Elizabeth Warren Rejected 'You Win, I Lose' Politics. Then She Lost in New Hampshire.

[brooklynite]

New York Times

MANCHESTER, N.H. — It was 24 hours before the biggest contest of her political life. Senator Elizabeth Warren didn’t want to talk about it that way.

She was making the media rounds ahead of the New Hampshire primary when she dialed into a progressive SiriusXM radio show, Signal Boost. A voter asked her a straightforward enough question: Who did she see as her biggest 2020 competitor — and why was she better than them?

Ms. Warren demurred.

“I know there’s only going to be one winner,” Ms. Warren said. “I’m not — I’m not turning away from that. But I am turning away from the idea of seeing each other as if I win, you lose. You know, if you win, I lose.”

The next day, they won. She lost.

[LanternWaste]

1. She's the one you prophecied would drop out today, yes?

[brooklynite]

2. I did.

[LeftTurn3623]

8. she should of

[squirecam]

15. Only if she fails to go after Sanders

At the NV debate. He needs his voters to survive.

[TwilightZone]

3. Not sure I see the connection.

Pete won Iowa and didn't seem to act as though everyone else had lost. I'm not sure the "you lose" perspective is necessary to compete well, though it's pretty obvious that some do.

[Baclava]

4. Let's review: 1991 delegates needed to win the nomination, its a long road ahead

So far....

Pete 23

Bernie 21

Liz 8

Amy 7

Joe 6

[BeyondGeography]

5. It's a good read

Unpleasant if you’re a supporter, but her team has been mind numbingly inept for months.

[squirecam]

6. She has to go through Sanders

If she wants to win. If she doesn’t take him on at the NV debate, then she might as well quit after South Carolina.

[BeyondGeography]

7. Well, here's what I wrote earlier

Warren had a great lane, to the right of Bernie ideologically but just as strong on fighting corporate influence in our politics and defending the interests of working and middle class people. Even stronger when you look at her actual record of achievement and her ability to articulate issues and solutions. Someone with brains should have been able to leverage that into more clear positioning in the field but it didn’t happen. Instead she got sucked into three months of figuring out how to sell Bernie’s health care plan.

Then there were the debates and what for me was the biggest debacle of all which was the wine cave attack. Whoever advised her to do that should have been pushed aside and muted for good. The problem with Buttigieg’s approach to funding isn’t the method of fundraising, it’s the sources. Talk about his bundler Tony James of Blackstone, a company whose political contributions helped kill a law that would have addressed surprise medical billing, something that happened just the week before that debate. Get into the guts of your signature issue which is corruption and show people how they are being hurt by it in real time. The stage was set; she and her team pushed him to release the names of his bundlers, got the information and made the decision to talk about friggin wine caves...All that did was open her up to charges of hypocrisy for the money she raised in 2018 using the same methods. Inept.

There are other examples; one of the foremost authorities on bankruptcy in the country hasn’t brought the issue up once in a debate. Nor was it ever featured in any detail in her stump speech. How is that even possible? I could go on, but Warren needed much better guidance than she got. It sickens me because she is a rarity in our politics, a soulful policy wonk, and her team hasn’t helped her make the most of the opportunity.

[squirecam]

9. Pete isn't her problem

If Pete is taken down a peg, his voters will choose Bloomberg or Amy.

Warren has to go through Sanders. Those are the voters she needs to get. THEN she can try to get the moderates who are busy fighting.

But she is trying to fight everyone else for a slice of the moderate pie. And it’s not working.

[BeyondGeography]

13. Disagree

Pete peeled off many college-educated voters who were deciding between him and Warren, and health care was a main reason why. The writer contradicts himself here but he gets the dynamic right:

If you make a timeline in Iowa and New Hampshire of Warren’s rise and fall, you see her taking first place in both states in October after Bernie Sanders’ heart attack. In Iowa, her poll numbers begin to decline about ten days into November; in New Hampshire, later in the month. Most commentators attributed her decline to the publication of her Medicare for All plan, but I find that implausible. She was just spelling out a position she already had taken. Maybe the awkwardness was a factor, but I’d say two other things were important.

First, Sanders regained his footing after his heart attack, and his supporters who had gone to Warren switched back. Secondly, Buttigieg, who had once been an enthusiastic supporter of Medicare for All, but sensed an opportunity on Warren’s right, began attacking her stand and peeling off her votes, and in general repositioning himself toward the center. When I was in New Hampshire last fall interviewing people at Warren’s rallies, what I often found, particularly among the Dartmouth/Hanover and upper-middle-class voters, was their deliberating between Warren and Buttigieg not Warren and Sanders. Hanover, as it turned out, went strongly for Buttigieg in the primary.

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/requiem-for-elizabeth-warrens-presidential-campaign

[squirecam]

14. Then she is done.

She cant get through Bloomberg, Pete, Amy and Biden all in NV and SC.

Her only shot is getting the sanders voters she once had.

[Fresh_Start]

11. I don't know if she can recover....but I really hope she can

she is the progressive that I would vote for..

[Fresh_Start]

12. she is wasted in the senate

she should be administering something big and important
I know she was blocked for the CFPB

can you imagine her getting her teeth into education or food and drug and any one of another agencies

[bluewater]

10. That is a harsh truth.