Democrats NEED Elizabeth Warren

[Segami]

"...Elizabeth Warren, not Hillary Clinton, personifies the true value system of most Democrats. Hillary might be ahead in certain polls, but Warren is rising and already has a major newspaper championing her as one of the best Democratic candidates in 2016. Elizabeth Warren should make a run for the White House since America, and the Democratic Party, will thank her for doing so...."

In two years, America might have its first female president. However, Democrats around the country should jettison conventional wisdom and look beyond Hillary Clinton. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (Mass.) is by far the most compelling Democratic candidate and The Boston Globe is absolutely right; she should “run for the White House.” Warren represents the best that Democrats have to offer in 2016, in addition to the fact that she can type an email without it causing a nationwide scandal. First, some polls have the Massachusetts senator ahead of the former secretary of State. Warren ranked ahead of Clinton and GOP competition in a 2014 Quinnipiac poll centered on a “heat index” that measures favorability:

Elizabeth Warren Generates Most Heat…

Number one today is U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, at 48.6 degrees…

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is second with 47.8 degrees and only 1 percent don't know enough about her…

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2028

It’s important to note that this data was taken last year, before Clinton’s email scandal cost her support in recent surveys and before Warren’s ascent within the Democratic Party. It’s also important to note that the 2014 Quinnipiac “favorability” poll is different from the recent 2015 poll that states Hillary “wipes everyone out.” This latest poll doesn’t mention the “heat index” and focuses primarily on New York voters. While Clinton has the name recognition today, Warren has two years to build on her reputation as a champion of the middle class. Second, The Boston Globe has recently urged Warren to run and stated that Democrats would be making a “big mistake” to simply ignore potential challengers to Hillary Clinton:

DEMOCRATS WOULD be making a big mistake if they let Hillary Clinton coast to the presidential nomination without real opposition, and, as a national leader, Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren can make sure that doesn’t happen...

Indeed, the big-picture debate on financial regulation and income inequality is what’s most at peril if the Democratic primaries come and go without top-notch opponents for Clinton…

She should not shrink from the chance to set the course for the Democratic Party or cede that task to Hillary Clinton without a fight.

http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/editorials/2015/03/21/democrats-need-elizabeth-warren-voice-presidential-race/TJkJtbu3UYaJYBmVHcrAcI/story.html

When a major newspaper urges a potential candidate to run, out of fear that Hillary Clinton will remain unopposed, this speaks volumes about the need for a paradigm shift within the Democratic Party. Part of the reason The Boston Globe and other would want Warren to serve as a counterbalance to Clinton is because the Massachusetts senator offers a real alternative to the GOP. As stated on Rep. Barbara Lee’s (D-Calif.) website, Warren proved to be a formidable opponent of Paul Ryan’s conservative views on the economy:

Warren continued: ‘Paul Ryan says don’t blame Wall Street: the guys who made billions of dollars cheating American families. Don’t blame decades of deregulation that took the cops off the beat while the big banks looted the American economy…’

And to a standing ovation, Warren declared: ‘That may be Paul Ryan’s vision of how America works, but that is not our vision of this great country.’

http://lee.house.gov/newsroom/in-the-news/elizabeth-warren-schools-paul-ryan-on-poverty-in-80-seconds

cont'


http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/politics/236935-democrats-need-elizabeth-warren

[whathehell]

1. Yes We Do!!

[BlueCaliDem]

2. Yes. Democrats NEED Elizabeth Warren...but not as president.

We need her right where she is...and hopefully, one day, as Senate Majority Leader. But not president. She'd have to compromise too much in order to get anything done, and that will seriously damage her image as a strong Progressive.

[Sherman A1]

4. Agreed

I wish it was the case that she could and would be President, but I suspect that is not to be. Nevertheless she is doing a great job where she is at and what's not to like about that.

[winter is coming]

7. So we should opt instead for someone who's already compromised?

[BlueCaliDem]

17. That would depend on your definition of compromised.

As a president, you don't have the luxury of standing on principles if you want to get things done. As president, you can't act like a dictator and try and force your will on Congress. As president, you have to work with two Parties of different ideologies. That means, you'll have to compromise in order to find common ground if you want to get anything done.

As Senator or U.S. Rep., that isn't a prerequisite. You can stand on principle and refuse to sign on with the majority and still get elected in your State or district because you're seen as a hero. If a president tries to do that, you can be sure that president will only be a one-term president which makes her/him look weak and ineffectual.

[L0oniX]

11. Only a candidate sponsored by the oligarchy can win 2016.

[rhett o rick]

13. That's fine if you can come up with someone that is progressive for President.

We must get someone else besides Wall Street Clinton.

[KamaAina]

3. Democrats HAVE Elizabeth Warren

Maybe she'll get behind Bernie or Martin O'Malley or whoever else emerges as the un-Hillary.

[betterdemsonly]

5. We need her as President

She is not going to appoint Larry Summers, Tim Geithner, Robert Rubin, or any other alumni of Goldman to be her financial advisor. Hillary will. I think until this revolving door for Goldman stops our economy and our middle class will never fully recover.

[geek tragedy]

6. We already have her, and are grateful for that. nt

[Segami]

9. So am I,....but...

2016 is her only window shot for the presidency as far as I'm concerned.


Let's play numbers:


Hillary runs and wins 2016.

The next window of opportunity for Warren will be 8 years later.

Date: 2024


Warren will be 75 years old.

After serving another 8 years (hopefully) in the senate, I don't see Warren strapping on her campaign running shoes for the office of the presidency at the age of 75.


JMO!

[geek tragedy]

10. She'd lose a lot of what makes her special if she ran for

President. She'd lose even more of it if she won.

I want her holding the next Democratic president accountable.

[RiverLover]

14. wow

I couldn't disagree more.

[geek tragedy]

16. Thank you for the feedback. nt

[rhett o rick]

15. I hope you don't think that Sen Warren will hold Her Majesty H. Clinton accountable.

[BlueCaliDem]

18. Yep. And then she'd be vilified by the very same people who now admire her.

Good thing she's smart enough to understand that.

[hifiguy]

8. Run, Liz, RUN!!!

[RiverLover]

12. Now more than ever.

Its kind of imperative. Republicans/Third Way Dems & their corporate puppet masters have taken over.

The country, the planet, needs sanity restored.