General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWaPo: Why You Shouldn’t Underestimate Elizabeth Warren (More Favorable Than Obama, Rubio, Biden)
Just saw this pop up on Twitter from Alex Wagner.
"But, a new Quinnipiac poll proves why Warren would be formidable in 2016 if she decided to run. Using a feeling thermometer 0 meaning you feel totally cold about a politician, 100 meaning you feel warmly (aka) strong favorably toward a pol Quinnipiac tested the majority of major national figures.
Warren finished third behind only New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (53.1 degrees) and Hillary Clinton (52.1 degrees). She finished ahead of, among others, President Obama, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz and Vice President Joe Biden."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/08/06/why-you-shouldnt-underestimate-elizabeth-warren/
I know it's not likely, but every day I see more and more about this. At the very least it raises her profile to be Senate leader someday.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)Jackpine Radical
(45,274 posts)I think somebody just stole your Warren sticker.
JRLeft
(7,010 posts)Hydra
(14,459 posts)I'm sure they're upset enough having her in the Senate, and not having her Junior status slowing her down.
okieinpain
(9,397 posts)NUTS!!
demwing
(16,916 posts)Warren's now the Senior Senator from MA.
Then my brain caught up.
Neoma
(10,039 posts)Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)uponit7771
(90,225 posts)...release every person who has ever smoked weed ever, put the WHOLE Bush admin in Gitmo, put EVERY ceo in jail except for COSTCOs ceo, implement universal health care with medical records kept by the Martians (cause we can't trust our government), Make the minimum wage 12.50 an hour and declare SYG unconsititutional ...
Then...
The professional left, bashers, fudr and wingers
Will call her a sell out....................................too
I wouldn't want that job for nothin!!!
Arkana
(24,347 posts)I don't want Warren to be President because there are elements on the left that would declare her a sellout instantly. The things she would have to do and say to get nominated, let alone elected, are things I don't want her to have to say.
Volaris
(10,260 posts)Also, -I- would rather her run, and lose for being honest, than any other scenerio.
What's that quote from West Wing? "It's not the fights that we lose that bother me, it's the ones we don't bother to suit up for."?
Well, if Mrs. Warren wants to run, I'll get dressed for that, but honestly, I thing she might have more power and influence if she stays in the Senate, all the President seems to be able to do the last 12 years or so is kill "terrorists", otherwise, it's mostly the CONGRESS that's worthless and needs changing...
just my 2 cents...
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)sellout instantly"
Really?
That's your reason for not wanting her to be President?
Really?
Arkana
(24,347 posts)ChangeUp106
(549 posts)And I'm not in the Obama fan club anymore
nevergiveup
(4,744 posts)You nailed it!
Metric System
(6,048 posts)blackspade
(10,056 posts)uponit7771
(90,225 posts)...tripe
blackspade
(10,056 posts)Purveyor
(29,876 posts)headquarters.
BTW? Anyone heard from Hillary lately?
Many world stage issues that I would think she would be checking in on by now or does she
think she just has 'this one'(nomination) in the bag already?
Some might ask "Hillary Who"?....
daleanime
(17,796 posts)and then we'll compare.
silvershadow
(10,336 posts)uponit7771
(90,225 posts)....only pay half ass'd attention and are easily distracted.
There's even a trap post on it!!!
daleanime
(17,796 posts)Yaoi or yuri?
uponit7771
(90,225 posts)...and easily distracted and half ass pay attention and take half the information to come up with a conclusion.
That's how FUDr had to work Carter, Clinton and now Obama
We'll learn, I know this has EVERYTHING to do with 2014 and thank GOD that DU is nothing like the rest of the left
daleanime
(17,796 posts)and maybe a little more forgiving.
And no otaku points for you.
uponit7771
(90,225 posts)daleanime
(17,796 posts)so sad that I don't fix in. Nice of you to converse with us non-persons.
dreamnightwind
(4,775 posts)I don't fix in either. Is this poster you're responding to serious, or sarcastic? If serious, would be an excellent candidate for my ignore list. And what's a FUDr? Any idea?
daleanime
(17,796 posts)I try to deal with every one the same.
FUD? I hope its fair use doctrine, but fear, uncertainty, and doubt is possible.
Hope its not 'fouled' up disinformation (polite version).
Fantastic Anarchist
(7,309 posts)... or, well, let's just hope it's really bad parody.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)It would be hard to top as parody; that's true.
Fantastic Anarchist
(7,309 posts)woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Is this the moment where you guys pivot from saying that you support Warren's views but think she is unelectable, to outright screaming against her?
I think you are a little bit early on this and should check your notes. You are supposed to pretend to be on the side of the 99 percent for just a little while longer before you come out full-throated against her.
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)That cannot be allowed, so she WILL be diminished. You can see on these boards that they are already hitting her with the "she's too far left to be elected" line, BUT I can assure you they are scouring the internet for tidbits that can be crafted into something more sinister. I can see the Google searches now "Warren agrees with Ron Paul"...anything there we can use? No? Well lets try "Warren believes in UFO's" Anything there? No? Damn, well lets try......
I actually came into this thread just to see what our pro-corporate faction was crafting on the Warren attack front. Even though it is early, I knew because of her popularity that they would be busy...AND of course I wasn't disappointed. Right on que....and I occasionally enjoy reading their contortioned logic, and watching to see how the line of anti-Warren rhetoric develops. Make sure to catch it all now while it is still in it's infancy, and watch it grow!
daleanime
(17,796 posts)She's human, so I'm sure they will find something they think is 'usable'.
LordGlenconner
(1,348 posts)All it would take is getting crossways with their ideological purity just once, which will happen by the way. One doesn't get elected president without being flexible on a previous position or two.
Hydra
(14,459 posts)You'd better hurry if you want to get some.
Fearless
(18,421 posts)She would be leading the pack.
uponit7771
(90,225 posts)...burning his underwear and walking aon water
Fearless
(18,421 posts)Coyotl
(15,262 posts)which seems to be bashing others?
Oh, and people who run for President don't need hard skin for what extremist think about them because they don't even think about that stuff, no time. Some people want the job of President because someone has to do it and it is a job best not left to asshats like Bush.
uponit7771
(90,225 posts)...up with the left who are full of overt whiners?!
Tarheel_Dem
(31,211 posts)know they could never actually get elected, and even if they did, they'd eventually have to "Compromise" to get anything done, and they'd meet the same fate as WJC & BHO.
The internet left has fallen victim to its own insular rhethoric, and no matter what anyone says, it'll somehow be Obama's/PTB's fault that Elizabeth fell on her face.
eridani
(51,907 posts)Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)absolutely freaking out over their growing irrelevance here and are in pure attack mode now.
As usual, the lefty's are right and the authoritarians are wrong, always wrong, about everything.
daleanime
(17,796 posts)what do you think the 'authoritarians' are right about?
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)daleanime
(17,796 posts)i'd be ok with Snowden at NSA and Glenn Greenwald at CIA.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)Fantastic Anarchist
(7,309 posts)HughBeaumont
(24,461 posts). . . and I'm linking this as a progressive and a huge fan of Alternet (Granted, the original article is from The Guardian, and they make the huge mistake of labeling Hillary as a "liberal", but still):
http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/why-are-liberals-hillary-clinton-and-elizabeth-warren-so-quiet-about-snowdens
Number23
(24,544 posts)that you posted.
demwing
(16,916 posts)that we'll never be offered?
For my part, I'd absolutely refuse to be the Pope.
Nope.
Response to uponit7771 (Reply #4)
Egalitarian Thug This message was self-deleted by its author.
Fantastic Anarchist
(7,309 posts)Really unbecoming of the time for my reply, but I'm feeling generous today.
Zorra
(27,670 posts)Is why I will vote for her.. She could win if we ALL get around
her and vote her in!!!
Pay attention... she is wildly popular..
Elizabeth Warren!!!!!!
Yes she can win!
uponit7771
(90,225 posts)MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Last edited Wed Aug 7, 2013, 12:01 AM - Edit history (1)
Progressive dog
(6,862 posts)JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)tridim
(45,358 posts)Thank you!
She has to do it all with 100% GOP obstruction too.
SheilaT
(23,156 posts)name recognition is compared to the others named.
My guess is that she has much lower name recognition right now. Give it some time.
Safetykitten
(5,162 posts)Plucketeer
(12,882 posts)blackspade
(10,056 posts)antigop
(12,778 posts)L0oniX
(31,493 posts)antigop
(12,778 posts)Metric System
(6,048 posts)Beacool
(30,244 posts)The so called Left seems to fear a Hillary presidency as much as the Right. Go figure.......
Maineman
(854 posts)She would beat a hard right radical. My perception is that she is awfully corporate and big bank, big money friendly.
BlueMTexpat
(15,349 posts)Maedhros
(10,007 posts)Not a lot to discuss (for me).
Easy vote for U.S. Senate: Jeff Merkley (D-OR). I don't see a Republican challenger unseating him.
Easy vote for U.S. Congress District 3: Earl Blumenauer (D-OR). I can't imagine a safer seat for Democrats.
Governor: If John Kitzhaber runs again, he'll probably win. I don't see a strong Republican challenger.
It's more interesting to discuss potential Presidential candidates.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)I don't mean to diss Warren by saying that. It's just that there aren't that many politicians out there who will say things like "the game is rigged" and make efforts to change that. Dems running in 2014 would do well to realize that economic inequality is a huge issue.
Hydra
(14,459 posts)And then for the "liberals" to be blamed for the bloodbath in Congress.
ananda
(28,783 posts)..
ecstatic
(32,567 posts)to win a national election. I really hate to say that. Her DNC speech didn't go over well. I'd definitely vote for her, but I don't believe Independents would.
Metric System
(6,048 posts)Elizabeth Warren is an asset to the Democratic party and I hope she wins re-election after re-election. However, like it or not, you do need more charisma and the IT factor to lead a national ticket. It may not be fair, but that's the reality.
Rosa Luxemburg
(28,627 posts)Beacool
(30,244 posts)But I don't see her running for president in 2016. She had never ran for elective office before she ran for the Senate. As it is, she barely won in a blue state. The presidency is a very tough job, what makes her supporters think that she would be ready for the task? Speaking against Wall Street does not a president make.
I agree on the charisma issue. I felt the same way about Kerry in 2004. Both good people, but their oratory style makes their speeches as interesting as watching paint dry.
ecstatic
(32,567 posts)He rocked the DNC!
Beacool
(30,244 posts)foo_bar
(4,193 posts)Granted it's Massachusetts, so maybe it was more of a Saxby Chambliss level upset, but I'm not sure Markey could have done the same, and you have to give Brown points for reptilian charisma.
I filmed Warren delivering her stump speech in my smallish town, and you could tell she didn't relish the glad-handiness of retail politics, and she seemed rather pained as she recited her (focus-group approved?) applause lines like "...the millionaires and billionaires!", but that's what I like about her: she seems like a nerd inhabiting a politician's body. (So does Hillary to a large extent, although she's a little better at disguising it, even if she doesn't quite possess her husband's Nerd-a-billy charisma, but next to Warren she's practically Elvis.) I realize nerds don't historically fare well in presidential primaries (see Paul Simon/Tsongas, although Hillary vs. Obama was kind of a toss-up in that department), but perhaps we live in peculiar times.
BlueMTexpat
(15,349 posts)being a Presidential candidate, just as I would have preferred that Prez Obama have the same. I believe that experience would have helped him to avoid at least some of his worst mistakes - most of which have resulted from believing that one can actually reason with the GOP of today. That is simply not possible.
I do believe that Warren would be an excellent to outstanding President, just as she is proving to be an excellent Senator - and generally a boon to MA and us all. But I have major doubts about her actually winning a national election in 2016, even with the GOP Klown Kar Kandidate group. I also believe that Warren herself is truly not interested in running for Prez in 2016.
I will support whoever is the Dem candidate in 2016. Period. Even for Hillary, 2016 would be a VERY difficult slog because the RW zealots hate her almost as much - or even more - than they hate Prez Obama. Unfortunately, there appear to be several here at DU who hate Hillary almost as much as the RW zealots do, which is yet another reason why 2016 would be difficult for her.
Beacool
(30,244 posts)I'll go to my grave thinking that Obama should have sat it out in 2008 and ran later on. Experience does matter in life. I still think that someone who had been in DC less than two full years did not have the chops to handle the bag of cats otherwise known as Congress. I feel the same about Warren, she has even less elective experience than Obama did in 2008.
As for Hillary, I have no idea whether she'll run or not. Although I know that the pressure is intense for her to run again. I wish that both sides would leave her be until after next year's midterms. This is the first time since the mid 70s when neither Bill nor she are running for office. She's enjoying her freedom.
Mass
(27,315 posts)(one is a total joke and the other one a real person) but I want to point out to the stupidity of these types of articles. DC fluff at its best.
antigop
(12,778 posts)towards someone, that doesn't mean that someone will necessarily vote for that person three years from now.
A lot can change in three years.
AppleBottom
(201 posts)Life Long Dem
(8,582 posts)He's not even able to run. So I'm sure people take that into consideration.
DirkGently
(12,151 posts)mountain grammy
(26,571 posts)earcandle
(3,622 posts)Warren is not a war-monger like Hillary.
loyalsister
(13,390 posts)We need all the sensible people we can find. Aside from that, I don't think she has the range of experience studying policy that Obama did because he had spent time in the IL state legislature. When it comes to policy, she is an expert in one area.
demwing
(16,916 posts)but I should also say that I prefer Hillary to any other party's candidate, without hesitation.
GiaGiovanni
(1,247 posts)/
DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)...is because no one knows about her. Not enough at this point, anyway. But head-to-head she would demolish Hillary using one word: Banks.
- Hell, Hillary is a bank.....
K&R
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)They will do anything to prevent her from running.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)Zorra
(27,670 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)But we need to be mindful that the constant critics of this administration (as you have described) are not a part of the Democratic Party (and, I suspect, are not even liberal
they only play one on the intertubes).
cantbeserious
(13,039 posts)eom
closeupready
(29,503 posts)K&R
NCarolinawoman
(2,825 posts)Hulk
(6,699 posts)...she would have NO CHANCE in a general election in this nation of ignorant butt holes. She could be the female version of Jesus Christ herself, and the KKKristians would have her crucified on a cross.
This woman is serving the country in the best place she can. She has a strong voice; she is on the right committee; and she'll be great in the future if we can support her and get our lame-ass Congressmen and women to do the same.
But if you ever thought, even for a moment, that Elizabeth Warren would gain a majority of this country, with all the ass-backward, red-necked, vile-propaganda spewers pouring their poison and lies about her; you are so ignorant to reality, you had better stop drinking the kool-aid you are working on, because she's get her innocent ass handed to her on a platter faster than sarah palin could be exposed for being an empty-headed bimbo.
NOT A CHANCE!
Response to Hulk (Reply #88)
mother earth This message was self-deleted by its author.
Maineman
(854 posts)Response to Maineman (Reply #98)
mother earth This message was self-deleted by its author.
Not Sure
(735 posts)What does it say that a complete putz like that even shows up?
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)brooklynite
(93,878 posts)...it's that she's not running.
It's easy to say she has plenty of time, we're not even up to 2014, and in an ideal world that might be true. But in the real world, the prospective candidates (Democratic and Republican) are already laying the groundwork: talking to State delegations at the 2012 convention; going on speaking tours; reaching out to prospective funders. Hillary Clinton is; Martin O'Malley is; Briaqn Schweitzer is. Even Cory Booker is (likely angling for a VP slot). Elizabeth Warren is not. She is, amazingly enough, doing the job she was elected to less than a year ago: being a US Senator.
You're welcome to try and change her miond, but if that's your goal, better get your "Draft Warren" team organized, and figure out a way to convince people that a candidate from Massachusetts can get elected nationally (see: Romney, Kerry, Dukakis): you're late already.
Response to brooklynite (Reply #100)
mother earth This message was self-deleted by its author.
brooklynite
(93,878 posts)...yes JACK Kennedy got elected...53 years ago. And, now that I think of it, a Democrat who got us into a war in Asia and nearly got us into one with Russia might be just what DU is looking for.
Now, TED Kennedy? Not so much.
tiredtoo
(2,949 posts)is doing fine as a senator. She is not now ready to run for or be elected president. She may never be a viable candidate for president. We should all do what we can to support her and her efforts in the senate. Meanwhile we must continue in our efforts at dragging any and all potential candidates to the left. This is not a light switch action (on/off) this is a dimmer switch action, on and increasing brightness as we progress. The demonstrations in N.Carolina and Wisconsin are good examples of moves we all must support. Two senators, Harkin from Iowa and Begich from Alaska have started an effort to EXPAND social security. This is another effort we must support.
Working together we can move forward !
Response to ChangeUp106 (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
ChiciB1
(15,435 posts)She's my kind of REAL Democrat & I will support her all the way. SHE is the woman I WANT as the first woman to win the White House!
It may take some time, but boy do we need more like her!
I'm so not "into" the lame excuse for so many elected Democrats we have now. The control the RW has is astounding and growing every day. Now, they're working on dictating what news stations can and can not air. And, if I were a betting person... they'll probably succeed!
We have MORE DINO's & DLC types now, and they just can't stand up to Repukes. Everyone keeps saying the Repukes are fracturing themselves, but with the districts redrawn like they are, it seems unlikely that the House will change! I know Vern Buchanan will get re-elected where I live. The Democratic Party here is VERY LIGHT!