If you want to know why Hillary Clinton should pick Elizabeth Warren to be her running mate, don’t listen to either of them.

Listen to the people who think it’s a bad idea. Just about every reason they come up with makes the case for a Clinton- Warren ticket in 2016.

Consider these arguments:

 Wall Street doesn’t like Warren.

“Big Wall Street donors have a message for Hillary Clinton: Keep Elizabeth Warren off the ticket or risk losing millions of dollars in contributions,” starts a June 20 Ben White story in Politico.

Maybe, but those are the kinds of millions you might want to lose if you were Clinton. Policy differences haven’t driven the Bernie Sanders movement as much as a lack of trust in Clinton herself. And the top reason for Sanders’ voters to distrust Clinton is her ties to Wall Street. Donald Trump makes hay with the same charge.

Clinton has already gotten the endorsement of Henry Paulson, treasury secretary under George W. Bush and a former chairman at Goldman Sachs. She doesn’t need millions in contributions that cement her image as a tool of the investment bankers.

Warren is the perfect character witness for Clinton on this score. Clinton’s financial reform proposal was intricate and opaque compared with Sanders’ plan, which could be boiled down to a slogan: “Break up the big banks.” A number of economists have said hers was the tougher regulatory regime, but you can get “a number of economists” to say anything.

Warren has bulletproof credentials as a Wall Street warrior, and if she says the Clinton plan is tough, people will believe it. If Warren is not on the ticket and the Wall Street money rolls in to Clinton’s campaign, they will believe something else.

 Two women is too many.

Times have changed. Once you have gotten used to the idea of a woman as president, a woman as vice president is a tiny leap.

The mostly male vice-presidential choices that have been floated by the Clinton campaign so far are not Warren’s equal. They don’t campaign as well, they can’t tap into her national fundraising network, they aren’t in tune with what has shown itself to be an angry electorate.

And no one is as good as Warren at beating up on Trump.

In all of American history there have been 91 presidents and vice presidents combined, all of them men.

A campaign that boasts about smashing glass ceilings shouldn’t bypass the best person for the job just because it needs a 92nd man to give the ticket gender diversity.

• Warren outshines Clinton.

Shine away. This is going to be an ugly campaign. Trump does nothing but attack, and Republican super PACs have 25 years of anti-Clinton material to work with.

Clinton will need someone who can fight back and inspire, and no one has proven that they can do that better than Warren. While others try to explain what’s wrong with Trump’s policy ideas, Warren goes right to the source and attacks Trump himself.

She is quick and she is sharp. She doesn’t need a script, and her tweets come fast and furious. I can’t believe someone as ambitious as Clinton would treat Warren’s charisma as a detriment. If you really want to win, you don’t mind if your teammates are better than you at some things.

 Warren won’t accept.

People argue that Warren could do more good representing Massachusetts in the U.S. Senate than she could as a vice president, and that she would – or she should – say “no” if Clinton offers.

To quote Lyndon B. Johnson – who was a much more powerful senator than Warren when he ran for the vice presidency – “Power is where power goes.” Or, the same qualities that make Warren an important senator would also make her an important figure in a Clinton White House.

In the end it’s a question of patriotism. If you believe, as Warren clearly does, that a Trump presidency would be a disaster for the country, you wouldn’t put your own career ahead of doing everything you could to make sure he loses the election.

If someone came to her and said, “Your country needs you,” how could she say no?

• Clinton doesn’t need Warren.

“We are going to win this,” said an anonymous senior executive from a Wall Street bank quoted in the Politico story. Naming Warren looks like a panic move, he said. Clinton can afford to play it safe.

Bookmark that if you ever need a recipe for disaster. Trump may not be able to win this election, but Hillary Clinton is more than capable of losing it, and acting as if this thing is in the bag would be a good way to accomplish that.

Clinton still has four weeks until the Democratic convention, but there is no reason for her to wait. She should bring Warren onto the ticket now, and start the fall campaign, already.