General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsMr. Russert: So you will not run for president or vice president in 2008? Sen. Obama: I will not.
Mr. Russert: "So you will not run for president or vice president in 2008?"
Sen. Obama: "I will not."
Transcript, Meet the Press, January 22, 2006
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/10909406/ns/meet_the_press/t/transcript-january/
(photo from May 4, 2008)
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Faryn Balyncd
(5,125 posts)I don't know the future.
Why is it, though, that some are so insistent on claiming that Sen. Warren's present tense statement (that she is not running for president) is a statement, written in stone, about the future?
QuestionAlways
(259 posts)to get Liz Warren into the Presidential race. In fact, from a marketing point of view, I want an interesting primary, and debate season so that the repubs don't get all the attention. But remember the first rule is, do no harm to our ultimate candidate. We do not need or want a repub in the White House to make appointments to the SC.
Faryn Balyncd
(5,125 posts)(although it would appear that the "hot and bothered" description might be more applicable to those who seem so anxious to silence support of Sen. Warren and for her positions. This is unfortunate, since she articulates positions that are essential to dealing with the problems we face, and essential to reaching across party lines and to those disillusioned with politics as usual.)
I am prepared to work my rear off for the Democratic candidate in 2016 (the alternatives are disastrous).
It would appear that the greatest harm that could occur would be for the positions articulated by Sen. Warren to not be the positions, in word and in deed, of our 2016 candidate.
Thanks for your comments.
MADem
(135,425 posts)direction) for no good reason. Keep 'em scattered, chasing rainbows, and maybe they'll get distracted and demoralized....yeah, that's the ticket!
EW has told both Ready For Warren AND MoveOn.org to push off.
If she wanted to run, the way to do isn't to formally disavow the people raising money. She already knows that the deep pockets that put her in the Senate are NOT with her--why? Because they are the same deep pockets who are backing HRC, and they have TOLD her that that's where their money is going.
People can keep digging for that pony, or they can click on the links and read the woman's OWN words. Who thought, here of all places, that people would be arguing a "No doesn't mean NO" approach, particularly when EW even uses her own lawyer to make it clear to the FEC and everyone else -- "Stop raising money, I am not in this thing."
Union Scribe
(7,099 posts)you'd probably drop that shitty "pony" insult.
MADem
(135,425 posts)helpless and needy neophyte who doesn't know which way the wind is blowing and needs "protection" from the evil "PTB" in her quest for Truth, Justice and The American Way.
Believe me, she knows--she built the anemometer.
I think EW knows her path clearly and it doesn't involve being pushed around by interest groups wanting her to do something that isn't in her wheelhouse. She has a goal in mind and I think she'll realize it. It won't be what the people here, who tout her now but who would throw her under the bus so fast that heads would spin once they realize her nuanced defense policy stance, might want for her, but oh well--she's not in this to please them. She's on a mission, and she's going to see it through. Warren is going to be a change-maker, but not as POTUS. I think it's far more likely she'll be Chair of the Federal Reserve one day--and maybe one day fairly soon.
Union Scribe
(7,099 posts)I take it. You want to both accuse others of dividing people and continue to insult large swathes of posters.
OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)So no.
MADem
(135,425 posts)See how that "gotcha" stuff works?
Stop treating EW like a child. She knows what she's doing. And it ain't running for POTUS.
Union Scribe
(7,099 posts)If you want to make it, that's fine. And if you want to use all of those shitty insults about ponies and Tinkerbell and whatever else people are using to gloat in EW supporters' faces today, that's fine. Just don't pretend you're also concerned with people being divided.
MADem
(135,425 posts)It ain't "shitty insults" if it's the truth. You are desperately seeking that which will not happen without the death of another. So if we want to talk about "division," there's that.
I wish everyone long life.
What an unhinged thing to suggest, that Warren supporters are banking on Clinton dying. I guess compared to that revolting implication your other insults probably don't seem like insults to you. That is just fucked up to say.
MADem
(135,425 posts)PERSONAL and use loaded words like "revolting" and "insults" in order to try and generate IRE? Why not trot out the "Oh, the NERVE" and "Why I NEVER" to round it all out?
This is a political discussion board--if you can't manage a political discussion, why are you here?
HRC doesn't have to breathe her last, but she does have to be "dead" politically in order for anyone else to make a move. I think she wants to run and it will take a grievous state of affairs to prevent that.
You don't have to buy off on that assessment but skip the smelling salts routine because it doesn't resonate with me.
benz380
(534 posts)Dawgs
(14,755 posts)djean111
(14,255 posts)an OP that proclaims Warren Says She Is NOT Going to Run!!!!!! and then, oddly, come unglued when those who like Warren don't enthusiastically agree with them. Makes no sense at all, especially this far out.
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)Case closed.
Odin2005
(53,521 posts)Interesting how you Clintonistas all act like she has already thrown her hat in the ring and demand that we all get behind her.
HappyMe
(20,277 posts)A pledge to be a Clinton booster!
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)Warren doesn't want to lose her speaking slot at the convention.
Odin2005
(53,521 posts)Autumn
(45,120 posts)of the Party already. Speaking slot at the convention are used to give newbies name recognition. Any Democrats who doesn't know her name by now has their head in the sand,
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)Who could forget Ted Kennedy bursting into the public consciousness in 2008.
Autumn
(45,120 posts)Voice for Peace
(13,141 posts)Lioness goes hunting.
Provides for the pride.
MADem
(135,425 posts)Hark--who is that silver haired, silver tongued devil with those exciting ideas?
MADem
(135,425 posts)The POTUS is head of the party--that's how it works when a party is in power. The DNC or RNC chair runs the show when a party is out of power.
Dozens and dozens of speakers speak at conventions, and they do it for all sorts of reasons--former Presidents, sitting senators, up and coming representatives--and they don't, many of them, need "name recognition." The Keynote Speaker is usually--not always, but usually--the person who embodies the future of the party, a fresh face. Most people plainly don't remember who was the Keynoter in 2012. Some say he'll be on the ticket as VP in '16.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Faryn Balyncd
(5,125 posts)...the present tense into a permanent lifelong future commitment, written in stone. (especially the historical context).
Voice for Peace
(13,141 posts)an abscess that just won't let go. Except abscess is
misspelled. Still, it's good.
Faryn Balyncd
(5,125 posts)That was a whopper! Thanks!
(edited for spelling)
Autumn
(45,120 posts)as we all know. But as a Liz supporter it will surprise me if she does run. She knows the precarious financial situation our country is in and I think that she feels that the senate is where she can work on that. It's my hope that Obama and that little fucker Dimon actually pushing and twisting arms for such devastating legislation will give her pause and make her change her mind.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Why would they write something in stone when not doing so fills their coffers. Groups are getting money and advertising mileage out of this. The past shows that the run up to the run is very important. Just by her not detailing her answer she has created a huge ground swell of support. It is planned. She is a politician.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)How dare you call Warren a politician.
NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)SNORT!
Thanks for this!
Odin2005
(53,521 posts)Saying "yes, I am running" this early would make her look like a scheming opportunist taking advantage of public sentiment.
MADem
(135,425 posts)Federal Election Commission saying no means no?
Cha
(297,528 posts)Thank you, MADem..
MADem
(135,425 posts)I think it's a bit disrespectful on one level; I'm not sure what she has to say to get through to these folks!
Cha
(297,528 posts)MADem
(135,425 posts)an "alternative" candidate--and plainly, they do--Bernie is sitting over in the corner screaming "Pick MEEE! PICK MEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!" and waving his hands wildly.
I guess he doesn't have "the look" or something--he's fired up and ready to go, and MoveOn doesn't want him--won't even flirt with him in a "Hey, maybe you, too" kind of way. When they do finally settle on him (that day will likely come because Jim Webb doesn't look like their kind of player), will he feel like Second Hand Rose?
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid
stone space
(6,498 posts)I mean, that's a full two years before the election.
Nobody really takes answers like that seriously.
Some may pretend to take them seriously, but it's an act.
Autumn
(45,120 posts)apple cart. Two years out and they are hanging their hopes on "I'm not running."
stone space
(6,498 posts)NYC Liberal
(20,136 posts)Present tense, people! He said he "doesn't have plans" NOT "I will not run".
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7048370.stm
Obviously that means he IS running because he refused to use the future tense.
--DUers all the way up to 2008
And for more fun, check out the DU thread:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3031311
saying "i have no plans"..does not say "I will not run"..It does not say..don't try to draft me..it does not say,..Americans i do not want to be and will not be president.
Gore knows the deal..and he has not made a Sherman Statement...and he knows if he will not run ..he would make the Sherman Statement..
I believe this to be part of the efforts by those who fear a Gore run.
They are doing whatever they can to convince us Al isn't running and Hillary is our only option.
Plans can be laid very quickly, and I sure hope that they are doing so as we speak.
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)brooklynite
(94,703 posts)...by this point, Obama was fully engaged with garnering financial and political support.
POINT 2: Obama didn't use this period to encourage someone else to run.
Personally, I don't care one way or another. But if she decides NOT to run, will you be back here whining that THEY wouldn't let her run?
Faryn Balyncd
(5,125 posts)It's her decision.
And it's way too early, even by recent standards.
By the way, I DO care, and can't imagine why someone could not "care one way or another". EW embodies what we need to do to repair our democracy. Her message is spot on. She has leadership. And I believe she has the message and leadership to reach across party lines, and to reach voters who have been disillusioned.
If she never makes a decision to run, and if the individual who she currently backs (HRC) becomes our candidate, I will work my rear off to elect HRC (although I believe EW to be the superior candidate).
(By the way, I have no idea what you mean by "they"
MADem
(135,425 posts)AKA "The PTB!!!!!"
Those snarling meanies that can scare someone away from running for the Number One leadership gig in the Free World....! Would we want anyone so easily cowed?
I don't recall Obama telling his lawyer to wave off any independent fundraisers, either, or telling the FEC that he disavowed their activities. But hey, no diff, all the same!
JI7
(89,262 posts)i remember because i was part of that.
also remember that Obama was NOT popular on DU . neither was Clinton .
but if you look at actual support on the ground there was a good amount of OBama people. otherwise he would not have been able to be competitive against clinton .
right now it's only Clinton who has that ground support. O'Malley is the only one who has tried but he has not been able to catch on and i'm not surprised based on some speech i once saw him give. he is a decent person overall but when there are big names people are expecting you need something more which Obama clearly had .
and i think this ground support is key in how much a candidate feels like they could win .
MADem
(135,425 posts)Who wouldn't want HIS rolodex?
I think he's gonna get that HHS gig if all this works out for him. He'd be great at it, too.
The Big Money is nothing to sneeze at, and it's all lined up behind HRC. I don't think that's likely to shift, either.
DU always seems to favor "boutique" candidates, even though it's the national brands that are the bestsellers! Kucinich, Edwards, Clark...every single one crashed and burnt. Some of that was kinda painful, too...!
Vinca
(50,302 posts)blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Faryn Balyncd
(5,125 posts)... is is that perhaps folks should take historical context into their perspective, and not be so anxious to take a Senator's statement that they are not running (present tense) and turn it into a written in stone statement that they never will run.
Especially when it's way too early.
Especially when no one can forecast how numerous factors will play out which effect such a decision.
Especially when history is full of examples of circumstances where a candidate makes a decision to run for an office when they previously had not made such a decision, as well as numerous examples where a candidate made a decision to run after even making specific statements that they would not be a candidate (future tense, as opposed to the present tense statement that they are not running).
It seems to me strange for some to be so apparently desperate to take a candidate out of consideration.
MADem
(135,425 posts)She should have organization by now. She doesn't. She should have big money donors lined up. She doesn't (her donors for her Senate run are the ones she got from Hillary--and they're sticking with HRC). She shouldn't be telling the FEC that she "disavows" these money raisers if she doesn't--see, that makes her a LIAR, and she is NOT one of those.
She is not running. She has pledged to finish out her term.
If she's running for anything, it's Chair of the Federal Reserve. IMO.
OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)Or, per her wild-eyed supporters, she is. Or might be. Only those afraid of her take her at her word.
It's a weird way to promote a potential candidate, but maybe it's "New Politics", of which I know bupkis.
MADem
(135,425 posts)EW has a very good reasons to want to "up" her profile in the Senate, and thus gain more clout. And good enough for her! She has good ideas that deserve a bit of attention. She wants to be (forgive the analogy) the "E. F. Hutton" of the Senate--when she talks, people listen. The more people who pay attention to her, the more her words have weight, the easier it is for her to steer the conversation to issues that matter to her. She is, as a consequence of this chatter, becoming a silverback.
It also benefits her to be coy without seeming to be coy. "Do I have to put an exclamation point after that?" and "I pledge to finish my term" aren't enough for some--they hang on to that "present tense" canard and think it means something. This is what it means--if Hillary is hit by that DU bus that has everyone stuffed under it, and expires from her wounds, then EW might be persuaded to run. MIGHT be. And maybe as VP, not POTUS. Anyone who is holding their breath, awaiting that eventuality, though, is betting on a very long shot, indeed. The Rodhams have incredible genes.
jalan48
(13,881 posts)I think Warren could run in the primaries in order to get her message about Wall St. and the banks out to the public. My guess is that the Clinton machine will ultimately be too strong but having to include Warren in the debates will help educate the public as to what is going on.
Exultant Democracy
(6,594 posts)I know this because the first time I met Obama was in Denver in 2006. I actually gave him a piece of my mind for endorsing Lieberman in the CT primary, and he responded with the full Obama charm which of course worked on me.
When I look at what Warren has now vs what Obama had then the gap is pretty vast. I'm not saying she has a lot going for her, but a real operation has to emerge in the next 2-4 months for her to fight out this primary. HRC can be beaten her campaign organization is actually one of her biggest weaknesses, but you still need to do the ground work.
Voice for Peace
(13,141 posts)then everybody probably should shut up and quit focusing
on getting her to run; as she said she wishes people to
put their energy and money elsewhere, and she probably
can give a good suggestion where we should put it.
I would like to see her run, and I think she could win.
But if she has something else in mind, it's probably a
good idea.
LondonReign2
(5,213 posts)(and I'm guessing she won't), it is amusing to see all of our DUers that think the party needs to be more right-wing frantically insist she most definitely is not.
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)Has Elizabeth Warren been speaking at any events in Iowa or New Hampshire?
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)Even as those seeking a new Messiah look to traditional politician behavior as evidence that the Messiah is running.
liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)Doesn't mean Warren will run. Doesn't mean she won't. Those who claim to know she won't run are just trying to marginalize her.
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Damn you, Obama.
Sid