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. Steve OaksMay 4, 2020 at 12:11 PM

    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

France and Britain Just Gave the Finger to Fascism

There is now ample evidence that people with democratic systems of government actually like them, and would just as soon keep them, flaws and all. There seems to be a strong backlash occurring in several European countries, a trend toward shoring up democracies threatened by toxic authoritarian forces. In Poland last year, then in France and Britain last week, actual voters — as opposed to deeply compromised opinion polls — gave a big middle finger to the fascists in their midst. I don’t pretend to understand the electoral systems of these countries — let alone their political currents — but I’m struck by the apparent connections between different elections in different countries, and what they might be saying to us. I’ve spoken before of Poland , where ten years of vicious minority rule was overturned at the ballot box. A ban on abortion was the galvanizing issue — sound familiar? — and it brought an overwhelming number of voters to the polls, many for the fir
1 comment
Read more

Don’t Let the New York Times Do Your Thinking

  My father would not live any place where the New York Times couldn’t be delivered before 7:00 a.m. To him, the Times was “the newspaper of record,” the keeper of the first drafts of history. It had the reach and the resources to be anywhere history was being made, and the skills to report it accurately. He trusted it more than any other news source, including Walter Cronkite. Like my dad, I grew to associate the Times with serious journalism, the first place one goes for the straight story. Their news was always assumed to be objectively presented, with the facts front-and-center. Their op-ed writers were well-reasoned and erudite, even when I thought they were full of shit. But there was more. The Times became — for me, at least — a sort of guide to critical thinking. It helped teach me, at an impressionable age, to weigh the facts before forming an opinion. And many of my opinions — including deeply-held ones — were formed around facts I might have read
1 comment
Read more

Democrats, Step Away from the Ledge

  Anxiety comes easily to Democrats. We’re highly practiced at perceiving a crisis, wanting to fix it immediately, and being consistently frustrated when we can’t. Democrats understand consequences, which is why we always have plenty to worry about. Republicans don’t give a rat’s ass about consequences — which is, let’s face it, their superpower. I wasn’t intending to write about last Thursday’s debate, mostly because I post on Tuesdays, and this could be old news by the time it gets to you. But then the New York Times weighed in with a wildly disingenuous editorial calling for Joe Biden to drop out of the race, and the rest of the mainstream media piled on. In the Times' not-so-humble opinion, Biden needs to consider “the good of the country,” something their own paper has repeatedly failed to do for almost a decade. And since this is now the crisis du jour for virtually every Democrat who watched that shitshow, I thought I might at l
Post a Comment
Read more