Who would you like to see as the Democratic vice president nominee?

Oct 27, 2017
2,364
One of the more annoying things about last cycle was I felt Clinton could have maybe captured some of the Bernie energy if she picked a more liberal VP. Instead she went with generic white guy 42.

If one of the more liberal candidates takes it, Joe Biden would ironically be a great VP nominee. And likewise, if Biden takes, I think a Warren or lesser known with similar politics would be a great way to try to bring the party together.
 

xxracerxx

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
18,364
No way Sanders or Warren chose Biden to be the VP if they get the nom. If Biden got the ticket, I would hope he would chose either though.
 

jml

Member
Mar 9, 2018
857
I don't really understand why anyone on the left would want Bernie or Warren in a VP spot. VP has very little actual power and they could do a lot more in the senate (or least in a cabinet spot somewhere). Bernie/Warren or Warren/Bernie would be terrible.
 

Sunster

The Fallen
Oct 5, 2018
3,514
Someone who's at least a semi professional diplomat. I wanna see them abroad for at least 50% of the year repairing our relationships with the world.

while the prez is here repairing the extensive damage done to our country
 

xxracerxx

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
18,364
I don't really understand why anyone on the left would want Bernie or Warren in a VP spot. VP has very little actual power and they could do a lot more in the senate (or least in a cabinet spot somewhere). Bernie/Warren or Warren/Bernie would be terrible.
On a Biden ticket? For the support of their voters.
 

DrewFu

Member
Apr 19, 2018
7,762
No way Sanders or Warren chose Biden to be the VP if they get the nom. If Biden got the ticket, I would hope he would chose either though.
Biden choosing Bernie would be ridiculously dangerous for the country, given both their ages. No way in hell that happens anyway. Warren, maybe.
 

LosDaddie

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
3,622
Longwood, FL
Somebody young and not a Senator.

I would say Beto or Gillum, but they were both losers in Blue Wave year
 
Oct 26, 2017
4,164
Warren/Beto
Biden/Abrams
Bernie/???

Honestly have no idea who would be a good match for Bernie let alone who he would pick
 

Rand a. Thor

Member
Oct 31, 2017
9,465
Greece
Sanders with Beto would be an amazing pipedream. The old fart "socialist" backed by the very potential future Dem. Golden Boy would be great to see. Unfortunately AOC ain't eligible yet, but I would have loved it just to see right wing america have a nationwide joint aneurysm.
 

I KILL PXLS

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,432
Stacey Abrams would maybe be a good pick. Realistically though, it needs to be someone who's going to bolster their chances in one or more swing states the nominee will have trouble winning on their own.
 
Feb 10, 2018
15,869
I know a lot here don't like yang. But I'm still yanggang. 2nd choice bernie + warren.

Imo opinion yang has the best chance of beating trump

Why because he does not criticise or even talk about trump as much as the other candidates do. Everytime a Democrat candidate talks about trump it only helps him.
 

Kumquat

Member
Jan 23, 2018
395
I see a pairing of Warren or Sanders and Yang as very appealing. I would vote that ticket in a hot second.
 

Masterz1337

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,456
Buttigieg would be best IMO. He can deliver the rustbelt and get the presidents messaging to the centrists and republicans who are willing to listen to him. I’m still hoping for a Warren/Buttigieg ticket.
 

The Albatross

Member
Oct 25, 2017
10,677
It's too far out to say, and it's not even likely to be a current candidate running for the presidential nomination. Neither Tim Kaine nor Mike Pence were even considered long-shot candidates for their party's nom in 2016, and they were the VP nods. Likewise Biden polled far behind Edwards, Clinton, and even other long-shots like Kucinich and Richardson in 2008. Dick Cheney had been a career Republican white house strategist in 2000, but never had aspirations at running for president, likewise with Al Gore in 1992. It's uncommon for the VP nod to go to someone who is actively competing in a presidential primary. Biden in 2008 was a modern anomaly, but even Biden was well out of the race early on in the 2008 primary which had become a two-horse race quickly.

That said, who I'd *like* it to be entire depends on who the nominee is and it's tough to say until there's a nominee or clear front-runner.

I think if the Democratic nomination goes to a more centrist Democrat, and if we're picking from the current crop of aspiring nominees, then I'd *like* to see Warren get a nod to be VP. I think she'd be a really effective vice president because she's from the senate so she's aware of senate procedure (one of the roles of VP is to break ties in the senate), she's a good attack dog in debates, she has a strong policy background so she could campaign for the nominee in an effective way. I don't think she aspires to continue to be in the senate, and I suspect a rising crop of young Democrats will be aiming for her seat, particularly Joseph Kennedy should he not be successful challenging Ed Markey.

I also think Warren has the countenance to be a vice presidential nominee if her campaign for president ultimately falls short... As in, she's willing to defer to the establishment when party unity calls for it, which I don't think another progressive candidate like Sanders wouldn't do as easily.

If a candidate like Sanders is the nominee, then I don't know. I don't think he can nominate another New England progressive like Warren as his VP. And I don't know whether other moderate candidates in this race would want to be his VP. I think a politician like Stacey Abrams from Georgia could work for a Sanders' nomination because she brings diverse opinion, is from a geographically different area than Sanders, from a large metropolitan area, has legal experience and has run for executive office (unsuccessfully, but ran an excellent campaign). Buttigieg would also benefit from Abrams as well, I think, though Abrams is mode moderate than Sanders on policy, closer to center-left, so it's a better fit for a progressive white male candidate like Sanders than moderate-left white male candidate like Buttigieg.

I also think Tom Vilsack is a potential front-runner should a candidate like Biden or even Warren get the nomination.

But again, it's a long way off, and VP noms are usually not even prominent candidates in the primary, so who knows.

Candidates like Yang would never, ever be a vice presidential nominee. Yang does nothing politically for any candidate, and he'd be a distraction for every candidate because he's hinging his presidential run on being an outsider with out-of-the-norm political ideas. You might like him as your nominee choice, and that's fine, but if a front runner goes with Yang, then they're going to be constantly pinned down on his very niche political proposals and have to answer for them, even though they're not the nominee's policy proposals. If a Warren or Sanders wins the nomination, they don't want to answer questions about Yang's unorthodox policy proposals (namely, UBI, something that even the most progressive candidates in the Democratic party don't endorse as policy even if they might agree with the basic argument for it). For progressive candidates like Warren or Sanders, 'The Yang Gang' is likely already going to vote for a Warren or SAnders in the general election; for more center-left candidates like Biden, Buttigieg, or others, Yang is political baggage that would cause them to lose some center-left support while Yang's supporters would still not fully endorse a moderate left nominee, or at least, the "minus" would exceed the "plus." Yang also does nothing to build a base, he's a "coastal elite" technocrat, and in a race where the Right is going to certainly paint any Democratic nominee as part of "The coastal elite out of touch with real Americans," you basically can't find a better example of that than Andrew Yang.

I think if Harris and Warren don't get the nomination (well, obviously not Harris...) or a VP nod, then both would be appointed to cabinet positions in the next Democratic administration should whoever the nominee is beat Trump. THey're both senators from safe Democratic states. Harris in particular is in line for a DOJ nod, given her background as Attorney General of California and District Attorney in San Fran. Incidentally, being a senator from california makes her a very safe administration pick because she'll almost certainly be replaced by a Democratic governor and then California will elect another Democratic senator to fill the seat. Warren, similarly, though I could see her as head of a newly reinvigorated Consumer FInancial Protection Bureau, and her seat would definitely go to another Democrat.

Julian Castro would be another strong choice for most candidates, too.
 
Last edited:
Jul 7, 2019
309
Way too “MAYO-HARVARD” for regular folk.
Apparently not in the early states, given polling. I think he’d be a smart pick, pragmatically. And I’d love for the Pence v. Buttigieg debate. But also, the powerlessness of the role would force him to adopt the more progressive policies of his boss, and obviously the administration would do better with several policy issues around race given who is leading the administration.
 

Wraith

Member
Jun 28, 2018
3,250
I think the chance that a septuagenarian presidential candidate ends up picking a septuagenarian VP candidate is about as close to zero as you can get. So I don't think there's any way we see a ticket with any combination of Biden, Sanders and Warren. One of them gets the nomination, they're going with a younger VP. As much as people float a Bernie/Warren or Warren/Bernie ticket as a way of uniting their bases, it's probably not a good idea in the end.

Out of the other candidates in the field, I think Castro and Booker are probably my first picks for VP. Stacey Abrams gets mentioned a lot, and while I wasn't following her that much during her gubernatorial campaign, I've heard interviews with her and she'd probably be a good candidate.

The other possibility is picking someone strategically to try secure a swing state.
 

Volimar

volunteer forum janitor
Member
Oct 25, 2017
11,762
Honestly I wouldn't mind Booker as VP.

Get Sherrod Brown and you might take Ohio on election night. Might have an influence in Michigan and Pennsylvania too.
 

Jroc

Banned
Jun 9, 2018
1,173
I'd like to see Beto come back.

He would be a nice youthful counterbalance to the inevitable geriatric nominee.
 

DiceHands

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,359
I hope they grab someone that didnt get the nomination. Yang, Beto, Harris, literally anyone. If its someone like Biden that wins (god forbid) I hope he pairs up with someone more progressive to help balance out his bull shit.

If Warren wins or Bernie, I think they would dominate if they nominate the other as their VP. That would be huge.
 

Jroc

Banned
Jun 9, 2018
1,173
I hope they grab someone that didnt get the nomination. Yang, Beto, Harris, literally anyone. If its someone like Biden that wins (god forbid) I hope he pairs up with someone more progressive to help balance out his bull shit.

If Warren wins or Bernie, I think they would dominate if they nominate the other as their VP. That would be huge.
I think a team up ballot might be banking a little too much on the idea that the silent majority of Americans are left-wing. Someone like Beto or Harris might help broaden their appeal.

Hard to say though.
 

abellwillring

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,451
Austin, TX
Beto is my ideal veep but it makes sense to have someone more diverse in that slot. I think it will just come down to who the nominee is.. it's really hard to pick the number 2 without that info. I think Harris, Booker, or Stacey Abrams would all be great choices.
 

Swiggins

Member
Apr 10, 2018
2,673
While I'd love a Sanders/Warren tag team, I doubt its going to happen.

Both of them are New England representatives (despite Warren being from Oklahoma), they'll definitely pick somebody from the mid-west or the south as a running-mate to balance out the ticket; people in "fly-over states" don't wanna feel like they're being excluded or left behind.
 

Aaron

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
12,549
Honestly I wouldn't mind Booker as VP.

Get Sherrod Brown and you might take Ohio on election night. Might have an influence in Michigan and Pennsylvania too.
Brown's viability as a VP candidate (and really, as a presidential candidate) died as soon as Richard Cordray lost the governor's race last year. Every seat counts.

Anyway, I think the expectation for both Sanders and Biden would be to offset their old white man status with a woman of color. Stacey Abrams has been mentioned quite a few times in this thread already, and I think she'd be a fantastic pick for either of them - she's to Biden's left so she could rally some progressive support for him, she's to Sanders' right so she could rally some establishment support for him, and in both cases she could do wonders with minority outreach (and not just for tokenism, either).

Otherwise I could see Biden picking Kamala Harris for similar reasons. Some have suggested there'd still be a grudge over the busing fight, but really, it's politics. If Biden felt like Harris would be an asset to his campaign, he'd get over it. Catherine Cortez-Masto is also an option I've seen floated for Biden. I don't know much about her, but she'd at least check off the demographic balance. Each of those women would be reasonable choices for Sanders as well, though I'd consider them each to be less likely.

Nina Turner and Tulsi Gabbard can gtfo. I'd be fine with Sanders as the nominee but would be actively upset if he went with either of them.

Warren's options are a bit more limited. I don't think she can get away with picking a woman as her VP, sadly, and as an older white woman she'd probably be expected to pick a younger man of color. Within the primary, that basically only leaves her with Booker or Castro (I don't consider Yang to be a legitimate contender but I guess he'd be in the mix too). I'm not a huge fan of either of them, though I've actually come around somewhat to Booker. My read of him as always been "insincere bougie liberal," but VP is mostly a ceremonial role in practice, so why the hell not. Castro could help in Texas, but probably at the expense of losing Florida (which is already a dicey proposition, so maybe that's a risk Warren would be willing to take, though I'd rather she not).

Buttigieg idgaf.

Warren and Sanders picking each other would be a terrible idea. The VP doesn't do shit and either of them would want a strong ally in Congress whipping bills for them.
 

DiceHands

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,359
I think a team up ballot might be banking a little too much on the idea that the silent majority of Americans are left-wing. Someone like Beto or Harris might help broaden their appeal.

Hard to say though.
Yeah its tough, I just hope its not someone random as fuck that no one knows. Grab one of the people with a large fanbase and run with it. I really fear that if Bernie doesnt win the nomination, we are going to see a repeat of 2016 where salty Bernie supporters no showed or even worse, voted for trump. I hope he is involved in someway with the winner because dems need that support.
 

bye

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
3,851
Phoenix, AZ
Bernie/Abrams would be cool
or Bernie/Booker or Bernie/Beto which makes sense and rolls off the tongue well

Don't really like Bernie/Warren because both of them would be more useful in the senate than as vice
 

The Albatross

Member
Oct 25, 2017
10,677
People who think that a President Warren would select Bernie Sanders as her VP nod, or vice versa, are like shipping their favorite manga characters. Its not happening. IF IT DOES I'LL EAT DIRT ON VIDEO. They're both representing New England, they're both from the progressive wing, they're both senators, they're both 70+, they're both white, they both appeal to similar constituencies, they both don't appeal to similar constituencies. Almost all Warren supporters would eagerly vote for a Sanders ticket, most Sanders supporters would probably vote for a Warren ticket, they bring very little to the other candidate other than ideological, regional, and racial homogeny, which is not how winning presidential tickets are built.
 

bye

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
3,851
Phoenix, AZ
Yeah its tough, I just hope its not someone random as fuck that no one knows. Grab one of the people with a large fanbase and run with it. I really fear that if Bernie doesnt win the nomination, we are going to see a repeat of 2016 where salty Bernie supporters no showed or even worse, voted for trump. I hope he is involved in someway with the winner because dems need that support.
stop repeating this lie. more salty Hillary supporters didn't supporting Obama in 08 than Bernie -> Hillary in 16
 

The Albatross

Member
Oct 25, 2017
10,677
stop repeating this lie. more salty Hillary supporters didn't supporting Obama in 08 than Bernie -> Hillary in 16
It's not a lie and you shouldn't feel attacked by it. Approx. 12% of Sanders voters in the Democratic primary voted for Donald Trump in the general election. While, perhaps, a larger percentage of Clinton supporters voted for McCain in 2008 over Obama (I've never heard this, but even assuming it's true -- edit, yes it's true, 13% in 2008, 12% in 2016, not surprisingly the Kasich -> Clinton was 34%), it doesn't matter because Obama had a surprisingly large (now considered near landslide by modern standards) victory, while Trump narrowly won by mere thousands of votes over a small collection of tight states. Meaning any voters that defected from Clinton in 2008 to McCain ultimately didn't matter because the Democratic nominee still won, while those voters who defected from Sanders to Trump likely mattered much more.

12% of Sanders' supporters defecting to Trump is a fact, though it obviously should make any of us uncomfortable. I don't really even think it's a problem necessarily with Sanders or Clinton, but the state of our zero-sum tribalistic politics. I think people look at that number and derive a narrative out of it and feel attacked by the narrative, but you don't have to. It's not a defense of Hillary Clinton (And it's weird that you instantly went there, to bring up an irrelevant statistic about Clinton to justify the Sanders->Trump flip...), I actually think it points to some of her central flaws, but the numbers are not a lie, they've been validated by multiple studies since 2016.
 
Last edited:

thefro

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,206
Someone who is going to balance the ticket (in terms of experience/youth, diversity, regions of the country), help in a state up for grabs, and doesn't have so much baggage that it hurts the nominee.

Ideally the person should energize the ticket and make people more excited and people should be confident that person can be President.