Survey says…

Elizabeth Warren will call Donald Trump “a loud, nasty, thin-skinned fraud” in a speech to a progressive legal group Thursday, according to excerpts of her remarks provided by her office. Warren is looking to play a major role in uniting the Democratic Party after a contentious presidential primary, in part by going after Trump. At a conference of the American Constitution Society in Washington Thursday, Warren will take aim at Trump’s attacks on the federal judge overseeing a lawsuit against Trump University, according to the excerpts. “Judge Curiel is one of countless American patriots who has spent decades quietly serving his country,” Warren will say. “Donald Trump is a loud, nasty, thin-skinned fraud who has never risked anything for anyone and serves nobody but himself. And that is just one of the many reasons why he will never be President of the United States.” Curiel survived assassination attempts, so he’ll “have no problem surviving Trump’s nasty temper tantrums,” Warren is expected to say.

Perhaps the most important of the modern traditional duties of the person occupying the VP slot on a presidential ticket is being the attack dog that one’s party unleashes on the other’s nominee at the top of the ticket. It is more acceptable for the Veep-to-be to be relentlessly vicious rather than articulating a vision for America all of the time. Given that, Elizabeth Warren certainly sounds Veep-ish at the moment.

She has been singularly focused on Trump for several weeks now. There is nothing unusual about the prominent members of one party sowing seeds of discontent about the presumptive nominee of the other, but it shouldn’t be a full-time job.

Then again, she is a United States senator, and it’s not as if they really do anything.

Some may think that Warren would never be considered because the Democrats wouldn’t need someone from Massachusetts to help them. That would be the traditional election wisdom, anyway. However, as we have seen time and again, traditional election wisdom died a hideous death during the course of this primary.

Let’s crawl inside the heads of Democrat voters for a second and hope we don’t get any stray ideological STDs while we’re there:

They aren’t voting for Hillary for any other reason than the HISTORIC aspect of her nomination. That’s really all they need. She could admit to every crime she’s been accused of and commit a new one during each campaign appearance and they are still going to vote for her BECAUSE HISTORIC.

So if one HISTORIC candidate is good, wouldn’t two be better? They’ll already be telling you that you hate women if you don’t vote for her. If Lizzy is on the ticket they can play a super-sized woman card that, along with Warren’s progressive cred, would probably be strong enough to mollify all of the disgruntled Bernie Sanders voters. A lot of those voters are young women who Hillary thought she could count on BECAUSE HISTORIC during the primaries but they’ve been voting for Bernie in droves. The most famous fake Native American in politics could be the bait that lures them over to Team van der Cankles.

If Warren isn’t actually auditioning, is her focus on Trump just some bizarre crush?

I think we know what he would say about that.