in office and out, who have said they will not support Trump because he's not a conservative. Can you name any Democrats who have railed against Clinton and have said they won't support her if she is the nominee? I'd be surprised, because as I said previously the overriding "principle" that guides Democrats is a lust for power, regardless of how it's achieved.
 

Citizen.Seven

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 27, 2014
Messages
1,967
Reaction score
718
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Would Sanders take it? He's 74 yo, will be 75 before this November. The only reason to take the job described as useful as a bucket of spit is as a setup to becoming POTUS in 8 years. He'll be 83 then, not historically a viable option. So the question is, would he be willing to be Clinton's attack dog for 8 years, no longer a Senator and only voting in the event of a tie with little chance of the big chair himself?
 

Grand Mal

bas air son Eachin
DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2013
Messages
38,553
Reaction score
20,464
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Liberal
Yes, I do. There are several Republican politicians, both in office and out, who have said they will not support Trump because he's not a conservative. Can you name any Democrats who have railed against Clinton and have said they won't support her if she is the nominee? I'd be surprised, because as I said previously the overriding "principle" that guides Democrats is a lust for power, regardless of how it's achieved.

Democrats want to govern, yes. That's why they're in the game. Republicans want to govern too, they just seem to have forgotten how to get there. They'll nominate another unelectable candidate and spend another four years moaning about how the electorate has let America down.
What you see as maintaining principles I see as incompetence, failure on the part of the Republican Party. If they can't put forward a candidate Republicans can get behind, how can they expect the rest of the country to endorse their party?
If nothing else, Trump's candidacy will make the decision easy for those liberals who don't support Clinton and wouldn't have voted without him looming on the horizon.
 

Unitedwestand13

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 24, 2013
Messages
20,703
Reaction score
6,260
Location
Sunnyvale California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
It looks like Bernie Sanders may end up winning 24 or 25 states. And it looks like he may do very well over the last four weeks of primary season causing Clinton to fall face first over the finish line badly bruised and damaged and looking not at all like somebody who just won something to be proud of.

Would the Democratic ticket be better off with Sanders as the Clinton VP? Would it shore up her falling numbers? Would it energize the ticket with the younger Sanders supporters then staying in the fold?

Or would the socialist label be used as a club against the ticket hurting it in the long run?

And if Bernie can win over the next several weeks - especially out west along the coast climaxing with California - what do you think the possibility is that this becomes almost mandatory in the way that JFK picked LBJ in 1960 and then won the election?

If Bernie does not win enough delegates to overturn Clinton, how can he be the stronger candidate?
 

Risky Thicket

Sewer Rat
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 28, 2011
Messages
31,171
Reaction score
32,417
Location
With Yo Mama
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I find it hard to believe that young people who support Sanders over Clinton would be swayed by Sanders as VP to Clinton. I find it even harder to believe that a man who claimed to be running on principle and who opposes so much of what Clinton stands for would be swayed to accept an offer to run on the ticket with her.

One of the best if only good things to come out of the Republican primary debacle is that so many principled conservatives have said there's no way they're supporting Trump. Sanders accepting such an offer, if presented, would cement the notion that Democrats lack any principles other than a greedy desire for power.

Clinton represents what has always been, nothing new. She represents everything that is wrong with Democratic Party politics. Bernie would be a hypocrite if he were to join Hillary. I certainly would never support a Clinton/Sanders or Sanders/Clinton ticket. Sanders would never accept such an offer from Clinton and Clinton would never extend the offer.

Bernie has more character and is more accomplished and much more respected than Hillary. Hillary has more baggage than Delta.
 

tres borrachos

HoHoHo
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 20, 2012
Messages
80,494
Reaction score
55,676
Location
New England
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
not only not mandatory, also not gonna happen. Vermont is not in play, as far as i can see. she needs someone from a rust belt swing state who actually seems likable and truthful.

her weaknesses :

1. unlikable legacy candidate who shifts positions depending on the political climate

2. everything she says sounds scripted, and even in private interviews, she seems to be acting. i can't think of one situation in which she didn't look like she was playing a role. even when she had the beer. this, the legacy candidate thing, and the 47% thing killed Romney's chances four years ago.

3. dumb policy priorities. STFU about guns and coal during the election, and talk about jobs and workers.

she needs a VP who is going to fix that for her. right now, her main strength is that Donald Trump is an unfit for office joke. most of the other candidates (excluding Cruz) would have wiped her out in the general.

so, who does she pick? she can't afford to lose midwestern swing states (or PA.) i'd look there first, and find someone who is liked by pretty much everyone.

Vermont is definitely not in play.

I agree with everything you wrote here.
 

CanadaJohn

Canadian Conservative
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 27, 2013
Messages
28,729
Reaction score
20,428
Location
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Democrats want to govern, yes. That's why they're in the game. Republicans want to govern too, they just seem to have forgotten how to get there. They'll nominate another unelectable candidate and spend another four years moaning about how the electorate has let America down.
What you see as maintaining principles I see as incompetence, failure on the part of the Republican Party. If they can't put forward a candidate Republicans can get behind, how can they expect the rest of the country to endorse their party?
If nothing else, Trump's candidacy will make the decision easy for those liberals who don't support Clinton and wouldn't have voted without him looming on the horizon.

I don't disagree with some of your comments, however, I don't agree with the outcome you expect. It wouldn't surprise me at all if Trump is a more attractive candidate to a lot of Independents than Clinton is. After all, Trump is a left of center moderate in almost all his policy positions as evidenced by his life record. Forget some of the hyperbole from the primaries. Trump is a much better salesman than Clinton ever will be. For all of Trump's negativities, he's not the despised human being that many find Clinton to be.

As I've said in other threads, I think this election will have the lowest turnout, percentage and totals, of any Presidential election in decades. That might also serve Trump well.
 

Grand Mal

bas air son Eachin
DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2013
Messages
38,553
Reaction score
20,464
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Liberal
I don't disagree with some of your comments, however, I don't agree with the outcome you expect. It wouldn't surprise me at all if Trump is a more attractive candidate to a lot of Independents than Clinton is. After all, Trump is a left of center moderate in almost all his policy positions as evidenced by his life record. Forget some of the hyperbole from the primaries. Trump is a much better salesman than Clinton ever will be. For all of Trump's negativities, he's not the despised human being that many find Clinton to be.

As I've said in other threads, I think this election will have the lowest turnout, percentage and totals, of any Presidential election in decades. That might also serve Trump well.

Well, I've been a small-L liberal all my life and I wouldn't give you a nickel for either of them. The best-intentioned of them all looks to be Sanders and I see him as I do the NDP- opposition, yes, government, no.
Whatever you think of Trump's character, for me the consideration that trumps them all is that President of the USA isn't an entry-level position.
 

pilot16

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 17, 2012
Messages
988
Reaction score
413
Location
New England
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Moderate
IMO she doesn't need Sanders to win. I think most of his supporters will vote for her, especially when they look at the alternative on the ballot. Just like her supporters came out for Obama.

I think she'll pick someone who is Hispanic.

I think she wants to, however a VP pick is usually strategic. Had Bush or Rubio won the GOP nom she surely would have picked Castro. Now I am not so sure. She is seeing the GOP and the "NeverTrump" movement and I think she is leaning towards a blue dog or moderate VP. She can pick up all those right leaning independents and moderates who wont vote for Trump. They wont go for a progressive but they would a more conservative democrat. Most of the Sanders progressives will vote for her anyway so she wont lose many of them. More right leaning votes are what gets her the WH.
 

Fletch

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 7, 2012
Messages
39,323
Reaction score
17,620
Location
Mentor Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
It looks like Bernie Sanders may end up winning 24 or 25 states. And it looks like he may do very well over the last four weeks of primary season causing Clinton to fall face first over the finish line badly bruised and damaged and looking not at all like somebody who just won something to be proud of.

Would the Democratic ticket be better off with Sanders as the Clinton VP? Would it shore up her falling numbers? Would it energize the ticket with the younger Sanders supporters then staying in the fold?

Or would the socialist label be used as a club against the ticket hurting it in the long run?

And if Bernie can win over the next several weeks - especially out west along the coast climaxing with California - what do you think the possibility is that this becomes almost mandatory in the way that JFK picked LBJ in 1960 and then won the election?

Ed Rendell would be a good pick for her. Hes a solid, Midwestern governor politically aligned with people in the Midwest and could freeze out any hope Trump might have to pick up some wins in that area. His downside is that he is a white male so his chance of being selected is zero.
 

haymarket

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 3, 2010
Messages
120,954
Reaction score
28,528
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Yes, I do. There are several Republican politicians, both in office and out, who have said they will not support Trump because he's not a conservative. Can you name any Democrats who have railed against Clinton and have said they won't support her if she is the nominee? I'd be surprised, because as I said previously the overriding "principle" that guides Democrats is a lust for power, regardless of how it's achieved.

Let us do this John - come back a week before the November election and lets see who kept their pants on and who jumped in bed despite their protestations that they would not be had.

My suspicion is that the old line.... "Democrats fall in love - Republicans fall in line" will hold true .
 

haymarket

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 3, 2010
Messages
120,954
Reaction score
28,528
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
If Bernie does not win enough delegates to overturn Clinton, how can he be the stronger candidate?

He can bring strength to the TICKET just like 1960 saw with JFK and LBJ going to victory.
 
Top Bottom