The leftosphere is all aflutter imagining its darling, Elizabeth Warren, may be Hillary’s VP. After all, they say, nobody ever objected to two men on a ticket.
As if Hillary needs to shore up the feminist vote. If she’s not already getting it, against Donald Trump, it’s game over anyway. But while America is ready for a woman president, a female duo would be too in-your-face, too gendery. We’d elect a Thelma, but not a Thelma and Louise.
We also hear the usual ticket balancing/pandering scenarios. An Hispanic, like one of those cute Castro brothers (no, not Fidel and Raul). Or an African-American like Deval Patrick or Cory Booker. But again, if Hillary hasn’t already got those demographics locked up, it’s hopeless anyhow.
Conventional wisdom meanwhile says she needs to play to the party’s base, all those lefties gaga for Bernie. Hence the Warren flutter. But this is one election where conventional wisdom has proven unwise. It won’t hinge on which party energizes its base more. Allegiances are scrambled. And for every Bernie-ite Hillary gets by pandering leftward,* she stands to lose a sane Republican repulsed by Trump, who might have voted for a palatable alternative.
At the end of the day in 2008 America elected a black man over a war hero because Obama was viewed as more capable, the safer choice. That is Hillary’s trump card against Trump, the one she should play for all it’s worth. She should play it in her veep pick. No politics-as-usual ticket-balancing ethnic pander. Instead a serious man (yes, man) of gravitas, who voters can see as president, to heighten the contrast against the GOP clown car.
Alas, Hillary has never shown much thinking outside the box. Nor ever heeded my wise counsel.
* Most of whom are in states like NY, California, Massachusetts, Illinois, which Hillary shouldn’t have to worry about.
