General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsI'll bet if Elizabeth Warren runs, a large chunk of America will get on buses to go help her.
I really do believe that.
srican69
(1,426 posts)AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)leftofcool
(19,460 posts)SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)I've been giving $5/mo through ActBlue for quite a while now. Of course, I'll step that up if she declares.
roguevalley
(40,656 posts)integrity and guts. Count me in.
cascadiance
(19,537 posts)... 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.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)pnwmom
(109,445 posts)Hillary's emails by now? Otherwise it will seem as if she doesn't care.
Maybe she doesn't.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)pnwmom
(109,445 posts)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.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)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.
pnwmom
(109,445 posts)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.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)use that to manipulate us. At some point, maybe when child poverty reaches 50%, we will stand up to them.
hopemountain
(3,919 posts)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.
peacebird
(14,195 posts)InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,513 posts)one_voice
(20,043 posts)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.
think
(11,641 posts)Cosmic Kitten
(3,498 posts)Well, aside from a crowd of bankers
bigwillq
(72,790 posts)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
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)hifiguy
(33,688 posts)was around 10% nationally, if that.
NYC Liberal
(20,330 posts)hifiguy
(33,688 posts)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."
NYC Liberal
(20,330 posts)Warrens name recognition is at 68% now (same time period) so shes not doing too bad herself.
Hillary is at 99% but thats pretty understandable!
Fred Friendlier
(81 posts)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
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)I graduated in spring 1988, same class as Michelle. He started that fall.
Fred Friendlier
(81 posts)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.
bigwillq
(72,790 posts)Thanks for the info.
cascadiance
(19,537 posts)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...
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)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.
cascadiance
(19,537 posts)... 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.
NYC Liberal
(20,330 posts)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. Its still about year before the primaries and a lot can happen. It will be interesting, thats for sure.
InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,513 posts)Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)bigwillq
(72,790 posts)Things can certainly change.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)He didn't start shining until the debates,
and people were saying , "Who is that guy from Arkansas?"
Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)when he entered, and almost won, the race for 3rd Congressional District against a 4-term incumbent.
NYC Liberal
(20,330 posts)BainsBane
(54,530 posts)His speech made him a star.
Smarmie Doofus
(14,498 posts)A good thing too. Because people who READ and analyze and ponder do.
Which is why she has an excellent chance. IF........
HappyMe
(20,277 posts)clydefrand
(4,325 posts)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.
TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)than they would for Hillary. I for one.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Segami
(14,923 posts)After listening to her speeches, people will gravitate to her campaign. The word will spread like a brush fire.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)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?
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Liberalynn
(7,549 posts)Smarmie Doofus
(14,498 posts)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.
HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)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.
Vinca
(50,861 posts)KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)Fearless
(18,448 posts)Left coast liberal
(1,138 posts)CTyankee
(64,784 posts)If she is in our CT primary, I'm IN!
zappaman
(20,607 posts)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.
DesertDawg
(66 posts)IN!!!
Fearless
(18,448 posts)edgineered
(2,101 posts)sorechasm
(631 posts)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?)
edgineered
(2,101 posts)appalachiablue
(42,731 posts)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.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)Get some people with actual brains as economic advisers for once.
cascadiance
(19,537 posts)hifiguy
(33,688 posts)Smarter than a treeful of owls, a terrific writer and a hard-core lefty Democrat.
appalachiablue
(42,731 posts)Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)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.
Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)We won't cut your social security too much, you know, just enough.
slumcamper
(1,676 posts)Tarheel_Dem
(31,440 posts)cascadiance
(19,537 posts)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.
Orsino
(37,428 posts)TDale313
(7,820 posts)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.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)BootinUp
(48,679 posts)Helen Borg
(3,963 posts)Of course, they would try to create a Warren Scream situation to take her down.
TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)she will likely be my first pick in the primaries, but she says she isn't.
mopinko
(71,549 posts)i got friends in iowa. i would love to spend more time with them.
i might even take out a mortgage on my kids.
Raine1967
(11,600 posts)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.
Thor_MN
(11,843 posts)Which she has said multiple times...
RufusTFirefly
(8,812 posts)1. Unlike Hillary, she doesn't cozy up to the big banks.
2. She dispels accusations that opposition to Clinton is sexism.
broadcaster75201
(387 posts)nt
father founding
(619 posts)Obama is Clinton reincarnated to screw the American people, this is not the change we believed in.
demwing
(16,916 posts)this isn't an Obama thread, jeez...
democrank
(11,230 posts)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.
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?"
- "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 believeI can't believe I have to say this in 2014we 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!
zappaman
(20,607 posts)I've heard plenty and love it!
By the way, she's not running...
MineralMan
(147,299 posts)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.
spinbaby
(15,188 posts)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.
HappyMe
(20,277 posts)AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)It's all about the big mo. It's Elizabeth's for the taking.
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)Will ride a bus, knock on doors, listen to people's concerns, just like Progressives are doing in Chicago for Garcia.
Run Liz Run!
wilsonbooks
(972 posts)TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)TOTAL UNITY. Like never before!
HappyMe
(20,277 posts)...Hillary!!11....she's our candidate!!111....
obnoxiousdrunk
(3,019 posts)TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)One of the 99
(2,280 posts)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.
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)One of the 99
(2,280 posts)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.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)Beausoir
(7,540 posts)great white snark
(2,646 posts)Beausoir
(7,540 posts)Stellar
(5,644 posts)behind BUT Elizabeth Warren.. even in the midnight if she so chose to run.
TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)There will be many, many buses!
TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)CloneClinton
(31 posts)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!
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)How did that turn out?
brooklynite
(96,882 posts)Elizabeth Warren is not.
TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)brooklynite
(96,882 posts)As one of her funders, I can authoritatively say "no".
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)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...
brooklynite
(96,882 posts)...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.
TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)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.
brooklynite
(96,882 posts)RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)As it stands she's our best hope for real change.