What would be the alternative ? Not being selected as VP in order to continue rigidly supporting a policy that won't ever be implemented during a Biden Presidency ? Or being sufficiently flexible to where she can help shape many policies (including healthcare) as VP ?
2020 US Elections | Biden certified as President | Dems control Congress
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
- Status
What would be the alternative ? Not being selected as VP in order to continue rigidly supporting a policy that won't ever be implemented during a Biden Presidency ? Or being sufficiently flexible to where she can help shape many policies (including healthcare) as VP ?
Gotta hand it to you mate...when you’re right you’re right. Let’s go Liz.
She's spend decades fighting against Joe Biden and his corporatist views. Why would she expect him to listen to a word she has to say on policy if she's his VP? It just means that the she'll be held accountable for all the shit he pulls, and the movement she claims to support will be harmed by association.
Bonus question, why would she even want to work for a man who she supposedly disagrees with on some really fundamental things?
That's part of being on the VP ticket. You get to have a degree of influence on policy, and in Biden's case, since he is somewhat disengaged (shall we say) from it all, and she is very proactive - I would suspect she would have far more influence than Biden himself had with Obama or Pence has now.
On the bonus question - Ultimately its about getting into power so you have a chance to shape policy. You don't get to be a part of the process if you're on the outside looking in, from the sidelines.
She only gets as much influence as VP as he chooses to give her though. For every Cheney there's a Pence or a Gore (I literally just had to google who Clinton's VP was, because it was so forgettable). You say Biden is disengaged but that doesn't mean his CoS and core team will be, and given that he doesn't agree with Warren on lots of things, it seems wildly unlikely he'd allow her to just take the lead or even have any real say on any of them. Why would he? He can have her on the ticket, pull in some of the progressive vote and still ignore her later.
Re access to power, I'd argue she has much more power as a prominent senator, committee member and senior voice of the progressive movement than she would as VP to a guy she doesn't agree with.
She would be very close to Cheney in terms of influence, otherwise she wouldn't be interested in the job. Biden wouldn't be a very hands-on President, so he would need a VP with experience shaping national policy to work with him in this regard. If we're looking at the alleged top three contenders (Warren, Harris, and Abrams), it would be a no-brainer to select Warren.
I'm not sure his donors and lobbyists paid all that money just to hand Liz Warren power.
And what if she is not picked .What will she stand for .Rather have a politician stick to their conviction and principles than a opportunist .
She would presumably still stand for the policies she has supported in the past. There's no shame in switching policies to be a part of a ticket in exchange for having more influence to shape policy if you get the job.
BDS is a boycott against the country Israel because of the governments treatment of Palestinian people. It has nothing to do with religion and hence is not anti-semitic.
No no that's not how it works. Raoul mate explain it again. You do such a great job of it. Politics is only about two things. Power and Polls. Everything else is just background noise.
They wouldn't have much say in the matter when the alternative is another 4 years of Trump.
This is where Warren is going to pivot, right?
I doubt he will but I hope he picks warren. seeing her accept and defend and pass proposals from the people she fought for a decade - Larry Summers and Joe Biden - will *maybe* (probably not) cause some people to start doubting received wisdom.
e - OTOH an equal number of people will think any unadorned turd is good since she could also be the face of it.
e - OTOH an equal number of people will think any unadorned turd is good since she could also be the face of it.
Last edited:
Warren "Pivots" Off Medicare-For-All For Joe Biden
It's all BS really.No wonder many have disengaged from politics.
It's all BS really.No wonder many have disengaged from politics.
I think I got brain damage trying to decipher this text.
I’m glad I’m not the only one.
They really are trying to lose this election.
Wait, so if she gets the VP gig she’ll...... pivot?
I should have kept scrolling down.
yes but does it match the brain damage needed to write that text
She will have to pivot before getting the gig.
Emma as it spot on and Cenk is just in denial
The exact problem is that she’ll pivot whichever way she needs to.
She can't see the forrest from the trees. If you aren't VP you can't influence anything, irrespective of how great the policies you support are. If you are VP, you have the ability to shape policy from the inside. Its a no brainer.
we want the klob gotta have the klob
No chance Warren will try to influence a Medicare For All if she's VP. She's in it for the power and her actions over the past year show it.
She wouldn't even try because it has no chance of passing. All politicians are in it for power, which is why it makes sense she would take the job if offered.
That's not the point though. She would have the influential power to make that policy more palatable than it already is, and I'm predicting she won't even do that. She'll do what she's told and maybe make some "progressive" comments here and there while doing pretty much nothing to advance popular progressive causes.
That wouldn't make sense under Biden. He's the perfect person for someone like Warren to wield a tremendous amount of power in his administration.
*cue Biden's wealthy donors intervening on Warren
Also I just don't agree that Warren would even do that.
Absolutely. To be fair, I don't get why Abrams is one of the top choices, she shouldn't be anywhere near the list, considering that her highest position so far has been a state legislative.
Warren, Harris, Klobuchar and Whitmer should be the top choices (considering that he wants a woman in the ticket). Bernie should have been the top choice though, they would have walked the election.
- Status