2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumShould Elizabeth Warren endorse?
Last edited Sun Feb 21, 2016, 08:06 PM - Edit history (1)
For Warren, the decision to endorse is a tricky situation.
If she endorses Bernie, she'll have a tough go of it with her Congressional Democratic colleagues given that to date, only one has endorsed Bernie. She needs their support to further her own legislative agenda. Warren may well favor Bernie, but I'm not sure of that and I'd wager neither is anyone else except Warren.
It's also risky to endorse Hillary. She would immediately lose much of her liberal following who are Bernie supporters, a base that is very important to her own agenda and the goals that she wants to accomplish. She needs their support.
So if Warren endorses now, in one way or another, she loses. Warren is an advocate but she is also a savvy politician. Her own welfare and political future will and should figure into her thinking. For the short time that she's been in the Senate, she's accomplished a lot and we need her to continue doing just that.
If Warren endorses, I'd wager that it will occur after the primaries when the Democratic nominee is apparent. For her own interests, it's best for her to stay out of it for now, and let Bernie and Hillary duke it out through June. I'd wager that Warren will campaign for the nominee because she knows what's at stake, and that a Republican president will do more damage to her own agenda than will any other factor or individual.
A LATE EDIT: There's another possibility, so obvious that I absolutely should have seen it when writing this post.
She bargains. Of course, she bargains. With both candidates. Warren is savvy, and she may well value her own agenda more than anything else.
The big question: What does she bargain for? What's at the top of her wish list?
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)I will not put her under the bus no matter who she endorses.
djean111
(14,255 posts)from Bernie to Hillary. if she endorsed Hillary, I would just assume political expediency, and would of course still admire her, and believe she would make a great president - but my vote would still be for Bernie.
I cannot imagine ignoring the issues I feel so strongly about - because of an endorsement.
blm
(113,083 posts).
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)And she will make her decisions and does not need to be threatened with losing supporters.
Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)exactly what is best for the county.
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)not herself.
kstewart33
(6,551 posts)We expect more, but the bottom line is that they're usually driven by an instinct that we all possess.
merrily
(45,251 posts)Serving is their job. If they didn't want to serve, they shouldn't have run.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)or in case we get to a situation in which one candidate has a strong delegate lead but at the same time a Mondale-sized deficit in the polls going into Philly(which could be either candidate, actually).
longship
(40,416 posts)And there are many of us here who love Liz and support her on this issue. I mean, she only denied it dozens of times. She wants to be a US Senator, which many of us see as a very great thing.
But no! Every important political person must become POTUS or they fail, which on base is a ridiculous argument.
Give up on Liz becoming either POTUS or SCOTUS. She is one helluva US Senator. Why can't people willingly give her that?
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)Just pointing out one case that could be made for it.
longship
(40,416 posts)Gees! What does it take? How can one make a case when she is obviously not in the least bit interested.
Furthermore, many of us see her as a really great US Senator. We need them, too.
Or is the Executive Branch the only important one? Maybe that's why Democrats are failing everywhere else. And they are.
brooklynite
(94,718 posts)wyldwolf
(43,869 posts)Autumn
(45,120 posts)JI7
(89,262 posts)JI7
(89,262 posts)PatrickforO
(14,586 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Skwmom
(12,685 posts)I think she'll lose some Bernie supporters by staying on the sidelines and not supporting him. It raises authenticity concerns and some people will always wonder if she could have helped make the difference if Bernie is not the Democratic nominee. In addition, sitting on the sidelines while Rome is burning isn't the portrait of a fearless fighter and makes one wonder if her own future political ambitions are her first concern.
If she went on a ticket with Hillary it raises authenticity concerns. Secondly, some people will think she stayed on the sidelines to get the VP slot, thus helping Clinton business to continue as usual.
If she endorses Hillary..... well I think there would be a lot of outraged people (a huge blowback) and it would hurt her brand with Democrats and independents.
kstewart33
(6,551 posts)MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)She's said as much, just like when she said she wouldn't run for president.