Wed Mar 11, 2015, 04:58 PM

I'll bet if Elizabeth Warren runs, a large chunk of America will get on buses to go help her.

I really do believe that.

123 replies, 5923 views

Thread info Bookmark this thread Trash this thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

123 replies	Author	Time	Post
I'll bet if Elizabeth Warren runs, a large chunk of America will get on buses to go help her. (Original post)	TheNutcracker	Mar 2015	OP
that may be true .. except she won't win ( small motivated minorty << lazy majority). nt	srican69	Mar 2015	#1
or she will	AtomicKitten	Mar 2015	#9
I hope she can raise a billion dollars because that is what it is going to take.	leftofcool	Mar 2015	#65
Well	SusanCalvin	Mar 2015	#114
I believe she will because she exudes something lacking on both sides at the moment ...	roguevalley	Mar 2015	#17
There's not many in either party that stand up to the banksters and other corporatists...	cascadiance	Mar 2015	#31
She will win in a landslide.	Enthusiast	Mar 2015	#47
If she were thinking about running, wouldn't she have spoken out about	pnwmom	Mar 2015	#52
Maybe she just isn't a cheap politician that would exploit such a manufactured scandal.	Enthusiast	Mar 2015	#57
Meaning she agrees it's a manufactured scandal.	pnwmom	Mar 2015	#60
Whether she runs or not, we must bring the corporatist powers down. We	rhett o rick	Mar 2015	#95
I wish I had more confidence that Elizabeth Warren could win.	pnwmom	Mar 2015	#97
The problem with the lesser of evils theory is that those in power can	rhett o rick	Mar 2015	#102
which are you?	hopemountain	Mar 2015	#71
Me too. And she could win.	peacebird	Mar 2015	#2
Me three - count me in!	InAbLuEsTaTe	Mar 2015	#77
I agree. I think she will be able..	one_voice	Mar 2015	#3
Yep. The Washington machine wouldn't like it though /nt	think	Mar 2015	#4
I don't know if Elizabeth has ever failed to inspire a crowd?	Cosmic Kitten	Mar 2015	#5
Does a large chunk of America even know who she is?	bigwillq	Mar 2015	#6
Did a large chunk of America even know who Barack Obama was?	KamaAina	Mar 2015	#8
I'd bet that in early 2007 his name recognition	hifiguy	Mar 2015	#10
76%, actually.	NYC Liberal	Mar 2015	#32
Wow. His 2004 convention speech must have had	hifiguy	Mar 2015	#33
It really did.	NYC Liberal	Mar 2015	#35
Back at Harvard in the mid Eighties	Fred Friendlier	Mar 2015	#82
We almost overlapped at HLS.	hifiguy	Mar 2015	#106
Those were interesting times	Fred Friendlier	Mar 2015	#115
Much higher than I would have thought.	bigwillq	Mar 2015	#37
And with that name recognition, Obama didn't really surge in the polls until a year later...	cascadiance	Mar 2015	#38
The endorsements from Caroline and Ted Kennedy didn't hurt him	hifiguy	Mar 2015	#39
I think Kucinich was held back by the PTB "keeping" Edwards in the campaign...	cascadiance	Mar 2015	#48
Absolutely. Warren is at 68% name recognition; certainly not bad at all.	NYC Liberal	Mar 2015	#45
Obama who? Oh yeah, that guy, the President, who Hillary supporters said had no chance. Riggghhhht.	InAbLuEsTaTe	Mar 2015	#79
That was 8 months prior to the election and after he had won the Iowa caucus.	Luminous Animal	Mar 2015	#54
I would have to say no.	bigwillq	Mar 2015	#12
A large chunk of the country didn't know who Bill Clinton was until LATE in the campaign.	bvar22	Mar 2015	#20
I've known who Bill Clinton was since 1974	Art_from_Ark	Mar 2015	#120
Yes. 76% of Americans knew who he was in March 2007.	NYC Liberal	Mar 2015	#30
Yes, they did. From the 2004 Democratic convention.	BainsBane	Mar 2015	#34
Average Americans don't vote in primaries.	Smarmie Doofus	Mar 2015	#18
I would in a heart beat.	HappyMe	Mar 2015	#7
iF WARREN can be convinced to run,	clydefrand	Mar 2015	#11
Spot on! Warren motivates even the disenchanted politically astute to work harder	TheNutcracker	Mar 2015	#87
She would have a devoted following if she ran.	hrmjustin	Mar 2015	#13
Hardcore!	Segami	Mar 2015	#25
She touches a real chord with a number of people I know	hifiguy	Mar 2015	#40
They were before my time.	hrmjustin	Mar 2015	#43
I would	Liberalynn	Mar 2015	#14
I know I will.	Smarmie Doofus	Mar 2015	#15
Considering what a big chunk could be and her position in some polls	HereSince1628	Mar 2015	#16
IMHO, she's the only person who could capture the "Obama" magic.	Vinca	Mar 2015	#19
I'll bet if unicorns existed they'd fart rainbows.	KittyWampus	Mar 2015	#21
You say that like it would be a bad thing.	Fearless	Mar 2015	#29
I would!	Left coast liberal	Mar 2015	#22
Too old to do the walkin' but ready to do the callin' for Elizabeth!	CTyankee	Mar 2015	#23
Nah, they'll be riding unicorns!	zappaman	Mar 2015	#24
Count me	DesertDawg	Mar 2015	#26
Count me in.	Fearless	Mar 2015	#27
I'm in, finally, NOT a plug your nose and vote candidate (run EW!)	edgineered	Mar 2015	#28
"She can't win!"	sorechasm	Mar 2015	#42
that sounds like something Hilla(R)y would say!	edgineered	Mar 2015	#64
I would get on a bus to help her campaign, or walk if needed, gladly. Motivated, highly.	appalachiablue	Mar 2015	#36
Piketty and Krugman.	hifiguy	Mar 2015	#44
And maybe some real decent SCOTUS justices like Erwin Chemerinsky and Marjorie Cohn n/t	cascadiance	Mar 2015	#58
Chemerinsky would be great!	hifiguy	Mar 2015	#107
Absolutely, Krugman too. Totally clean house from the previous regime. The 90s are long over.	appalachiablue	Mar 2015	#62
We are sick of the lying and the betrayals of the people for corporate interests.	Enthusiast	Mar 2015	#41
Or irrelevant.	Ed Suspicious	Mar 2015	#50
That too.	Enthusiast	Mar 2015	#53
It's not that he thinks we are stupid, he just thinks we should sit down and shut up. nm	rhett o rick	Mar 2015	#98
Sit down and shut up, we have billions of dollars to make for a few select special buddies.	Enthusiast	Mar 2015	#100
In in Iowa.	slumcamper	Mar 2015	#46
Like they did for Dennis Kucinich? And Lord knows he never wanted for airtime.	Tarheel_Dem	Mar 2015	#49
I think if Edwards had pulled out a lot earlier, Kucinich would have picked up a lot of his voters..	cascadiance	Mar 2015	#59
She's not going to, but yeah, I probably would. n/t	Orsino	Mar 2015	#51
I'd crawl for Warren.	TDale313	Mar 2015	#55
I will be behind whoever the DNC nominee	Thinkingabout	Mar 2015	#56
I'll bet a lot of them will be pukes! nt	BootinUp	Mar 2015	#61
I agree. It would be a landslide, I believe.	Helen Borg	Mar 2015	#63
SHE WILL WIN!	TheNutcracker	Mar 2015	#66
If she runs...	awoke_in_2003	Mar 2015	#67
i would sell m farm, give her the money, and hit the road.	mopinko	Mar 2015	#68
Charles Pierce is a personal friend of hers.	Raine1967	Mar 2015	#69
Except for the fact that she isn't running.	Thor_MN	Mar 2015	#70
Warren is a real thorn in the side of the Clintonites	RufusTFirefly	Mar 2015	#72
Nope. America can't even be bothered to vote. They sure aren't getting on a bus n/t	broadcaster75201	Mar 2015	#73
Slick Willie 2.0	father founding	Mar 2015	#74
I think you woke up on the wrong side of the thread...	demwing	Mar 2015	#81
The fact that Elizabeth Warren may not run for president is irrelevant to me.	democrank	Mar 2015	#75
+1!	RiverLover	Mar 2015	#78
Who's stopping you from hearing what she has to say?	zappaman	Mar 2015	#80
If you believe that, you should be encouraging her	MineralMan	Mar 2015	#76
A story from 2008	spinbaby	Mar 2015	#83
This. Exactly.	HappyMe	Mar 2015	#86
great vignette	AtomicKitten	Mar 2015	#99
R&K!!!	RiverLover	Mar 2015	#84
Damn straight.	wilsonbooks	Mar 2015	#85
Does this thread tell you something? Have you seen any other 100% positive thread on a candidate?	TheNutcracker	Mar 2015	#88
Yeah...but...but..a billion!1..name recognition...	HappyMe	Mar 2015	#91
Agree. Except #74	obnoxiousdrunk	Mar 2015	#92
Doesn't count cuz they're bashing Obama and Clinton...not Warren. 100% positive for Warren here!	TheNutcracker	Mar 2015	#94
That's called living in an Echo chamber.	One of the 99	Mar 2015	#105
Sure, because things in the US today are JUST like they were in 1988...	RiverLover	Mar 2015	#109
They are worse for progressives	One of the 99	Mar 2015	#113
Count Me In...	WillyT	Mar 2015	#89
I bet you also believe that wolverines make great house pets.	Beausoir	Mar 2015	#90
.	AtomicKitten	Mar 2015	#93
Wasn't Oscar part wolverine?	great white snark	Mar 2015	#96
The classic!	Beausoir	Mar 2015	#111
I don't know anybody that I would put my money	Stellar	Mar 2015	#101
Exactly, and this is proving to be the mindset across america!	TheNutcracker	Mar 2015	#103
PS. Thursday kick!	TheNutcracker	Mar 2015	#104
Let's think about this..	CloneClinton	Mar 2015	#108
It reminds me of the chatter on Huffpo in 2006 for Barack Obama.	RiverLover	Mar 2015	#110
Well, in 2006, Obama was organizing a campaign,,,	brooklynite	Mar 2015	#112
And in a different way, so is Liz. She gets just as much attention/support 'not running'.	TheNutcracker	Mar 2015	#116
When Warren ran for Senate in 2012, did she forego organization and fundraising?	brooklynite	Mar 2015	#117
If you are this certain she isn't going to run, why does it matter to you so much	RiverLover	Mar 2015	#118
I care, because I have to deal with the aftermath...	brooklynite	Mar 2015	#119
Nothing about force will be said, but a fact remains, we will not have a choice.	TheNutcracker	Mar 2015	#121
Out of curiosity, were you as outraged when Al Gore ran for President?	brooklynite	Mar 2015	#123
If not Warren, it'll be a republican	RobertEarl	Mar 2015	#122

Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 05:00 PM

srican69 (1,426 posts)

1. that may be true .. except she won't win ( small motivated minorty << lazy majority). nt

Reply to this post

Response to srican69 (Reply #1)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 05:13 PM

AtomicKitten (46,585 posts)

9. or she will

Reply to this post

Response to AtomicKitten (Reply #9)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 07:03 PM

leftofcool (19,460 posts)

65. I hope she can raise a billion dollars because that is what it is going to take.

Reply to this post

Response to leftofcool (Reply #65)

Thu Mar 12, 2015, 03:17 PM

SusanCalvin (6,592 posts)

114. Well

I've been giving $5/mo through ActBlue for quite a while now. Of course, I'll step that up if she declares.

Reply to this post

Response to srican69 (Reply #1)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 05:48 PM

roguevalley (40,656 posts)

17. I believe she will because she exudes something lacking on both sides at the moment ...

integrity and guts. Count me in.

Reply to this post

Response to roguevalley (Reply #17)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 06:10 PM

cascadiance (19,537 posts)

31. There's not many in either party that stand up to the banksters and other corporatists...

... that control both parties.

Despite the corporate media's efforts to depict her as "far left", that is just a label. When people start to meet her and see what she's about and that she reflects values that more are about defending them that the 1% in this country, her support will come from a lot of independents as well as many Republicans. Much was made of the Reagan Democrats pushing Reagan in to office. I think we might have a lot of Warren Republicans that might help someone like Warren, who I think they will ultimately discover is someone they want working for them as well.

Here's an article that gives an example of how many tea partiers are just as much upset with Obama on his Wall Street ties and lack of holding them accountable as those of us progressives on the left. Now, they start from that position because they are pushed to not like Obama by the right wing and corporate media. But the message that echoes with them is that Obama and implicitly the Democrats are helping the Wall Street banksters screw them. Someone like Warren would completely twist that right wing message around.

https://johnhively.wordpress.com/2015/02/12/tea-party-republicans-and-progressive-democrats-unite-to-fight-against-the-wall-streets-buddies-obama-wyden-mcconnell-and-orrin-hatch/

The TPP that is getting pushed now will potentially be a big issue that will unite the people against the corporatists that are pushing that POS down our throats that benefits no one but the wealthy crooks in our society, and will do far more to mess with our country's sovereignty than the UN ever did, which is what the right has in the past been conditioned to be very upset about.

Reply to this post

Response to srican69 (Reply #1)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 06:33 PM

Enthusiast (50,983 posts)

47. She will win in a landslide.

Reply to this post

Response to Enthusiast (Reply #47)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 06:38 PM

pnwmom (107,962 posts)

52. If she were thinking about running, wouldn't she have spoken out about

Hillary's emails by now? Otherwise it will seem as if she doesn't care.

Maybe she doesn't.

Reply to this post

Response to pnwmom (Reply #52)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 06:44 PM

Enthusiast (50,983 posts)

57. Maybe she just isn't a cheap politician that would exploit such a manufactured scandal.

Reply to this post

Response to Enthusiast (Reply #57)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 06:49 PM

pnwmom (107,962 posts)

60. Meaning she agrees it's a manufactured scandal.

I think if she were running she'd have started already. She doesn't have a campaign organization already in place, as Hillary does. Time's running out.

Reply to this post

Response to pnwmom (Reply #52)

Thu Mar 12, 2015, 12:58 AM

rhett o rick (55,981 posts)

95. Whether she runs or not, we must bring the corporatist powers down. We

can not survive 8 more years of Wall Street domination. The corporations will try to stop her and they may succeed, but they can't hold down the Movement forever. 22% of our children live in poverty and 45% live in lower income homes. Goldman-Sachs doesn't give a damn, I hope you do. HRC isn't the right choice to fight corporatism.

Reply to this post

Response to rhett o rick (Reply #95)

Thu Mar 12, 2015, 01:08 AM

pnwmom (107,962 posts)

97. I wish I had more confidence that Elizabeth Warren could win.

And the longer she waits to begin a campaign, the more she reduces her chances.

Give me Hillary Clinton over any of the Rethugs any day.

And if she wins, I'd love her to appoint Elizabeth Warren to the Supreme Court.

Reply to this post

Response to pnwmom (Reply #97)

Thu Mar 12, 2015, 10:45 AM

rhett o rick (55,981 posts)

102. The problem with the lesser of evils theory is that those in power can

use that to manipulate us. At some point, maybe when child poverty reaches 50%, we will stand up to them.

Reply to this post

Response to srican69 (Reply #1)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 07:34 PM

hopemountain (3,919 posts)

71. which are you?

part of the small motivated minorIty or the lazy majority?

it's so easy to sling shit from an armchair.

she actually was voted most likely candidate by democracy for america. people are already raising money and flocking to her state to urge her to open an office. if elizabeth warren does not run it is because she is choosing to not run. she most definitely has people behind her and i venture to say the majority are the very same grassroots hardworking majority that elected president barack husseing obama.

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 05:05 PM

peacebird (14,195 posts)

2. Me too. And she could win.

Reply to this post

Response to peacebird (Reply #2)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 08:12 PM

InAbLuEsTaTe (23,913 posts)

77. Me three - count me in!

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 05:06 PM

one_voice (20,043 posts)

3. I agree. I think she will be able..

to motivate young voters too. Wait now hear me out--she's on their side when it comes to student loans. She's for education. She's against the big banks/corporations that are screwing everyone.

I think she gives a good speech--she's not Obama

but she's good. I think she has a good chance to build a nice grassroots movement much like Obama did.

She reaches a lot of the population--imo.

I think she could make the primary very interesting.

****I'm not against Hillary/for Warren or anyone else. I'm commenting in a thread about Elizabeth Warren.

I'd like to Martin O'Malley throw his hat in the ring too.

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 05:06 PM

think (11,641 posts)

4. Yep. The Washington machine wouldn't like it though /nt

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 05:07 PM

Cosmic Kitten (3,498 posts)

5. I don't know if Elizabeth has ever failed to inspire a crowd?

Well, aside from a crowd of bankers

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 05:09 PM

bigwillq (72,790 posts)

6. Does a large chunk of America even know who she is?

I'm a Warren fan, but unless you follow politics not sure if the average American can tell you who she is.
They may know her from watching Faux, but if they know her from there, they probably think she's the devil. lol

Reply to this post

Response to bigwillq (Reply #6)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 05:12 PM

KamaAina (78,249 posts)

8. Did a large chunk of America even know who Barack Obama was?

Reply to this post

Response to KamaAina (Reply #8)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 05:18 PM

hifiguy (33,688 posts)

10. I'd bet that in early 2007 his name recognition

was around 10% nationally, if that.

Reply to this post

Response to hifiguy (Reply #10)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 06:10 PM

NYC Liberal (19,877 posts)

32. 76%, actually.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/26815/mitt-romney-still-unknown-many-republicans.aspx

Reply to this post

Response to NYC Liberal (Reply #32)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 06:12 PM

hifiguy (33,688 posts)

33. Wow. His 2004 convention speech must have had

a bigger impact than I gave it credit for. I remember watching that speech with my now deceased mom and telling her "That guy is gonna be President sooner rather than later."

Reply to this post

Response to hifiguy (Reply #33)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 06:16 PM

NYC Liberal (19,877 posts)

35. It really did.

Warren’s name recognition is at 68% now (same time period) so she’s not doing too bad herself.

Hillary is at 99% — but that’s pretty understandable!

Reply to this post

Response to hifiguy (Reply #33)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 08:24 PM

Fred Friendlier (81 posts)

82. Back at Harvard in the mid Eighties

there was an atmosphere of "there is this hotshot kid at the law school who is going to be president some day."

Nothing like that vibe ever attached itself to Warren.

All this underscores the fact that Obama had been laying the ground work for his run, for twenty years, before he became an overnight sensation and landed in the White House.

Warren, who I love and respect and admire, has not been doing anything to establish a run at the presidency - in keeping with her repeated disavowal of any intention of running.

So I think it would be best to seek out a candidate who reflects our interests and is interested in running. How about this:

"A black agenda is jobs, jobs, jobs, quality education, investment in infrastructure and strong democratic regulation of corporations. The black agenda, at its best, looks at America from the vantage point of the least of these and asks what's best for all."

Cornel West

Reply to this post

Response to Fred Friendlier (Reply #82)

Thu Mar 12, 2015, 12:57 PM

hifiguy (33,688 posts)

106. We almost overlapped at HLS.

I graduated in spring 1988, same class as Michelle. He started that fall.

Reply to this post

Response to hifiguy (Reply #106)

Thu Mar 12, 2015, 03:56 PM

Fred Friendlier (81 posts)

115. Those were interesting times

This kind of story pops up surprisingly often. One of my friends, today, has a sister who was at North House but graduated in the spring before I moved in.

I hope that you have kept moving on to the bigger and the better and the happier.

Reply to this post

Response to NYC Liberal (Reply #32)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 06:20 PM

bigwillq (72,790 posts)

37. Much higher than I would have thought.

Thanks for the info.

Reply to this post

Response to NYC Liberal (Reply #32)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 06:21 PM

cascadiance (19,537 posts)

38. And with that name recognition, Obama didn't really surge in the polls until a year later...

during the 2008 primary season, especially right after Edwards pulled out...

There's still plenty of time for someone like Warren to overtake Hillary if she decides to run...

Reply to this post

Response to cascadiance (Reply #38)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 06:23 PM

hifiguy (33,688 posts)

39. The endorsements from Caroline and Ted Kennedy didn't hurt him

one bit, either. I'd been on the fence and leaning Kucinich (yeah, I know he couldn't win) but when Kennedys speak I tend to pay attention.

Reply to this post

Response to hifiguy (Reply #39)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 06:33 PM

cascadiance (19,537 posts)

48. I think Kucinich was held back by the PTB "keeping" Edwards in the campaign...

... until Super Tuesday, to draw away any possible build up of support for Kucinich then. I was an Edwards supporter then, and I think we were pushed to support him instead of someone like Kucinich, when the PTB knew they had a "plug" that they could pull when it suited them to have him removed from the campaign and leave the progressives without a real champion to vote for then... People then moved to Obama, since his more nebulous "vote for hope and change" had people hoping that he would carry through with some degree of progressive change, when Hillary at the time was more vocal about her support for things like war in the middle east. Of course many that went over to Obama were later disappointed when he did things like reverse himself in his campaign stances of looking to reform "free trade" deals like NAFTA, when he now seems to be behind pushing an even more potentially damaging TPP, that in effect are substantive reversals of those earlier campaign "promises".

I think it might be harder to insert an "Edwards" vote sink this time around, and I think that Warren has a lot more potential to draw voters than Kucinich did then, and people will be a lot more suspicious of candidates like Obama and Hillary this time around than they were in 2008.

Reply to this post

Response to cascadiance (Reply #38)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 06:30 PM

NYC Liberal (19,877 posts)

45. Absolutely. Warren is at 68% name recognition; certainly not bad at all.

And I think it will rise even more.

I support Hillary. But I also think Warren is terrific and I will be thrilled to support her and vote for her if she wins the nomination. It’s still about year before the primaries and a lot can happen. It will be interesting, that’s for sure.

Reply to this post

Response to cascadiance (Reply #38)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 08:15 PM

InAbLuEsTaTe (23,913 posts)

79. Obama who? Oh yeah, that guy, the President, who Hillary supporters said had no chance. Riggghhhht.

Reply to this post

Response to NYC Liberal (Reply #32)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 06:40 PM

Luminous Animal (27,310 posts)

54. That was 8 months prior to the election and after he had won the Iowa caucus.

Reply to this post

Response to KamaAina (Reply #8)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 05:22 PM

bigwillq (72,790 posts)

12. I would have to say no.

Things can certainly change.

Reply to this post

Response to KamaAina (Reply #8)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 05:55 PM

bvar22 (39,909 posts)

20. A large chunk of the country didn't know who Bill Clinton was until LATE in the campaign.

He didn't start shining until the debates,
and people were saying , "Who is that guy from Arkansas?"

Reply to this post

Response to bvar22 (Reply #20)

Thu Mar 12, 2015, 08:47 PM

Art_from_Ark (27,247 posts)

120. I've known who Bill Clinton was since 1974

when he entered, and almost won, the race for 3rd Congressional District against a 4-term incumbent.

Reply to this post

Response to KamaAina (Reply #8)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 06:09 PM

NYC Liberal (19,877 posts)

30. Yes. 76% of Americans knew who he was in March 2007.

Reply to this post

Response to KamaAina (Reply #8)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 06:16 PM

BainsBane (52,689 posts)

34. Yes, they did. From the 2004 Democratic convention.

His speech made him a star.

Reply to this post

Response to bigwillq (Reply #6)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 05:51 PM

Smarmie Doofus (14,498 posts)

18. Average Americans don't vote in primaries.

A good thing too. Because people who READ and analyze and ponder do.

Which is why she has an excellent chance. IF........

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 05:11 PM

HappyMe (20,277 posts)

7. I would in a heart beat.

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 05:21 PM

clydefrand (4,325 posts)

11. iF WARREN can be convinced to run,

I think the people that would back her will end up being much more active than those for Hillary. Because, Hillary has been 'running' for a long time, and I just don't think a lot of people will be active in supporting Hillary. It seen those that are for Warren are MUCH for 'get out and work for her' types.
As much as I've been for Hil., I might actually get out and work for Warren.

Reply to this post

Response to clydefrand (Reply #11)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 11:32 PM

TheNutcracker (2,104 posts)

87. Spot on! Warren motivates even the disenchanted politically astute to work harder

than they would for Hillary. I for one.

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 05:23 PM

hrmjustin (71,265 posts)

13. She would have a devoted following if she ran.

Reply to this post

Response to hrmjustin (Reply #13)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 05:56 PM

Segami (14,923 posts)

25. Hardcore!

After listening to her speeches, people will gravitate to her campaign. The word will spread like a brush fire.

Reply to this post

Response to hrmjustin (Reply #13)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 06:27 PM

hifiguy (33,688 posts)

40. She touches a real chord with a number of people I know

who pay attention to things but aren't hugely politically active. When was the last time a real economic populist headed the Dem ticket? George McGovern? LBJ?

Reply to this post

Response to hifiguy (Reply #40)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 06:28 PM

hrmjustin (71,265 posts)

43. They were before my time.

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 05:35 PM

Liberalynn (7,549 posts)

14. I would

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 05:36 PM

Smarmie Doofus (14,498 posts)

15. I know I will.

And for Sanders as well.

For Clinton, no.

I might conceivably vote for her in a GE ( although I doubt it because NYS is never in play). But, no... I'm not traveling to friggin' Pa or Ohio or Va to elect help elect someone who is only marginally better than Scott Walker. (Yes, she'd make a better appointment to SCOTUS for the Ginsberg vacancy than would Walker, Inc; but that's *only* if she doesn't ask permission from Goldman Sachs before she does it.)

The DEM establishment can't get it thru its thick head that you have to *MOTIVATE* the base if you want it to work for you.

So.....MOTIVATE , already.

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 05:42 PM

HereSince1628 (36,063 posts)

16. Considering what a big chunk could be and her position in some polls

I think the measurement of 'big chunk of support' would without doubt be met.

It seems that there is already a big chunk committed to convincing her to change her mind about running.

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 05:53 PM

Vinca (49,388 posts)

19. IMHO, she's the only person who could capture the "Obama" magic.

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 05:55 PM

KittyWampus (55,894 posts)

21. I'll bet if unicorns existed they'd fart rainbows.

Reply to this post

Response to KittyWampus (Reply #21)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 06:08 PM

Fearless (18,421 posts)

29. You say that like it would be a bad thing.

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 05:55 PM

Left coast liberal (1,138 posts)

22. I would!

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 05:56 PM

CTyankee (62,002 posts)

23. Too old to do the walkin' but ready to do the callin' for Elizabeth!

If she is in our CT primary, I'm IN!

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 05:56 PM

zappaman (20,595 posts)

24. Nah, they'll be riding unicorns!

Cuz that's just as likely as her running, unless you think she is lying.
I love her and donated to her Senate run even though I live on the other side of the country and I don't think she's a liar.

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 06:01 PM

DesertDawg (66 posts)

26. Count me

IN!!!

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 06:07 PM

Fearless (18,421 posts)

27. Count me in.

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 06:07 PM

edgineered (2,101 posts)

28. I'm in, finally, NOT a plug your nose and vote candidate (run EW!)

Reply to this post

Response to edgineered (Reply #28)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 06:28 PM

sorechasm (631 posts)

42. "She can't win!"

Hillary told me so.

I don't care. I'll still campaign for Warren because she's the only one displaying the courage to lead.
(Hillary is following Warren's lead, why shouldn't we all?)

Reply to this post

Response to sorechasm (Reply #42)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 07:01 PM

edgineered (2,101 posts)

64. that sounds like something Hilla(R)y would say!

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 06:20 PM

appalachiablue (38,720 posts)

36. I would get on a bus to help her campaign, or walk if needed, gladly. Motivated, highly.

And Thomas Piketty has to be in her cabinet, Treasury post. Lafayette was given honorary American citizenship, so can the economist. This country needs all the help it can get to recover from neoliberal corporatism. Joseph Stiglitz too.

Reply to this post

Response to appalachiablue (Reply #36)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 06:28 PM

hifiguy (33,688 posts)

44. Piketty and Krugman.

Get some people with actual brains as economic advisers for once.

Reply to this post

Response to hifiguy (Reply #44)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 06:45 PM

cascadiance (19,537 posts)

58. And maybe some real decent SCOTUS justices like Erwin Chemerinsky and Marjorie Cohn n/t

Reply to this post

Response to cascadiance (Reply #58)

Thu Mar 12, 2015, 01:00 PM

hifiguy (33,688 posts)

107. Chemerinsky would be great!

Smarter than a treeful of owls, a terrific writer and a hard-core lefty Democrat.

Reply to this post

Response to hifiguy (Reply #44)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 06:53 PM

appalachiablue (38,720 posts)

62. Absolutely, Krugman too. Totally clean house from the previous regime. The 90s are long over.

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 06:27 PM

Enthusiast (50,983 posts)

41. We are sick of the lying and the betrayals of the people for corporate interests.

Even with the entire media lying to us it is still readily apparent that we are being screwed.

Yet the President is still pushing the TPP. He must think we are fucking stupid.

Reply to this post

Response to Enthusiast (Reply #41)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 06:37 PM

Ed Suspicious (8,879 posts)

50. Or irrelevant.

Reply to this post

Response to Ed Suspicious (Reply #50)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 06:39 PM

Enthusiast (50,983 posts)

53. That too.

Reply to this post

Response to Enthusiast (Reply #41)

Thu Mar 12, 2015, 01:15 AM

rhett o rick (55,981 posts)

98. It's not that he thinks we are stupid, he just thinks we should sit down and shut up. nm

Reply to this post

Response to rhett o rick (Reply #98)

Thu Mar 12, 2015, 05:34 AM

Enthusiast (50,983 posts)

100. Sit down and shut up, we have billions of dollars to make for a few select special buddies.

We won't cut your social security too much, you know, just enough.

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 06:32 PM

slumcamper (1,525 posts)

46. In in Iowa.

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 06:35 PM

Tarheel_Dem (31,137 posts)

49. Like they did for Dennis Kucinich? And Lord knows he never wanted for airtime.

Reply to this post

Response to Tarheel_Dem (Reply #49)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 06:48 PM

cascadiance (19,537 posts)

59. I think if Edwards had pulled out a lot earlier, Kucinich would have picked up a lot of his voters..

I know I would have looked at him strongly then, if the primaries hadn't really started yet. By the time Edwards pulled out right before Super Tuesday, the only two candidates that were left with a shot were Obama and Hilary then. If Edwards had had the "plug pulled" earlier on him (and I do believe the PTB knew about what was going on with him a lot earlier), then i think Kucinich might have had a real shot then. He would have at least made for an interesting campaign, and also prompted a lot more discussion on progressive stances on issues in the debates, etc. too.

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 06:37 PM

Orsino (37,428 posts)

51. She's not going to, but yeah, I probably would. n/t

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 06:43 PM

TDale313 (7,763 posts)

55. I'd crawl for Warren.

If she ran (yeah, yeah, yeah- rainbow farting unicorns, blah blah blah) she'd be great. She's a fighter, she's got a great populist message, she's smart as a whip and comes across as very real. I think her message would resonate.

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 06:43 PM

Thinkingabout (30,058 posts)

56. I will be behind whoever the DNC nominee

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 06:50 PM

BootinUp (44,319 posts)

61. I'll bet a lot of them will be pukes! nt

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 06:59 PM

Helen Borg (3,963 posts)

63. I agree. It would be a landslide, I believe.

Of course, they would try to create a Warren Scream situation to take her down.

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 07:15 PM

TheNutcracker (2,104 posts)

66. SHE WILL WIN!

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 07:18 PM

awoke_in_2003 (34,582 posts)

67. If she runs...

she will likely be my first pick in the primaries, but she says she isn't.

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 07:26 PM

mopinko (67,233 posts)

68. i would sell m farm, give her the money, and hit the road.

i got friends in iowa. i would love to spend more time with them.
i might even take out a mortgage on my kids.

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 07:26 PM

Raine1967 (11,566 posts)

69. Charles Pierce is a personal friend of hers.

HE calls her senator professor — He has said that she isn't running.

As a fellow woman, I respect her words. As a fellow progressive, I respect Charles Pierce.

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 07:33 PM

Thor_MN (11,843 posts)

70. Except for the fact that she isn't running.

Which she has said multiple times...

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 07:42 PM

RufusTFirefly (8,812 posts)

72. Warren is a real thorn in the side of the Clintonites

1. Unlike Hillary, she doesn't cozy up to the big banks.
2. She dispels accusations that opposition to Clinton is sexism.

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 07:44 PM

broadcaster75201 (387 posts)

73. Nope. America can't even be bothered to vote. They sure aren't getting on a bus n/t

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 07:58 PM

father founding (619 posts)

74. Slick Willie 2.0

Obama is Clinton reincarnated to screw the American people, this is not the change we believed in.

Reply to this post

Response to father founding (Reply #74)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 08:23 PM

demwing (16,916 posts)

81. I think you woke up on the wrong side of the thread...

this isn't an Obama thread, jeez...

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 08:04 PM

democrank (10,608 posts)

75. The fact that Elizabeth Warren may not run for president is irrelevant to me.

I just wish folks who say, "She`s not running, she`s not running, she`s not running, she`s not running, she`s not running, she`s not running, she`s not running, she`s not running, she`s not running, she`s not running, she`s not running, she`s not running, she`s not running, she`s not running, she`s not running, she`s not running, she`s not running, she`s not running, she`s not running, she`s not running, "she`s not running, she`s not running, she`s not running, she`s not running, she`s not running, she`s not running, she`s not running, she`s not running, she`s not running, she`s not running, she`s not running, she`s not running, she`s not running, she`s not running, she`s not running, she`s not running, she`s not running, she`s not running, she`s not running, she`s not running" , would quiet down for a little while so people like me can hear what she has to say.

After all, Elizabeth Warren has more sense than just about any other politician in....or out....of Washington.

Reply to this post

Response to democrank (Reply #75)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 08:14 PM

RiverLover (7,830 posts)

78. +1!

Here's a bit of what she has to say~

Elizabeth Warren's 11 Commandments of Progressivism
National Journal
July 18, 2014

Watch Elizabeth Warren give a speech to her fold, and you realize she's one of the rare Democrats who can excite her base in the same way Ted Cruz or Dr. Ben Carson can excite their own. As Politico's Katie Glueck wrote on Friday, liberals' minds may be with Hillary Clinton, but their hearts lie with Warren.

Speaking on Friday at Netroots Nation, a convention for liberal bloggers and activists, Warren got the crowd more fired up than Vice President Joe Biden was able to do the day before. (To be fair, the crowd was in a solemn mood at the time in reaction to the news of the Malaysian passenger plane crash). In her speech, Warren outlined more clearly than other Democrats the social issues that galvanize progressives. Her performance was reminiscent of a certain other young senator in 2008.

"What are our values?" Warren asked the audience, some of whom held up "Run Liz Run" signs.

"What does it mean to be a progressive?"

She went on to outline 11 tenets of progressivism:

- "We believe that Wall Street needs stronger rules and tougher enforcement, and we're willing to fight for it."

- "We believe in science, and that means that we have a responsibility to protect this Earth."

- "We believe that the Internet shouldn't be rigged to benefit big corporations, and that means real net neutrality."

- "We believe that no one should work full-time and still live in poverty, and that means raising the minimum wage."

- "We believe that fast-food workers deserve a livable wage, and that means that when they take to the picket line, we are proud to fight alongside them."

- "We believe that students are entitled to get an education without being crushed by debt."

- "We believe that after a lifetime of work, people are entitled to retire with dignity, and that means protecting Social Security, Medicare, and pensions."

- "We believe—I can't believe I have to say this in 2014—we believe in equal pay for equal work."

- "We believe that equal means equal, and that's true in marriage, it's true in the workplace, it's true in all of America."

- "We believe that immigration has made this country strong and vibrant, and that means reform."

- "And we believe that corporations are not people, that women have a right to their bodies. We will overturn Hobby Lobby and we will fight for it. We will fight for it!"

And the main tenet of conservatives' philosophy, according to Warren? "I got mine. The rest of you are on your own."

*********************************************************

Run Liz Run!

Reply to this post

Response to democrank (Reply #75)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 08:16 PM

zappaman (20,595 posts)

80. Who's stopping you from hearing what she has to say?

I've heard plenty and love it!
By the way, she's not running...

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 08:10 PM

MineralMan (145,246 posts)

76. If you believe that, you should be encouraging her

to run. Have you done that? I suspect she has studied the situation, and has decided not to run. Do you suppose that she is getting bad advice from those she has as me? She appears to have made her decision at this point. I'm sure you could email her, though.

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 08:38 PM

spinbaby (14,874 posts)

83. A story from 2008

In my small city two offices opened up ahead of the primary. Hillary's office was on the ground floor of a shiny new high-rent office building. She was endorsed by the "official" local Democrats. I never saw anyone go in or out of that office. Barack's office half a block away was in a dilapidated old storefront but it was a hive of activity. It was the candidate who generated enthusiasm and drew volunteers that won. Elizabeth Warren can do that.

Reply to this post

Response to spinbaby (Reply #83)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 11:28 PM

HappyMe (20,277 posts)

86. This. Exactly.

Reply to this post

Response to spinbaby (Reply #83)

Thu Mar 12, 2015, 01:17 AM

AtomicKitten (46,585 posts)

99. great vignette

It's all about the big mo. It's Elizabeth's for the taking.

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 08:51 PM

RiverLover (7,830 posts)

84. R&K!!!

Will ride a bus, knock on doors, listen to people's concerns, just like Progressives are doing in Chicago for Garcia.

Run Liz Run!

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 11:26 PM

wilsonbooks (972 posts)

85. Damn straight.

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 11:41 PM

TheNutcracker (2,104 posts)

88. Does this thread tell you something? Have you seen any other 100% positive thread on a candidate?

TOTAL UNITY. Like never before!

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Reply #88)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 11:48 PM

HappyMe (20,277 posts)

91. Yeah...but...but..a billion!1..name recognition...

...Hillary!!11....she's our candidate!!111....

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Reply #88)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 11:53 PM

obnoxiousdrunk (2,785 posts)

92. Agree. Except #74

Reply to this post

Response to obnoxiousdrunk (Reply #92)

Thu Mar 12, 2015, 12:40 AM

TheNutcracker (2,104 posts)

94. Doesn't count cuz they're bashing Obama and Clinton...not Warren. 100% positive for Warren here!

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Reply #88)

Thu Mar 12, 2015, 12:40 PM

One of the 99 (2,280 posts)

105. That's called living in an Echo chamber.

I love Warren and would love to see her elected President. But I don't live in an echo chamber and know that she doesn't play well outside of the northeast and west coast. She'll be another Michael Dukakis.

Reply to this post

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #105)

Thu Mar 12, 2015, 01:04 PM

RiverLover (7,830 posts)

109. Sure, because things in the US today are JUST like they were in 1988...

Reply to this post

Response to RiverLover (Reply #109)

Thu Mar 12, 2015, 02:44 PM

One of the 99 (2,280 posts)

113. They are worse for progressives

The GOP controls more statehouses and congressional seats that in 1988. But if you want a more contemporary reference, she'll be another Kucinich. It's not anything against Warren, it's more against the people in middle america that wouldn't elect her.

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 11:43 PM

WillyT (72,631 posts)

89. Count Me In...

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 11:47 PM

Beausoir (7,540 posts)

90. I bet you also believe that wolverines make great house pets.

Reply to this post

Response to Beausoir (Reply #90)

Thu Mar 12, 2015, 12:18 AM

AtomicKitten (46,585 posts)

93. .

Reply to this post

Response to Beausoir (Reply #90)

Thu Mar 12, 2015, 01:02 AM

great white snark (2,646 posts)

96. Wasn't Oscar part wolverine?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=105&topic_id=624815

Reply to this post

Response to great white snark (Reply #96)

Thu Mar 12, 2015, 02:20 PM

Beausoir (7,540 posts)

111. The classic!

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)

Thu Mar 12, 2015, 05:48 AM

Stellar (5,644 posts)

101. I don't know anybody that I would put my money

behind BUT Elizabeth Warren.. even in the midnight if she so chose to run.

Reply to this post

Response to Stellar (Reply #101)

Thu Mar 12, 2015, 11:51 AM

TheNutcracker (2,104 posts)

103. Exactly, and this is proving to be the mindset across america!

There will be many, many buses!

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Reply #103)

Thu Mar 12, 2015, 12:26 PM

TheNutcracker (2,104 posts)

104. PS. Thursday kick!

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)

Thu Mar 12, 2015, 01:03 PM

CloneClinton (31 posts)

108. Let's think about this..

This whole let's have Warren run reminds me a lot of the chatter I read here years ago about Howard Dean.. Refresh my memory how did that work out!

Reply to this post

Response to CloneClinton (Reply #108)

Thu Mar 12, 2015, 01:06 PM

RiverLover (7,830 posts)

110. It reminds me of the chatter on Huffpo in 2006 for Barack Obama.

How did that turn out?

Reply to this post

Response to RiverLover (Reply #110)

Thu Mar 12, 2015, 02:21 PM

brooklynite (86,874 posts)

112. Well, in 2006, Obama was organizing a campaign,,,

Elizabeth Warren is not.

Reply to this post

Response to brooklynite (Reply #112)

Thu Mar 12, 2015, 06:36 PM

TheNutcracker (2,104 posts)

116. And in a different way, so is Liz. She gets just as much attention/support 'not running'.

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Reply #116)

Thu Mar 12, 2015, 08:37 PM

brooklynite (86,874 posts)

117. When Warren ran for Senate in 2012, did she forego organization and fundraising?

As one of her funders, I can authoritatively say "no".

Reply to this post

Response to brooklynite (Reply #117)

Thu Mar 12, 2015, 08:41 PM

RiverLover (7,830 posts)

118. If you are this certain she isn't going to run, why does it matter to you so much

that we hope she does?

You'll be able to tell us you were right soon enough. If you are. I hope you aren't. But either way, you seem to care more than you should what we hope for...

Reply to this post

Response to RiverLover (Reply #118)

Thu Mar 12, 2015, 08:47 PM

brooklynite (86,874 posts)

119. I care, because I have to deal with the aftermath...

...people whining that Warren was forced out of running by "The Powers That Be", and that they "weren't given a choice", when they had plenty of time to try and find a candidate who actually wanted to run.

Reply to this post

Response to brooklynite (Reply #119)

Thu Mar 12, 2015, 11:34 PM

TheNutcracker (2,104 posts)

121. Nothing about force will be said, but a fact remains, we will not have a choice.

We have a right to 'wine' about not having a choice. No one WANTS to run. Can't blame them. But, we still don't have a choice.

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Reply #121)

Fri Mar 13, 2015, 07:21 AM

brooklynite (86,874 posts)

123. Out of curiosity, were you as outraged when Al Gore ran for President?

Reply to this post

Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)

Fri Mar 13, 2015, 02:42 AM

RobertEarl (13,685 posts)

122. If not Warren, it'll be a republican

As it stands she's our best hope for real change.

Reply to this post

General Discussion (Forum)

I'll bet if Elizabeth Warren runs, a large chunk of America will get on buses to go help her.

1. that may be true .. except she won't win ( small motivated minorty << lazy majority). nt

9. or she will

65. I hope she can raise a billion dollars because that is what it is going to take.

114. Well

17. I believe she will because she exudes something lacking on both sides at the moment ...

31. There's not many in either party that stand up to the banksters and other corporatists...

47. She will win in a landslide.

52. If she were thinking about running, wouldn't she have spoken out about

57. Maybe she just isn't a cheap politician that would exploit such a manufactured scandal.

60. Meaning she agrees it's a manufactured scandal.

95. Whether she runs or not, we must bring the corporatist powers down. We

97. I wish I had more confidence that Elizabeth Warren could win.

102. The problem with the lesser of evils theory is that those in power can

71. which are you?

2. Me too. And she could win.

77. Me three - count me in!

3. I agree. I think she will be able..

4. Yep. The Washington machine wouldn't like it though /nt

5. I don't know if Elizabeth has ever failed to inspire a crowd?

6. Does a large chunk of America even know who she is?

8. Did a large chunk of America even know who Barack Obama was?

10. I'd bet that in early 2007 his name recognition

32. 76%, actually.

33. Wow. His 2004 convention speech must have had

35. It really did.

82. Back at Harvard in the mid Eighties

106. We almost overlapped at HLS.

115. Those were interesting times

37. Much higher than I would have thought.

38. And with that name recognition, Obama didn't really surge in the polls until a year later...

39. The endorsements from Caroline and Ted Kennedy didn't hurt him

48. I think Kucinich was held back by the PTB "keeping" Edwards in the campaign...

45. Absolutely. Warren is at 68% name recognition; certainly not bad at all.

79. Obama who? Oh yeah, that guy, the President, who Hillary supporters said had no chance. Riggghhhht.

54. That was 8 months prior to the election and after he had won the Iowa caucus.

12. I would have to say no.

20. A large chunk of the country didn't know who Bill Clinton was until LATE in the campaign.

120. I've known who Bill Clinton was since 1974

30. Yes. 76% of Americans knew who he was in March 2007.

34. Yes, they did. From the 2004 Democratic convention.

18. Average Americans don't vote in primaries.

7. I would in a heart beat.

11. iF WARREN can be convinced to run,

87. Spot on! Warren motivates even the disenchanted politically astute to work harder

13. She would have a devoted following if she ran.

25. Hardcore!

40. She touches a real chord with a number of people I know

43. They were before my time.

14. I would

15. I know *I* will.

16. Considering what a big chunk could be and her position in some polls

19. IMHO, she's the only person who could capture the "Obama" magic.

21. I'll bet if unicorns existed they'd fart rainbows.

29. You say that like it would be a bad thing.

22. I would!

23. Too old to do the walkin' but ready to do the callin' for Elizabeth!

24. Nah, they'll be riding unicorns!

26. Count me

27. Count me in.

28. I'm in, finally, NOT a *plug your nose and vote* candidate (run EW!)

42. "She can't win!"

64. that sounds like something Hilla(R)y would say!

36. I would get on a bus to help her campaign, or walk if needed, gladly. Motivated, highly.

44. Piketty and Krugman.

58. And maybe some real decent SCOTUS justices like Erwin Chemerinsky and Marjorie Cohn n/t

107. Chemerinsky would be great!

62. Absolutely, Krugman too. Totally clean house from the previous regime. The 90s are long over.

41. We are sick of the lying and the betrayals of the people for corporate interests.

50. Or irrelevant.

53. That too.

98. It's not that he thinks we are stupid, he just thinks we should sit down and shut up. nm

100. Sit down and shut up, we have billions of dollars to make for a few select special buddies.

46. In in Iowa.

49. Like they did for Dennis Kucinich? And Lord knows he never wanted for airtime.

59. I think if Edwards had pulled out a lot earlier, Kucinich would have picked up a lot of his voters..

51. She's not going to, but yeah, I probably would. n/t

55. I'd crawl for Warren.

56. I will be behind whoever the DNC nominee

61. I'll bet a lot of them will be pukes! nt

15. I know I will.

28. I'm in, finally, NOT a plug your nose and vote candidate (run EW!)