Skip to main content

Warren

Berkley MI
Tuesday

Last week, Rachel Maddow wrapped up her interview with Elizabeth Warren with the question we all knew was coming. The question we knew she would surely duck.
If, Maddow asked, she were offered the vice-presidential spot on the Democratic ticket, would she take it?
Warren didn’t hem, haw, spin, or equivocate. She said, and I quote her verbatim, “Yes.”
As far as I can tell, this has not gotten the media attention we might have expected — the virus does tend to dominate the discussion these days — but there it was, out in the open. Maddow was visibly gobsmacked, but no more than I was. I’ve been thinking about it ever since.
First let me say that I consider Warren to be, by a wide margin, the person most qualified to be president. Her accomplishments are one thing — how many of us have designed and built a federal agency from scratch? But it’s her communication skills — her uncanny ability to explain difficult concepts so that Main Street can understand them — that put her in a class by herself. Add to that her obvious compassion and authenticity and it’s clear why I’m not alone in regarding her failure in the primaries as profoundly disappointing.
That said, I never considered her an especially good choice for running mate. I have spent the last few months convinced — and it’s hardly an original thought — that Joe Biden needs to name an African-American woman, as the literal embodiment of the two demographics now at the core of the Democratic party. The fact that we have at least two talented and charismatic choices at hand — Kamala Harris and Stacey Abrams — it has seemed to me a no-brainer.
At the same time, I thought Warren would ultimately be more useful either in the Senate, running the Finance Committee, or in a key cabinet post — Treasury comes to mind. It never occurred to me that she might actually see opportunity in the vice presidency, a post that has historically been a political graveyard, but which has grown in stature over the last several presidencies (Mike Pence notwithstanding).
But now I’m thinking — and more important, she seems to be thinking — that the virus changes everything. It certainly shifts the dynamic of the election to the point where I can’t see anyone not voting for Biden based on his choice of running mate. Would an African-American be a more righteous choice? Definitely. But this is Elizabeth Warren we’re talking about, and for me that makes all the difference.
Clearly someone will need to take charge of a badly damaged country. Clearly someone has to figure out what America 2.0 is going to look like. I don’t think Joe Biden is the guy for that. Nothing against Joe, but rebuilding the economy in the wake of a global pandemic is not really in his skill set. It is definitely in Warren’s.
So assuming he were to get elected president (please oh please), wouldn’t it be beautiful if he could leave the real work to her? If he could make her the de facto president?  We all know by now that complex plans are at the heart of her brand. She deserves the chance to make one and oversee its execution. I would trust her ideas over anyone else’s, and I would trust her to appreciate anyone else’s ideas if she thought them workable. She won’t let ego get in the way of a good idea.
Biden’s job would be to run interference for her. Take the political heat, which will be intense. Tend to the healing, which will be prolonged and heart-breaking. These are things he’s good at. He’ll exude empathy. He’ll be as touchy-feely as he can be from six feet away. And while he will surely continue to make all the spontaneous gaffes he’s so famous for, we’ll forgive him because in that regard he is so not Trump.
In the back of Warren’s mind, I’m guessing, is the real possibility that Biden may not finish his term. Yes, the virus could take him, and his age will always be a concern. But I think he’s just as likely to want to step down. He might just decide that he’s done what he came to do, and that he’s leaving the country in good hands. Or he might forego a second term.
But however that plays out — and there are many possibilities — Warren surely understands that as vice president, her odds of one day becoming president will have been raised considerably.
Hey, a guy can dream. Right?

Comments

  1. Couldn't disagree with you more on this one. I think Elizabeth Warren is a great Vice Presidential candidate if you want 4 more years of Trump. Too controversial right now.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The New York Times has Gone Over to the Dark Side

  A week or so ago, Trump took a break from the courtroom and held a rally in a picturesque corner of New Jersey, a state he has no hope of winning. His speech at this rally was even more unhinged than usual, featuring his now-famous tributes to Al Capone and Hannibal Lecter — the latter being as fictional as Trump’s medical records, but seemingly real in his mind. These speeches are growing worse over time, and they seem to betray a worsening cognitive condition. Unfortunately, the New York Times doesn’t see it that way. Their reporting of the event was basically a puff piece . To them, this rally was Trump’s well-deserved break from the rigors and indignities of his criminal trial. They marvel that, “after a long and tense week,” he could now head to the Jersey Shore for some much-needed rest and adulation: Against the backdrop of classic Americana, Mr. Trump repeated his typical criticism that Mr. Biden’s economic policies were hurting the middle class.

Six Things Every American Needs to Know About Trump

  When it comes to Trump, piling on is a civic duty. We cannot afford to allow him even the slightest chance of retaking power. He needs to be overwhelmed. Simon Rosenberg — the veteran political analyst who famously predicted that the Red Wave of 2020 would be the Republican debacle it turned out to be — is urging a practical, grassroots approach to the problem. He is openly optimistic about the Democrats’ prospects this year, but he wants us all to be smart about it. He's especially concerned about getting information to the depressing percentage of the public who have no real grasp of who Trump really is, let alone the clear and present danger he represents. Right now, they are not paying attention, but Rosenberg wants us to be ready when they are, and to have at our command “ The Six Things Americans Are Going To Learn About Trump They Didn’t Know in 2020.” There’s nothing new here, but seeing it in one place is valuable. Think of it as a starter set o

The Origin Story of the Pro-Death Movement

  Two weeks ago, I excoriated the New York Times for its heavy hand in election coverage, for compulsively favoring the horserace over the survival of the American Experiment. Of course, no sooner had I done that then they published the sort of eye-opening exposé that few journalistic organizations have the resources to pull off anymore. Which only served to underscore what we’ve been missing from the Times in this year of hair-raising silliness. It was a long and depressing article about the behind-the-scenes machinations that led to the fall of Roe v. Wade . It tells of a loose but vast movement of religious zealots, reactionary lawyers, and red-state legislators who saw the election of Donald Trump as the moment they’d been waiting for. Think of them as the pro-death movement: [T]hey had built an elite legal and ideological ecosystem of activists, organizations, lawmakers and pro bono lawyers around their cause. Their policy arms churned out legal argument