Elizabeth Warren's Avalanche Of Donald Trump Criticism Doesn't Mean She Should Be VP
Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren still hasn't endorsed any presidential candidate, but she's spending an increasing amount of time making clear which one she hates the most. That person, of course, is presumptive GOP nominee Donald Trump. Warren devoted a length speech at a gala for the Center of Popular Democracy on Tuesday to call him things like "a small, insecure money-grubber." Also, is it just me or does that somehow invoke the whole tiny-hands thing?
Warren has been getting a lot of attention in recent weeks for her rather awesome anti-Trump tweets; I've previously written that Warren's one of the very few politicians fighting Trump effectively, and certainly the only one doing it on Twitter. It's a nice change of pace to see someone clap back when Trump does things like call her "Goofy Elizabeth Warren," which is at least more palatable than when he calls her "Pocahontas." And her success at taking on Trump is making people hungrier to see her as the Vice President.
CNN used the remarks to note that Warren's name is often tossed around as a potential Democratic VP choice, and it certainly seems like every time she puts Trump in her place people just can't help themselves from keeping the dream of her on the ticket alive, despite no encouragement from the woman herself.
I mean, a year ago Warren's name was often tossed around as a potential nominee, even though she literally said over and over and over that she was not running.
So, on the one hand, you have the notion that VP is a kind of impotent and ineffectual position for anyone who is not Frank Underwood, and that Warren would be wasted there. On the other, the possibility that VP could really mean whatever Clinton and Warren wanted it to mean, and that she could actually be surprisingly useful somewhere that high-ranking and with that much access to Clinton (we're just going to assume Clinton is the president in this situation. Sorry, Bernie Bros). Plus, the possibility that her presence could bring into the fold some of the farther-left voters who might otherwise turn to Trump when Sanders is ultimately eliminated (sorry again, Bernie Bros).
It's an increasingly intriguing idea, but I'm not quite sold yet. For the moment, anyway, I'd like to see her keep her Senate seat, where I believe her talents are of greater use to us (and I feel the same way about Sanders).
At the end of the day, though, this is all kind of moot because Warren has yet to endorse Clinton (or Sanders), stands significantly left of the centrist former Secretary of State, and would presumably find it difficult to align herself with Clinton's policies sufficiently to be her running mate. I still find it hard to imagine her accepting a spot on the ticket, even if Clinton asked. People will keep dreaming, but in the meantime we'll have to be satisfied with speeches like this:
"Donald Trump is worried about helping poor little Wall Street," Warren said. "Let me find the world's smallest violin to play a sad, sad song. Really, can Donald trump even name three things about Dodd-Frank? Someone should ask."