@AlGiordano Any thoughts on why E.Warren has not yet endorsed HRC? Why the wait?
— West4Hillary (@Bloomswest) May 14, 2016
Because she's part of the "talk Bernie down off the ledge" team. https://t.co/MY15FfBtH3
— AlGiordano (@AlGiordano) May 14, 2016
Paul Waldman, in the Washington Post, spells out the key reason “Why Elizabeth Warren Isn’t Going to Be Hillary’s Running Mate“:
… [R]ight now the governor of Massachusetts is a Republican, Charlie Baker. That means that if Warren stepped down to become vice president, Baker would appoint a temporary successor for her Senate seat. In other years this might have been a relatively minor consideration, but in 2016 it’s absolutely central to the fate of Clinton’s presidency.
Right now Republicans have a 54-46 advantage in the Senate, but they’re defending many more seats up for reelection. Seats in Democratic-leaning states like Illinois, Wisconsin, and New Hampshire may well turn to the Democrats, but it’s likely to be very close. It’s entirely possible that we could have a Senate that’s 51-49 for the Democrats, or even 50-50. One vote could make the difference between Clinton getting her nominees confirmed and having some chance at legislation passing (depending on what happens with the filibuster and the House), or finding herself utterly paralyzed by Congress. Giving up a seat for the sake of a compelling running mate is an enormous risk, one Clinton would be foolish to take. Which, by the way, also rules out a number of other potential vice presidential candidates, including Sherrod Brown of Ohio and Cory Booker of New Jersey…
Senator Warren would indeed be an excellent replacement for Joe Biden, but she’s doing great work in her current job — and a HRClinton presidency can only increase her clout. And she obviously loves what she’s doing, so there’s that as well.