Far and away my first choice for 2020 will be Elizabeth Warren. I had hoped she would run for 2016 and was so disappointed that she didn’t. As an actual Democrat, I believe she would have won the primary and the general if she had.
For the 2016 campaign, Bernie (who I supported in the primaries after Elizabeth Warren took herself out of the running) waited for her to unambiguously close the door on running (which she did at the end of 2014) before he announced his candidacy. He had earlier said that “if a true progressive didn’t run” (and everyone knew he was referring to Elizabeth) that he would get into the race.
I have (and have actually read) both of her last two books. She is enormously intelligent, more than all others put together, is fiercely loyal to working people, cannot be bought by corporate money, has stood up to the banks and Wall $treet elitists more aggressively than anyone else ever has (calling for prison sentences for those who profited by collapsing the markets in 2008 and specifically the top officers at Wells Fargo), knows the minutiae and most arcane technical details of the financial sector better than anyone (taught financial law at Harvard), and can articulate a message and stick with it. In my 46 years as a registered voter (never failing to vote), I have never been more energized by a candidate (or potential candidate).
One of the most important things, to me, is that she is admired by both Bernie and Hillary wings of the party and is the one person that could unify the current rift in the Democratic Party.
Her entire career has been what she can do FOR people, not TO them, not typical for a politician, and definitely not a quality of anyone in the Trump camp.
The mere mention of equality and government of the people, by the people, and for the people is going to turn-off misguided voters seeking an authoritarian leader and continued middle-class austerity, won’t it?
After she destroys the financial services industry, which sector of the job market will she choose next ? There are less hateful progressives to choose from.
Warren was appointed by Obama to develop the Consumer Protective Financial Agency in response to the near depression that resulted from Republican policies during the Bush administration. She wasn’t chosen because she happened to be in the room. She was chosen because she had been warning that this was going to happen for years before it did, and since everything was going fine on that particular day, no one listened. She has a life long record of working and advocating for the middle class. Sure, she’s a Harvard professor, but she is the daughter of working class people, and she makes it plain that being brilliant didn’t change her attitudes on that score.
I’m not a giant fan of Warren, but she’s a hell of a lot better than the Democrats the corporate media is trying to push to be front runner for 2020. I could actually see my self voting for her if she were the Democratic nominee.
Only anti-intellectuals like the Orange Furor and his minions can think of calling someone “Pocahontas” as a negative since the original was quite instrumental in the success of the first permanent English settlement in the Americas, Jamestown.
Their barely contained misogynous and racist tendencies (“squaw”) are on full display.
But what do you expect from people who think “deplorable” is a badge of honor?
Only a matter of time before we hear the Rethuglicans and their media acolytes scream “class warfare”, obscuring the fact that the class warfare has been going on for quite some time, only it’s been the warfare of the rich against the poor and middle class. As Warren Buffett commented though not with approval, “If it’s class warfare then our side is winning.”
By definition, the Republican party does not want unity. Their entire message and platform is based on an “us” versus “them” mentality; the “them” being a very elastic term and changeable as the need for a new enemy arises. Originally, Mr. Trump’s them was any Muslim, next almost any immigrant (because they’re all illegal anyway if they come from certain countries), then Hillary, then the Democrats in general. The entire GOP strategy is based on division and fear.
There isn’t a Democrat I wouldn’t vote for over Trump. There is no point in my entertaining the idea of what Republican I would vote for, since I wouldn’t vote for any of them, though many would be a better choice than Trump.
I don’t believe her claims of Native American ancestry was much if at all a factor in her being hired anywhere. However, the optics aren’t as clear cut as the “facts” that her supporters spout. She started checking off the Native American box annually in 1986 on the Association of American Law Schools reporting form. Fine. It doesn’t help that her story has some inconsistency to it or that some of her “proof” prior to the DNA smidgeon was downright silly. That she was asked to contribute to a Native American cookbook called Pow Wow Chow (lol) would only happen if she was in fact, Native American. Well, it was her cousin who asked and Warren plagiarized her recipes from the NYT’s which not only made her look a bit silly, but brought her integrity into question.Harvard was under enormous pressure to hire minority faculty. I remember the student protests. They hired Warren and then they reported her as a minority hire. So did Penn. While no hard proof/smoking gun has been unearthed to show Penn or Harvard hired her in part because she was listed as a minority, it doesn’t mean it wasn’t a factor. Again, I don’t think it was, but it’s understandable for some people to question if it was her intent to use her ancestry to her advantage. That a couple of liberal institutions like Penn and Harvard would circle the wagons (haha) to protect one of their own wouldn’t surprise many people, so the hard evidence issue doesn’t change minds much. Both Penn and Harvard will not open their personnel files on Warren, which would bring some clarity to the issue. Warren could do so, but she’s refused, too. So to the more skeptical, this doesn’t help. Bottom line is, this shouldn’t be an issue, but it is and it’s not going away. It’s going to haunt her even within her own party.
Search for September 5, 2012 Doonesbury cartoon to see Elizabeth Warren referenced in Doonesbury. Warren was working with Joanie on her keynote address. Rick the reporter and Joanie’s husband was trying to get some info regarding the address. Another time, a character referenced Ms. Warren’s appearance. “For 62? She looks great,” it was said.
DD Wiz Premium Member over 5 years ago
Far and away my first choice for 2020 will be Elizabeth Warren. I had hoped she would run for 2016 and was so disappointed that she didn’t. As an actual Democrat, I believe she would have won the primary and the general if she had.
For the 2016 campaign, Bernie (who I supported in the primaries after Elizabeth Warren took herself out of the running) waited for her to unambiguously close the door on running (which she did at the end of 2014) before he announced his candidacy. He had earlier said that “if a true progressive didn’t run” (and everyone knew he was referring to Elizabeth) that he would get into the race.
I have (and have actually read) both of her last two books. She is enormously intelligent, more than all others put together, is fiercely loyal to working people, cannot be bought by corporate money, has stood up to the banks and Wall $treet elitists more aggressively than anyone else ever has (calling for prison sentences for those who profited by collapsing the markets in 2008 and specifically the top officers at Wells Fargo), knows the minutiae and most arcane technical details of the financial sector better than anyone (taught financial law at Harvard), and can articulate a message and stick with it. In my 46 years as a registered voter (never failing to vote), I have never been more energized by a candidate (or potential candidate).
One of the most important things, to me, is that she is admired by both Bernie and Hillary wings of the party and is the one person that could unify the current rift in the Democratic Party.
Dtroutma over 5 years ago
Her entire career has been what she can do FOR people, not TO them, not typical for a politician, and definitely not a quality of anyone in the Trump camp.
Daeder over 5 years ago
How dare she suggest that no animals are more equal than others!?!
amethyst52 Premium Member over 5 years ago
She has dumpty wetting his panties.
Carl Premium Member over 5 years ago
Just as long as I’m one of the more equal pigs with her.
superposition over 5 years ago
The mere mention of equality and government of the people, by the people, and for the people is going to turn-off misguided voters seeking an authoritarian leader and continued middle-class austerity, won’t it?
Masterskrain Premium Member over 5 years ago
So, how long before the trumpbots trot out their old tired memes??
WestNYC Premium Member over 5 years ago
After she destroys the financial services industry, which sector of the job market will she choose next ? There are less hateful progressives to choose from.
Cerabooge over 5 years ago
WestNYC: She’s gonna destroy the financial “services” industry? Hooray!
comixbomix over 5 years ago
A Republican: clearly the smallest-eared of all the elephants…
Diane Lee Premium Member over 5 years ago
Warren was appointed by Obama to develop the Consumer Protective Financial Agency in response to the near depression that resulted from Republican policies during the Bush administration. She wasn’t chosen because she happened to be in the room. She was chosen because she had been warning that this was going to happen for years before it did, and since everything was going fine on that particular day, no one listened. She has a life long record of working and advocating for the middle class. Sure, she’s a Harvard professor, but she is the daughter of working class people, and she makes it plain that being brilliant didn’t change her attitudes on that score.
Jason Allen over 5 years ago
I’m not a giant fan of Warren, but she’s a hell of a lot better than the Democrats the corporate media is trying to push to be front runner for 2020. I could actually see my self voting for her if she were the Democratic nominee.
Meh~tdology, fka Pepelaputr over 5 years ago
Only anti-intellectuals like the Orange Furor and his minions can think of calling someone “Pocahontas” as a negative since the original was quite instrumental in the success of the first permanent English settlement in the Americas, Jamestown.
Their barely contained misogynous and racist tendencies (“squaw”) are on full display.
But what do you expect from people who think “deplorable” is a badge of honor?
Radish the wordsmith over 5 years ago
Republicans believe Republicans should run everything into the ground all the time.
Meh~tdology, fka Pepelaputr over 5 years ago
@Mikey
You playing the part of Guest Deplorable today?
acellist Premium Member over 5 years ago
Let us pray that Hind-sight is 2020 . . . !
GreggW Premium Member over 5 years ago
Only a matter of time before we hear the Rethuglicans and their media acolytes scream “class warfare”, obscuring the fact that the class warfare has been going on for quite some time, only it’s been the warfare of the rich against the poor and middle class. As Warren Buffett commented though not with approval, “If it’s class warfare then our side is winning.”
magicwalnut Premium Member over 5 years ago
@MIKEY: There should be another category on those forms anyway. “Human”.
Bookworm over 5 years ago
By definition, the Republican party does not want unity. Their entire message and platform is based on an “us” versus “them” mentality; the “them” being a very elastic term and changeable as the need for a new enemy arises. Originally, Mr. Trump’s them was any Muslim, next almost any immigrant (because they’re all illegal anyway if they come from certain countries), then Hillary, then the Democrats in general. The entire GOP strategy is based on division and fear.
montessoriteacher over 5 years ago
There isn’t a Democrat I wouldn’t vote for over Trump. There is no point in my entertaining the idea of what Republican I would vote for, since I wouldn’t vote for any of them, though many would be a better choice than Trump.
guyjen2004 Premium Member over 5 years ago
I don’t believe her claims of Native American ancestry was much if at all a factor in her being hired anywhere. However, the optics aren’t as clear cut as the “facts” that her supporters spout. She started checking off the Native American box annually in 1986 on the Association of American Law Schools reporting form. Fine. It doesn’t help that her story has some inconsistency to it or that some of her “proof” prior to the DNA smidgeon was downright silly. That she was asked to contribute to a Native American cookbook called Pow Wow Chow (lol) would only happen if she was in fact, Native American. Well, it was her cousin who asked and Warren plagiarized her recipes from the NYT’s which not only made her look a bit silly, but brought her integrity into question.Harvard was under enormous pressure to hire minority faculty. I remember the student protests. They hired Warren and then they reported her as a minority hire. So did Penn. While no hard proof/smoking gun has been unearthed to show Penn or Harvard hired her in part because she was listed as a minority, it doesn’t mean it wasn’t a factor. Again, I don’t think it was, but it’s understandable for some people to question if it was her intent to use her ancestry to her advantage. That a couple of liberal institutions like Penn and Harvard would circle the wagons (haha) to protect one of their own wouldn’t surprise many people, so the hard evidence issue doesn’t change minds much. Both Penn and Harvard will not open their personnel files on Warren, which would bring some clarity to the issue. Warren could do so, but she’s refused, too. So to the more skeptical, this doesn’t help. Bottom line is, this shouldn’t be an issue, but it is and it’s not going away. It’s going to haunt her even within her own party.
montessoriteacher over 5 years ago
Search for September 5, 2012 Doonesbury cartoon to see Elizabeth Warren referenced in Doonesbury. Warren was working with Joanie on her keynote address. Rick the reporter and Joanie’s husband was trying to get some info regarding the address. Another time, a character referenced Ms. Warren’s appearance. “For 62? She looks great,” it was said.