MSNBC: Warren could use some of Biden's ability to connect emotionally. Biden could use some of her

[highplainsdem]

careful attention to detail.

That was the discussion on Morning Joe after they followed a discussion of how unfair the media coverage of Biden's gaffes has been (Gene Robinson, Joe Scarborough and historian Walter Isaacson all admitted they'd accidentally conflated stories themselves, and Isaacson added that's just how memory works) with a discussion about how unusually favorable Warren's media coverage has been. The guy from Axios (whose name I can't recall at the moment -- Mike Allen?) suggested that was because when reporters ask her a question, she can hand them a plan.

But they didn't seem to feel she can connect with people the way Biden does, or at least she doesn't do it very often.

I thought it was interesting that they thought those two top candidates could benefit from being more like the other.

And it did make me wonder whether that might happen naturally if by any chance there were a Biden/Warren ticket and they were campaigning together.

(No, I don't think there's much chance we'd ever see that ticket. In part because it would lead to screaming from the people who don't want an older candidate running for president.)

[blm]

1. None of them read other news stories?

Elizabeth Warren Is the Teacher All the Students Hope to Get in the Fall
The happy warrior goes to the Iowa State Fair.

https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/a28669312/elizabeth-warren-iowa-state-fair/


WA Post: Elizabethan. Elizabeth Warren has a way with words. [View all]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/arts-entertainment/2019/08/21/posts-theater-critic-is-reviewing-performances-democratic-candidates-this-installment-elizabeth-warren-cuts-shakespearean-figure-arizona/

Warren’s Tempe appearance was the first time in my travels as a theater critic on the 2020 campaign trail in which I was moved by a politician’s oratory, and I could feel that I wasn’t the only one. Warren’s team seated about 120 people on the venue’s stage to cheer her on, and one exuberant young man in the first row was clapping so ferociously, I thought his hands would bleed.

That kind of enthusiasm is difficult to manufacture. In this hall, it came across as genuine, in part because the speaker seemed to be seeking that kind of intensity. One of the most seductive attributes of great actors is that they create the impression they are giving you more of themselves — and asking you, as an audience, to give them more in return.

A Warren performance is a polished act of seduction. As the candidate makes plain — and even makes fun of herself for — she’s got a plan for everything, except maybe what you should have for dinner. But I’m drawn to something more elemental and just as vital for someone auditioning for the role of communicator in chief: How does a politician convince you that she understands the way you think? How does she share enough of herself for you to not only imagine you know her, but also to want to side with her?

SNIP

At other times, Warren can summon a bit too fiercely — almost comically — her disapproving inner schoolmarm. But unlike former vice president Joe Biden and Sen. Kamala D. Harris, the subjects of my previous campaign trail “reviews,” Warren has a fully evolved performance style, one that binds her roll-up-her-sleeves biography powerfully and fluidly to her average, working person’s philosophy. In a grittily poetic way, her spiel is akin to that of a folksy troubadour: She is the Springsteen of campaign 2020.

[highplainsdem]

4. I see mostly the "disapproving inner schoolmarm" side. And I think the appeal that article

describes as Warren showing "she understands the way you think" is basically a wonk's appeal to wonks who just love to hear "I have a plan for that."

Btw, before anyone wrongly accuses me of being misogynistic, I'm a woman, a feminist for more than 50 years, who supported HRC in 2008, until Obama won the nomination, and who supported her in 2016.

There are a lot of things I admire about Warren. But I believe Clinton was a much stronger candidate.

And I don't think any of the other candidates have Biden's ability to connect with people emotionally.

___


Editing to add, before anyone yells at me for the "disapproving inner schoolmarm" description of that aspect of Warren: I want to point out that's the wording used by Peter Marks, the Washington Post's theater critic.

Marks adores Warren.

Marks also really, really dislikes Biden, and again -- as seems so often to be the case with Biden critics -- this seems to be partly due to Biden standing between Warren and the nomnation.

And it also seems to be partly due to the apparent envy Marks feels toward Biden, which I've mentioned here before:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287240456

[blm]

6. I don't. Never did.

And I also think you use the word wonk to be disqualifying....a pejorative. Warren speaks to kitchen table issues in kitchen table language and THAT is why her campaign support has been growing. If voters only relied on the early media portrayal of her she would have dropped out by now.

[highplainsdem]

9. I don't consider "wonk" a pejorative. Hillary had a wonk side, too. But I think that side of

her had a limited appeal except to other wonks.

I don't have anything against teachers/academics/schoolmarms, either. Some of my best friends over many years have been teachers -- one of my favorite social circles used to be a group of academics that met at a local bar near the university on Friday afternoons and then adjourned to a restaurant -- and I've sometimes helped them teach classes. I admire good teachers, and I admire Warren's ability to explain things.

But I saw HRC go from seeming too wonky to seeming both very strong and very relatable as a result of all she had to endure, from all the investigations during her husband's time as president to her role as Obama's Secretary of State to her ability to withstand the nonstop investigations by Republicans in Congress before and during the 2016 election, culminating in her bravura day-long defense of her actions during that Benghazi hearing, when she made mincemeat of her critics.

Maybe Warren just hasn't had the spotlight on her enough to come across as just as strong as HRC seems to me.

And maybe we simply haven't seen enough of Warren with her family.

But even so, I don't think she has Biden's ability to relate emotionally to others, whether one-on-one or while giving a speech. Not to the same degree, anyway.

He has a very rare knack for that, as even Rachel Maddow said in 2016 after his DNC speech

https://upload.democraticunderground.com/1287210938

And I do think it would help Warren if she had some of that.

Just as I agree with those talking heads on MSNBC that Biden would be helped by having more of her careful attention to detail.

There's nothing WRONG with wishing a candidate had more strengths, especially when you can see those strengths in other candidates.

[Bradshaw3]

27. Confirmation bias on your part

You are seeing what you want to see, and what the ones who disparage Warren are trying to sell.

She has people lining up for hours for a selfie, got standing ovations at an AN and NA conferences with attendees connecting with her on an emotional level, as have many others who have seen her in person. The baloney that you are only quoting an author who loves her and hates Biden is disingenuous and takes the context out of the article. Your concern is duly noted.

[highplainsdem]

28. You're the one who's showing confirmation bias.

[Thekaspervote]

35. This!

[livetohike]

2. Here we go again. Wasn't that their mantra about Hillary?

I never saw that as a problem with Hillary and I don’t see it with Elizabeth Warren either. They need to stop it.

[blm]

3. Media running their bag of tricks against Biden one day and Warren the next.

Some don’t mind repeating the media’s past mistakes.

[BlueMTexpat]

17. Exactly!

Part of it is because BOTH are intelligent, competent, warm and genuinely likable women.

So there must be ways to put and keep them in their "places."

[JI7]

5. the msm wants to make everything simple rather than do real reporting

they like to categorize candidates in simple ways and focus on areas that they think reinforces it instead of just reporting on what is happening.

it's just all bs and lazy reporting .

[gordianot]

7. Biden needs to dump the emotional nostalgia.

This is from a Democratic voter who is leans between Warren and Biden.

[highplainsdem]

10. You just made my point, really, since you seem to favor Warren because she shows less emotion.

I don't believe that's true of most voters, though.

[gordianot]

16. I am very cautious about any politician that appeals to emotional reactions.

Emotional reactions are Donald Trump’s appeal. My emotional response is to get rid of Trump. I would also like to know what they are going to do in office which is why I am also looking at Warren. I have donated to Biden, the gaffes worry me, as someone in his age range I understand his challenges.

Goal one replace Trump I do not need any more emotional motivation.

[Drunken Irishman]

32. Biden should continue being Biden - it's working.

Why change what is obviously an asset to your campaign?

[Thekaspervote]

36. And that's the truth of it. Thank you for pointing that out!!

[BeyondGeography]

8. When Warren talks about her family's economic struggles it registers deeply with a lot of people

Plus it’s linked to what she would actually do as President and why she would do it. As your favorite pundit Axelrod has said, her message as a candidate is integrated with her biography in a much deeper way than any one in the field, and that includes Biden.

[highplainsdem]

12. Axelrod is NOT my favorite pundit. I do appreciate it when he sometimes overcomes his apparent envy

of Biden enough to say something nice about him or defend him from other critics.

But in general Axelrod has been very critical toward Biden and seems to favor Warren, as many in the media do.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287253368

[BeyondGeography]

13. You missed the sarcasm

But that’s ok. Whiffing on how Warren actually is connecting with people emotionally is less ok.

[highplainsdem]

14. Well, since the last thing I'd posted about Axelrod was about his criticism of the WaPo hit piece on

Biden, and his suggestion it was the result of an oppo research dump by another campaign (though Axelrod didn't suggest which other campaign he had in mind), I thought your comment might have been serious rather than sarcastic, so I responded to it.

[JenniferJuniper]

11. I don't want to be emotionally connected to...

I want someone who is going to come in and immediately begin fixing all the shit the toddler orangutan damaged or destroyed. At this point I don't care exactly who that it is, but come primary time I am going for the person who I think has the best chance of doing that as quickly and efficiently as possible. Right now I am betting that's Warrren, but I, like everyone else, will see how things go over the coming months.

And the reality is, no female candidate at this level can be perceived as "warm", or "feeling". It would be used as an effective weapon against her. Can't have an emotional female as president!

[highplainsdem]

15. Like you, I want our nominee to be able to fix the mess Trump has made. IMO Biden is ready to do

that on day one.

But I also want a nominee I can connect to emotionally.

And I don't think women are penalized for showing they can be warm and emotional as well as strong and competent.

I believe it helped HRC a lot to show her warmer, funnier, more emotional side. We already knew she was smart. We already knew she could be a wonk.

[CTyankee]

20. I think the comparisons to HRC are largely irrelevant because of one factor:

she was married to Bill Clinton. That single fact had an enormous effect on voters because as much as many people loved him a lot there were many people who hated him a lot and that had to have an effect on HRC's campaign. Also, the Electoral College!

Warren has no baggage that is comparable to HRC's. So people have to discuss what she proposes. That, in itself, is a problem in that the press likes to dismiss her as a socialist; they are too lazy (with some great exceptions) to really examine what she is proposing.

But without the Bill baggage, I think people can see clearly who she is and listen to her proposals. She seems unmoored to local comparisons -- Harvard professor with an Oklahoma accent and background, that's hard to pin down.

So ya gotta actually LISTEN TO WHAT SHE SAYS.

[Thekaspervote]

37. +1000

[JenniferJuniper]

38. F**k emotions

We've had enough emotional insanity.

We need a leader. Not a weepy bleeder.

[highplainsdem]

39. You're calling Biden a "weepy bleeder"?

[JenniferJuniper]

40. No, I didn't.

I'm speaking generically about the need for "emotional connectivness".

Not needed in a presidential candidate. Not at all.

Let's please stop with the "we need warm fuzzies" bullshit, especially now that everything is collapsing in front of us.

[Skya Rhen]

21. I beg to differ re warmth being a negative for a female President. Michelle Obama is extremely

warm and caring and still can command respect.

Of course, we all know that she would never even consider running for President but I am just using her as an example to show that there are women out there that can be just as likeable as any male politician (like Biden), and just as competent.

But as it stands, IMHO, Biden is the only candidate currently running that checks these boxes.

[BeyondGeography]

29. Let me get this straight, Warren isn't warm and caring?

Who is this person then?

[marlakay]

30. I think your totally right

A woman has to show strength to prove she can be president.

Women have to try harder because they get judged by everyone so much more than men.

I like Elizabeth and if Pete ever drops out she is next in line for me.

[mcar]

18. Good Gad! Every video clip I see of Warren

shows her "connecting" - look at her selfie lines, and her pinky swears with little girls.

MSM has to have their memes - and one is that women candidates are never good enough.

[blm]

19. You'd think that these talking heads would tire of their own lazy narratives

they use against our candidates.

[jcgoldie]

22. Sooo they claimed coverage of Warren is "unusually favorable"

...as they advanced some mysterious criticism about how she fails to "connect with voters." Seems legit.

[highplainsdem]

24. It is a legit description. They were reading the headlines of favorable stories about Warren.

[jcgoldie]

33. Whether you feel its a legitimate criticism

It certainly is not an objective statement to say she "fails to connect with voters." It's purely a subjective statement and its a bit ironic to read such a criticism in some discussion of how she's supposedly getting such favorable coverage.

[highplainsdem]

26. Nate Silver on how reporters seem to favor Warren much more than voters in general do:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287238719

[Bayard]

23. I keep saying

If Biden and Warren could work out their differences and come together for the sake of the country, that would be an unbeatable ticket. I DON'T want to see them going after each other in the next debate.

[highplainsdem]

25. It would potentially unite "very liberal" Democrats with those who are "somewhat liberal" or

"moderate" or even "conservative" Democrats. There probably isn't any other ticket that would work as well to bridge the ideological divide within the party.

Like you, I don't want to see them attacking each other in the next debate. That will only make the divisions worse.

[marlakay]

31. It would be great ticket

But she is strong and needs to be more than a VP. Senator, head of treasury department if she doesn’t win primary.

[thesquanderer]

34. Funny, I think Warren's ability to connect emotionally is her big advantage over Buttigieg. (n/t)