How can you tell a middle aged, lefty feminist from across the room? She’s the one with stars in her eyes, holding the just-printed “Clinton-Warren 2016” campaign sign.

The Clinton-Warren appeal is undeniable to progressive women like me.

I loved just about everything that came out of Senator Bernie Sanders’ anti-establishment mouth over the last year — from fighting against income inequality to fighting for campaign finance reform. But I voted for former Secretary of State, former Senator Hillary Clinton, who is, in my view, the most experienced presidential candidate ever, both in terms of domestic and foreign policy.

Plus, it is Hillary, with her decades of dedication to women’s issues, who would be able to transform those 18 million cracks in that ultimate, highest office glass ceiling (cracks she generated with her 2008 presidential run) into a sky’s-the-limit, I-can-do-anything attitude for young girls everywhere. Overcoming this barrier is crucial for the evolution of our country, which in 239 years has had 44 presidents, all men.

What about the conventional wisdom surrounding veep selections? It dictates Clinton must pick someone more to the middle of the electorate, ideologically speaking. In fact, conventional wisdom argues that a party ticket must be balanced not just ideologically but also geographically and, more recently, demographically, too.

Yet the notion that in order to win you need someone who has something that you don’t, was shot down in 1992 by Clinton’s own husband. At first Democratic nominee Bill Clinton was questioned and then lauded for picking Al Gore as his veep running mate. Two white males from the South? They were too alike, said conventional wisdomites. But in the end, the duo was deemed perfect: Youthful, fresh, representative of the new South, emblematic of a new generation — and they won the White House, twice.

Twenty-four years later, Hillary should follow her husband’s lead and disregard any criticism that her running mate should not be like her, a wonky white woman from the Northeast.

It just makes sense. A Clinton-Warren ticket could go a long way to bring reluctant Bernie voters to the Clinton ticket. But Senator Warren, sharing the same values and ideals as Bernie Sanders, is more than Sanders in a pants suit. She is such a keen fighter for a fair economy, working families and consumers that she has earned the unofficial title of leader of the progressive wing of the Democratic party. She is uniquely positioned to generate insta-unity in the currently divided Democratic electorate after the rough and tumble Clinton-Sanders boxing match.

Like icing on the cake, Warren is also the best anti-Trump attack dog out there, earning herself the moniker of “sledgehammer.” Attacking the opposition is the primary role of the veep pick in a presidential run, and Warren fits the bill.

Plus, Clinton’s team has already decided that the former secretary of State should run strong as a woman. This also goes against conventional wisdom which says that black candidates should not run as black candidates and women candidates should not run as women candidates, all in an effort not to scare off the Wonder Bread masses.

Flying in the face of that thinking, Hillary is running as a Woman with a capital W. Not only did her acceptance speech on the night of her ascension as presumptive nominee focus on the victory this is for women everywhere, but her speech was proceeded by a powerful film visually reviewing the history of American women’s fight for the right to vote, the right to be liberated from sexist roles and the right to equality.

With that decision made, the excitement factor alone surrounding a two-woman ticket would resonate with more than just lefty feminists like me. It would galvanize Democratic women everywhere, from college campuses, where gender equality (for all genders, including transgender and gender nonconforming folks) and stopping violence against women have become key issues, to work places, where income parity and family leave have risen to priority status.

We have seen plenty of male candidates who had the “balls” to be bold and run for the highest office in the land. Now it is time to see two women on the ticket. In fact, a two-woman ticket, by definition, is the ultimate rejection of conventional wisdom and establishment politics. That takes ovaries!