How about a Warren/Brown ticket?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Far too liberal to play nationwide. Furthermore, Warren at the top of the ticket will be an invitation to Wall Street and other special interests to just open the floodgates against Warren. You will see Democrats get out raised like you've never seen in presidential history. You don't want to piss the big money off.

we'll never know until we try.

seriously, when was the last time the democrats nominated a leftist?

That sounds like Republican logic for nominating Ted Cruz. "When's the last time Republicans nominated a far right nutjob? We won't know unless we try!"

The thing is, "trying" in this case means potentially handing the presidency to the Republicans for at least 4 years and possibly more. I'm not willing to take that risk, not at this point at least.

The last time the GOP nominated a far-right nut job they lost in a landslide. To someone as or more liberal than Warren. Even if she were against a moderate Republican nominee, the GOP would need all that Wall Street money to distort Warren's view lest swing voters realize they mostly agree with her.

Anyway, I assum both Brown and Warren stay in the senate but campaign for Hillary.

The last two times the Republicans nominated someone who wasn't pretty right-wing (1976 & 1996), they lost.

[tarheel-leftist85]

Yeah, 1964 was a bloodbath for Dems.

Oh, wait! LBJ didn't hide behind pot, abortion, and gay marriage like contemporary progressives(TM).  He was a DINO, brah!

But, seriously, Warren's Iran hawkishness, anti-Medicare for All, taxes "pay" for spending, and raising the minimum wage as a panacea for income (not wealth) inequality are deal-breakers.

[Meursault]

Warren isn't nearly as far left as you're all making her out as being. She was a Goddamned Ford Republican until the 1990s.

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

a name-recognition advantage.*

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/hillary-clinton-favorable-rating
http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/joe-biden-favorable-rating

>joe biden

Bush ran as a "compassionate conservative"

In 2000

also a good point. in 2004 w campaigned on partially privatising social security and amending the constitution to ban abortion and gay marriage.

[IceSpear]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

a name-recognition advantage.*

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/hillary-clinton-favorable-rating
http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/joe-biden-favorable-rating

>joe biden

Your argument was that her only advantage was name recognition. Biden's is just as high.

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

a name-recognition advantage.*

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/hillary-clinton-favorable-rating
http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/joe-biden-favorable-rating

>joe biden

Your argument was that her only advantage was name recognition. Biden's is just as high.

your argument was that clinton has a huge electability advantage over any other democrat.
most democrats are not joe biden.