Warren is Trying to Unite the Democratic Party, But All She's Doing is Betraying Progressives

[Skwmom]

Last edited Fri Jun 3, 2016, 12:42 PM - Edit history (2)

NOTE: People are tired of being sold out by the political class and MANY NO LONGER trust politicians to speak even a modicum of truth. Bernie's LONG HISTORY on sticking to his principles is one of the major reasons people support him. The political insiders are really misreading how fed up people are.

Update: Warren can attack Trump until the cows come home. Yippee! However, that does not prove that she isn't for propping up the status quo. There are Status Quo Democrats aplenty attacking Trump. People are trying to tell you that attacking the other side is NO LONGER enough, but you refuse to listen. This is not about Trump. This is about what in the hell the Democratic Party stands for.

Elizabeth Warren is seen by many as the heart of the Democratic Party. She bridges the gap between Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton supporters. Both sides have sought her endorsement and have large factions within them that want her as the Vice-President. Given the rise of the ‘Bernie Or Bust’ Movement, Clinton and her allies are looking to Warren as a means of delivering progressive votes in November. However, not even Elizabeth Warren can save the Democratic Party should Clinton win the nomination, and any attempt by her to do so will be seen as betrayal in the eyes of progressives who were already let down when she did not endorse Bernie Sanders.

It seems clear that Warren’s Twitter arguments are an effort to unite the party. There is a general attitude among Democratic Party leaders (and many in the media) that Donald Trump is electoral poison, and no matter how much people don’t like or trust Hillary Clinton, the prospect of The Donald in the White House is so frightening it will bring Democrats together. But this analysis completely misses why Trump (and Bernie) are so popular, and underestimates exactly how discontented people are.

Economic and political inequality are replacing social issues as the lens through which we define left/right politics. On both sides of the aisle, Americans are fed up with the inequity that has come to define our system which favors wealth and power over popular mandate. After roughly four decades of middle class decline and stagnation while more and more of the total income goes to the top one percent, Americans want change. They are rejecting the current political establishment on both sides of the aisle.

Sanders supporters see the 2016 election as a revolt against systemic corruption, and view the current establishment and Hillary Clinton as a part of that corruption.

For her part, Elizabeth Warren cannot bring Sanders supporters and the current establishment together. She cannot erase the history that has led to this moment. All the Massachusetts Senator can do is alienate her own supporters by attempting to do so, and carrying water for the establishment.

But the biggest hurdle to unity which Warren will not be able to overcome is Hillary Clinton herself. Not only is she unable undo the parts of the former Secretary’s record that bother progressives, or unravel her connections to special interests and big money, she cannot ease concerns over Clinton’s honesty.

https://www.pastemagazine.com/articles/2016/05/elizabeth-warren-is-trying-to-unite-the-democratic.html

[SFnomad]

1. Is there room for for Elizabeth Warren under that bus? n/t

[Skwmom]

5. A grade school taunt doesn't address the issue.

[SFnomad]

21. Stating that Elizabeth Warren is "betraying progressives" is juvenile, at best n/t

[CorporatistNation]

198. Liz Is Self Serving... WORTHLESS! She Had Her Chance To Stand Up For What She Talks About, BUT...

She Did NOT! She is just like EVERY OTHER POL, JUST LIKE HILLARY WHO SHE WILL SHORTLY ENDORSE WHEN THE "TIMING" IS ... RIGHT FOR HER... SHE THINKS!

IF SHE HAD ANY ... ANY... CHARACTER AT ALL SHE WOULD HAVE ENDORSED BERNIE MONTHS AGO... TALK IS CHEAP... ESPECIALLY THE "TALK" COMING OUT OF LIZ WARREN'S MOUTH! INSTEAD SHE IS GOING TO "ENDORSE" THIS!

e.g., MSNBC To the deniers... Watch THIS Video... It is not comforting to think that she may well be the Democratic Nominee...

Hillary really betrayed Andrea Mitchell... The entire context of this report was of a solemn nature... A Funeral so to speak...

Andrea Mitchell "I do not see this report as ...ANYTHING BUT... DEVASTATING!"

Chuck Todd "After this I don't think that she could get confirmed for Attorney General!"

Lots of FIBBING by Hillary here.. for more than a year!

[ExtraGriz]

204. WTF right?

ran out of space for Warren under the bus, but plenty of room under the Delta 767...lobster not included.

[puffy socks]

22. Contrived issues arent worth addressing

Like anyone else who supporte Clinon the rabid unhinged Berners will throw them under the bus ny the Neo Robespierre revolutionary wanna-bes without actual courage or any tenable plans.


Yep Sandrs has repeated the same shtick with no results for years...bravo
He cant work with others. That's tealy something to hang his hat on.
Apparently neither can his fanatical supporters who keep pretending they are sooo tough and yet he and they havent manged to push through any of these changes. Berns been tring the same my way or the highway tactics since he entered office and still hasnt got a clue.

Doing the same things over and over again and expecting different results..hmmmmm

[think]

40. Single payer, a living wage, family leave, against death penalty, FAIR trade, free public college

Spare us your nauseating hate rant and get a grip there socks....

[brush]

56. No one on this board are against those things

Sanders just has not made even a semblance of a convincing case as to how he's going to get any of them through an obstructionist, repug congress.

He just hasn't done that.

[brush]

78. Trump is not beating our nominee. He will lose spectacularly.

Bank on it. Guess you didn't see her speech yesterday where she eviscerated his silly non-stances on foreign policy and made him look totally unqualified for the presidency.

And that was just the beginning. All the other material is still in the vault — Mexicans are criminals and rapists, women need to be punished for abortions, Megan Kelly had blood in her eyes and wherever else, mocking of handicapped people — and on and on and on. You wanna talk about ammo, there you go.

[tonyt53]

99. All a reasonable person has to do is to take a look at the electoral map. HRC landslide in November.

[puffy socks]

65. Who said I was against any of those?

No one

Have a nice day , try better strawmen.

[think]

68. Your hate rant sucked. Enjoy your day also....

[puffy socks]

73. Aw u mad

Its not hate filled just fact filled

Bye now

[think]

75. No. Just calling out your crap.

[puffy socks]

156. so niw you get to tell me what I am for?

Talk about crap. lol!

Bernie lost!


deal with it

[Phlem]

101. Wed Apr 20, 2016, 04:16 AM Your another April drop of trolls. 900+ posts

In a little over a month?

As the others,

Blah blah blah blah blah........................................

You realize ya'll you give yourselves away when you speak right?

The least Hillary could have done is hire more politically savvy trolls than the Walmart versions.

[HooptieWagon]

115. $1,000,000 buys a lot of Brockoli,...

...but not so much competence. And the script-writing is pure comedy gold.

[QC]

134. And 4 hidden posts already!

Busy busy!

[stevenleser]

232. Get those accusations in. In another nine days you won't be able to do it. Nt

[Phlem]

234. Whatever chief. Your history is embarrassing at best.

[stevenleser]

238. I have nothing to be embarrassed about. But your silly attacks on new DUers

should be embarassing to you.

[Phlem]

241. Uh huh. Against Hillary till the neoliberal gravy train comes by then

well, you know..........

[libdem4life]

226. Actually, it's par for the course. It's all they got.

[apnu]

52. There is always room under the bus. (nt)

[wyldwolf]

240. there is only ONE true progressive, only one man deserving to be President. The Almighty Bernie...

... the rest are only worthy to inhale the fumes from under the bus.

[LuvLoogie]

2. The Revolution will not be spurned!

[Scurrilous]

230. LOL

[bravenak]

3. Attacking Warren?

She was crucifying Trump recently. Kinda strange she is getting attacked by the left.

[Renew Deal]

51. Jerry Brown and Barbara Boxer too

Who's side are the people attacking Warren, Brown, and Boxer on?

[YouDig]

4. Aaaaaaaand, the day of Elizabeth Warren trashing has arrived!

I though she would last for another week or so. Berners getting antsy.

[obamanut2012]

82. Starry Messenger and I were taking bets

I think I won --

WHERE IS MY BLUE BOTTLE COFFEE, STARRY?!

[Starry Messenger]

90. On the way! You called it!

[obamanut2012]

93. Yay!

[geek tragedy]

174. There is no fury like a Berner scorned. nt

[blackspade]

205. Camp weathervane tossed her under the bus months ago.

Now she is your darling? Please.

[Skinner]

6. Shame on Elizabeth Warren for attacking Donald Trump.

What a betrayal of progressives!!!11

[BillZBubb]

16. You know that's not the issue being addressed.

No one has a problem with her attacking trump.

[Skinner]

28. The author of the article makes clear that the catalyst for his article..

...is the fact that Elizabeth Warren is attacking Trump.

Now, he doesn't come out and say that she's bad for attacking Trump, because saying that directly would be ridiculous. But look what he does say:

not even Elizabeth Warren can save the Democratic Party should Clinton win the nomination, and any attempt by her to do so will be seen as betrayal in the eyes of progressives. ...

Lately, Warren has been engaging all-but-certain GOP nominee Donald Trump on Twitter rather than weighing in on the issues dividing Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton. ...

It seems clear that Warren’s Twitter arguments are an effort to unite the party. ...

Elizabeth Warren cannot bring Sanders supporters and the current establishment together. She cannot erase the history that has led to this moment. All the Massachusetts Senator can do is alienate her own supporters by attempting to do so, and carrying water for the establishment.

He's using the transitive property to conflate attacking Trump to betraying progressives. Here, let me break it down for you.

-- Any attempt by Elizabeth Warren to unify the Democratic Party is a betrayal to progressives.

-- Elizabeth Warren's twitter attacks against Donald Trump are an effort to unite the party.

-- Therefore, Elizabeth Warren has betrayed progressives.

If a = b and b = c, then a = c.

Attacking Trump = Betraying progressives.

QED

[Gidney N Cloyd]

42. Well done.

[BillZBubb]

49. Wow, that's some good spin. And a "proof" too!

Of course your proof left out the KEY PHRASES: "should Clinton win the nomination..." and "will be seen". That shows the author is referring to future actions, not the "lately attacking trump".

Now, I don't know you. I don't know if you missed that or are being disingenuous.

I will agree the author was sloppy in how that was presented. Attacking trump is a separate issue--aside from the fact that it is politically self-serving for Warren to do that while NOT choosing a side in the primary fight.

[Skinner]

54. LOL, you just proved my point.

You say:

Attacking trump is a separate issue--aside from the fact that it is politically self-serving for Warren to do that while NOT choosing a side in the primary fight.

So apparently she's not allowed to attack Trump because she hasn't picked a side in the primary fight. This is laughable. Trump will be the opponent of the Democratic nominee, whether we nominate Hillary Clinton (likely) or Bernie Sanders (unlikely). Elizabeth Warren doesn't have to endorse anyone in the Democratic primary before she attacks Trump. Trump is the opponent for all of us. Attacking Trump helps Clinton and Sanders.

[BillZBubb]

58. LOL. No I didn't.

You failed to address why you ignored all the future tense terms in the OP when you made your "proof".

Attacking trump's a good thing. Failing to endorse someone in the primary is not a good thing. The latter shows cynicism and political cowardice. The former is good politics for her and of course it helps her visibility so there obviously is an element of self-serving in it.

[Skinner]

70. But attacking Trump and failing to endorse in the primary are not related things.

Your criticism of Warren in your earlier post connects those two unrelated things:

it is politically self-serving for Warren to do that (attack Trump) while NOT choosing a side in the primary fight.

Unless "politically self-serving" is now considered a positive thing.

[BillZBubb]

91. I believe I was pointing out that for Warren's future prospects, self-serving might be a good thing.

Not that I approve of it. She's hasn't made a choice between the two Democratic rivals. Whichever way she went would piss off nearly half the party. So, the safe path for her future is to stay out of it. Having done that, attacking trump gives her a way to keep her name to the forefront and it is the politically safest move anyone could make. Both camps have no problem with that. It's a win-win for her.

So, the things are related in relation to her status in the party and her future. She doesn't have to make a risky choice and she gets to keep her name in the headlines. That's got to be a politician's dream situation.

[pmorlan1]

208. I agree with you

She wants to have her cake and eat it too. That's the difference between a public servant and a politician. It would appear that Sen. Warren is more politician than public servant. Bernie is more public servant than politician. It's a smart play for her personally but it does give me pause. Will it be an isolated play or will she go along to get along in the future instead of standing firm for principle? It's certainly worth keeping an eye on but it was definitely a tell to those of us who aren't blinded by the rewards that come from being part of the establishment. We weren't fooled by this. We see it for exactly what it was.

[trudyco]

64. I know you'd like to use the same tactics as in the past

but it won't work this time. Hillary is flawed. Many progressives do not see her as a Democrat. Many see her as much the enemy, some even see her as more the enemy than Trump. So you are wrong when you say Trump is the opponent for all of us. That's just your wishful thinking. You are making assertions based on that false assumption. Your conclusion is therefore wrong.

You can't use the old logic anymore. Warren is sitting on the fence, waffling. I don't think this will hurt her with the Clinton Clan but it will with Progressives.

It will bite her. Maybe she thinks the bite is small.

[LuvLoogie]

80. Logic shmogic. This is The Revolution.

[seaglass]

81. Haha, Trump is the opponent of all of us who belong on this website. Get it? n/t

[sarae]

184. LOL

[emulatorloo]

126. There's nothing "logical" about drawing False Equivalencies between Trump and HRC

I think you'd best prepare yourself for this: if Bernie does not win the nomination he will endorse the Democratic nominee. He's well aware of the horror show Trump is. And has said many times that HRC would make a better president than Trump.

[Nonhlanhla]

128. Nobody who says Hillary is more the enemy than Trump

can truly call themselves progressives. They are, at best, anarchists.

[Beartracks]

231. Well, I can see where they might be coming from.

Perhaps their reasoning is something like this...

Which is the greater enemy: The one who says, "I am your enemy!" and is 100% opposite of you, or the one who says, "I am your friend!" and is 25% opposite of you?

The enemy is someone you and your people will fight, putting a stop to their agenda that is 100% opposed to you.

The friend is someone you and your people will trust, allowing them to enact an agenda 25% opposed to you.

Which is worse: a) NONE of a 100% bad agenda, or b) ALL of a 25% bad agenda?

Option b) means you actually move farther in the wrong direction with the friend rather than the enemy -- and that, it can be argued, makes that friend more dangerous.

-----

Or, to use the classic wolf-in-sheep's-clothing example... The big bad obvious wolf gets stopped outside the sheep's corral, while a lesser wolf slips in under the guise of a sheep. Which wolf is the greater enemy: the really bad one that got stopped, or the not-so-bad one that got in?


==================================

[BainsBane]

151. That's because those "progressives" aren't Democrats

or liberal. She is a Democrat and has been for decades. That is a fact.

Warren is going to endorse Clinton after voting finishes, and she is going to work on uniting the party. Bernie has already lost. He trails by a wide margin, 3x Obama's lead over Clinton in 2008. So you go can consider Trump anything you want, but don't pretend you're a Democrat, leftist or liberal if you even have to think about that choice in the general election. The contrast on issues couldn't be clearer, and it's obvious they don't factor in your attitude at all.

It's telling that you think Warren owes Bernie her endorsement. That sense of entitlement no doubt has a lot to do with your anger toward Clinton.

[obamanut2012]

86. Skinner actually used true scientific/logic proof

He is 100% right on this.

[BillZBubb]

95. Sorry, he didn't. Note the "if" and FUTURE TENSE in the first predicate.

[obamanut2012]

100. Well yes, he did

[BillZBubb]

135. Wrong. If the predicate contains a conditional and a future tense, it doesn't hold water.

Skinner omitted those. Learn basic logic, then get back to me.

[muriel_volestrangler]

188. No, he refers to the past too:

Lately, Warren has been engaging all-but-certain GOP nominee Donald Trump on Twitter rather than weighing in on the issues dividing Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton. This has led many to question if she is coordinating with Clinton’s campaign now that the primary is winding down. Though the campaign denies such coordination, many of Sanders’ followers have been angered by the Massachusetts Senator’s actions, feeling they’re premature.

See? He claims there are idiots who are angry Warren attacked Trump.

The author is not just sloppy - he's an idiot. Attacking Trump is exactly what he's writing about - not a 'separate issue'.

And "it is politically self-serving for Warren to do that while NOT choosing a side in the primary fight" is not a 'fact', it's a stupid opinion, that, thank goodness, Democrats like Senator Warren don't agree with.

[trudyco]

57. I like your use of logic but

you oversimplified it. Attacking Trump means Warren is trying the "let's move on to the GE now and go after that nasty Repub". It's ignoring the deep divide in the Dem party. It's ignoring the huge surge of people who want the Dems to recognize the big issue of the times: income inequality. Everything else pales in comparison. Bernie has given a face and a voice to millions of people who realize that while social issues matter, like LGBTQ rights, racism, abortion, etc, they have been used for years as a diversion.
The other looming catastrophe Sanders supporters want to deal with is Global Warming. Again, social issues that Dems and Repukes squabble over for decades have been used as a diversion while Big Fossil Fuels keeps polluting us to oblivion.

Hillary Clinton is still on the side of ignoring the widening chasm of income inequality, hell she's a part of it. Bernie is on the side of fixing it. Hillary is also very much in the pockets of the Fossil Fuel industry. She promoted Fracking. Bernie wants to fix it.

Lastly, Hillary comes across as dishonest. She's under FBI investigation probably on multiple fronts. The Clinton Foundation is obscure and the funding is shady. It should be illegal. She could very well be a crook. At the very least, her "talking the talk" does not inspire us to believe she will walk the walk. She lies. We know that. She lied for a year about her emails. Lied on TV, straight in peoples faces. Bernie is honest. You may not agree with what he says but at least you know he actually does what he says. There are millions of us Democrats tired of being lied to by our own party. Even Obama was a disappointment in that regard. We want honesty and transparency.

These are huge differences. Trying to unify the party by using the "let's move along, nothing to see" or the "but Trump is sooo much worse than Hillary so you've got to support the lesser of two evils so lets unite against the bad guy" no longer works. It worked in the past. Not this time. For Sanders supporters the stakes are too high, the divide too big, Clinton too flawed. Warren appears to be ducking the issues by using these worn tactics. Trying to straddle both sides of the fence in order to unify the party but basically ignoring the differences and focusing on the "common enemy". The problem is that many progressives see Hillary as much as the enemy as they do Trump. Some even see her as more of the enemy. That tactic won't work anymore.

The author was trying to explain why this will only backfire on Warren. Ignoring the great divide between the two democratic party camps will make it look like she's marginalizing the progressives concerns. She's tacitly agreeing they aren't that important. This will bite her.

[pablo_marmol]

59. Extremely well stated!

You have elucidated my feeling much better than I could have.

[Skinner]

60. You are making the exact same argument as the article, and my logic still applies.

You say:

Attacking Trump means Warren is trying the "let's move on to the GE now and go after that nasty Repub".

Elizabeth Warren's original sin here is attacking Donald Trump. You apply your interpretation to that act, and then the rest of your case flows from that.

If a = b and b = c, then a = c.

[trudyco]

69. Nope. Your logic is based on faulty assumptions. Therefore your conclusion is wrong.

You can a, b and c it all you want. But Hillary is flawed. And it's not attacking Trump, its the presumption behind it.

But you know that.

[Skinner]

74. There it is again!

"its the presumption behind it."

Your criticism of Warren is based on the interpretation you apply to her attacks on Donald Trump.

[trudyco]

84. Ah, maybe I misunderstood you

So you don't think Warren was trying to unify the party by trying to focus the media et al on the "common enemy" of the Republican Nominee? I thought you had mentioned he was the enemy of us all? Seems to me you ARE making the exact same presumption as I did.

It is a common practice to unite dividing factions by providing them with a common enemy.
Warren attacks Trump and focuses media attention on that, ergo she is using the common enemy theme to unify her party.

So, yes, the criticism of Warren is based on the interpretation we both applied to her attacks on the Donald. And if you and I interpreted it that way then many, many Progressives in the democratic party are thinking that too. And they will be wondering if she is side stepping the deep divides in the party so she doesn't have to chose sides. It does, currently, make her look like she's being self serving. Only time will tell. If she keeps trying to unite the party by trying to focus on the Repuke and avoiding the fundamental differences between Progressives and the DLC then she will have made a mistake.

At least, progressives think so.

[Skinner]

123. I think unifying the party is one reason she is doing it, yes.

But here's the thing: I don't think attacking Trump OR trying to unify the party are bad things, nor are they a betrayal of progressives. They are both things that Elizabeth Warren should be trying to do. The fact that she is getting attacked for it is absurd.

[George II]

140. Who is not "flawed"?

[stopbush]

221. Fortunately, any "deep divide" that exists in the D Party

is between the 95% of Ds who will support Hillary as the nominee and the 5% of Ds who are rabid, Bernie-or-bust zealots.

Don't for a moment delude yourself into thinking the Party is split in half. It isn't.

[uponit7771]

114. +1

[wildeyed]

142. Nice proof!

You win

[Skwmom]

207. Attacking Trump is not enough. She refuses to address the problems within

the Democratic Party.

[cantbeserious]

30. Not Funny And Off The Mark

eom

[Skinner]

37. See my subsequent post above.

I am exactly on the mark.

[cantbeserious]

39. I Did - We Will Have To Agree To Disagree

eom

[Zorro]

122. Under the bus with you, Skinner!

Say hi to Elizabeth for me.

[obamanut2012]

85. lolz

[corkhead]

117. Did you graduate from the Dennis Miller School of Comedic Arts?

don't quit your day job.

[Skwmom]

127. That is NOT the issue. She can attack Trump until the cows come

home. That does not prove she isn't for the status quo.

[pmorlan1]

209. Nice spin

[beachbum bob]

7. here is more of the ideological "purity test" crap and why we don't stand for it

and why extreme leftistism is extreme thinking on all levels

[Exilednight]

33. what's so extreme about the positions Sanders has carved out? which

Issues do you take issue with?

[beachbum bob]

147. Canned speech of 30 years ..

With no reasonable path of implementation...besides all the issues and baggage Bernie has...that so little has-been discussed....

[Exilednight]

155. i will try this again. What issues do you take issue with? I'm not asking about speeches or

Possibility of implementation, or baggage - both candidates will have problems with a Republican congress.

[libdem4life]

227. They got nothing but taunts and insults. Bernie is an old-style,

prior to 3rd Way Democrat. These have been values since before the 80s...when we traded our values for more money. Not the come-lately massive wealth of our presumed nominee?

Then, the wealth of the "other" nominee. I even read of people saying he doesn't know how to manage money or he'd be richer, which supposedly disqualifies him for erious consideration...Too Poor...LOL.

[wildeyed]

143. I don't think "Walter Bragman" is a real person.

Pen name, like HA Goodman. Bragman. Goodman. Lolz. So who knows where their motivation for writing these screeds lie.

[msanthrope]

8. We're gonna need a bigger bus. nt

9

[Tarc]

9. Man, that bus undercarriage is getting quite a workout lately

The coup de grâce will be when Sanders himself finally concedes, and a handful of angry fans denounce him.

[GulfCoast66]

129. You said it man!!

I have been waiting for that for weeks. It will be quite a show.

And it won't just be a handful. He has them whipped into a hateful frenzy if they are throwing Warren under the bus. I now can understand how the French Revolution spun out of control. But in the end even Robespierre had his head lopped off!

[seabeyond]

10. Clinton is supported by progressives, is a progressive, and has progressive policies.

[cantbeserious]

31. Hardly - HRC Is A Corprotist To The Core

eom

[seabeyond]

34. Nu uh

[cantbeserious]

36. Your Opinion Only - Others See The World Much, Much Differently

eom

[seabeyond]

38. And your opinion..... only

[cantbeserious]

43. And Therein Lies The Truth And The Tragedy Of A Corporate Controlled Political System

eom

[redstateblues]

67. Unfortunately for you, not enough to get Berie the nomination

The people have spoken.

[emulatorloo]

102. Keep Shitting On Senator Warren If You Wish

[uponit7771]

116. But but Republicans hate her!!! /sarcasm

[jack_krass]

166. many repubs support her.

[HooptieWagon]

118. Wall St didn't giver her 100s of millions to be a progressive.

[seabeyond]

131. NRA didn't fund Sanders to be progressive.

[randome]

11. Well, hell, who knows Sanders and Clinton better? Warren or some media pundit?

There is a reason why Sanders has so few friends in the Senate.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[BootinUp]

12. Save us Saint Bernie!!! /sarcasm

[BillZBubb]

13. Warren has shown herself to be a calculating, cynical politician.

She has avoided picking a side in this fight for the soul of the party. That way, she won't end up in the losing camp. She attacks trump on twitter, putting herself in the limelight, no matter what happens to the party in the GE.

Strategically, it's a good move for her going forward. She's positioned to be the favorite next time the Democrats have an open primary campaign. She's made no enemies inside the party and has taken the lead in attacking the republican nominee. Going against the Clinton machine can be political suicide.

Bottom line, it is a cowardly strategy. Even so, politically she's going to come out ahead.

[randome]

23. Or she knew what many of us knew on DU some time ago: Sanders was never a real possibility.

There is a reason he has so few friends in the Senate.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[BillZBubb]

62. That is illogical. Why not endorse Hillary then?

Is there a reason she doesn't like Hillary? Maybe you should be asking yourself that?

[randome]

71. I don't know. I don't really like her, either.

Maybe Warren was 90% certain that Sanders wouldn't make it to the final lap but she still held out hope for him so she waited?

It's politics. Anyone who expects every movement or non-movement to have deep meaning is probably spending too much time listening to pundits.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[Skwmom]

27. She is seriously misreading the tea leaves. Many people are NO longer willing to rely on pretty

speeches.

She has remained on the sidelines while our democracy burns. She has proven by her own actions that she is not a champion of the people, she is a champion for Elizabeth Warren.

[cantbeserious]

32. Roger That

eom

[mythology]

89. Just wow

Is there anyone who won't be called names just for not fawning over Sanders.

[trudyco]

107. I think you confuse Hero Worship with Ideals

It isn't about Sanders. It's about the ideals behind Sanders. I think with some Hillary supporters it IS about Hero Worshiping her so it's confusing.

The ideals driving Progressives right now:
1) Extreme Income Inequality in the wealthiest country in the history of the world. It's abysmal and unnecessary. Our middle class has been decimated by some greedy bastards;
2) Global Warming - it's here and we haven't done anything about it. Hillary and possibly Trump (hard to say anything with that one) are for Fossil Fuels, Bernie is against it;
3) I didn't mention this before but our sovereign rights as a nation, the right to protect our air, water, food, labor, environment without some stupid treaty trying to let companies act like nations;
4) Honesty and Transparency. We went through BFEE and the World Trade Center attack, two wars, and our country couldn't conduct an investigation as to who did it, release the information to the people in a democracy, and act accordingly. We had the great Recession and nobody was held accountable for it. No jail time for the rich. The last 8 years have been with a President who promised to be left of center but is forcing Fracking on people everywhere, let the Banksters just get bigger and fatter, didn't stop any of the financial devices that got us the Great Recession, got us looped into Libya and Syria (isn't that part of the PNAC hit list?), trying to stop us from seeing the World Trade Center Commission Report, brought us back jobs but everybody is underemployed, and is pushing treaties that harm our economy and Sovereignty. He talks a good talk though.

So it isn't about fawning over Sanders. Or expecting a purity test. Or having a "throw the Dem party under the bus" fest.

It's about Principles. Ideals. Standing for something. Caring. Equality. Fairness. Wanting your children's world to be better than yours was. Stuff the Democratic Party used to believe in.

[Skwmom]

150. +1,000,000

[DookDook]

44. It makes me think of Pascal's Wager

Warren knew that the results of the primary would be uncertain and since it was a decision under uncertainty her best course of action was to just ride it out and sit in the middle.

I was talking to a buddy of mine in college about Pascal's Wager, when I first learned about it in college philosophy and he pointed out to me that it was also known as the cowards argument. So I agree with you BillZBubb, it's a politically motivated cowardly strategy, but I think Senator Warren is finding out how things run in Washington....

[LanternWaste]

108. I imagine yours is the best spin available to thiose trailing in second.

I imagine yours is the best spin available to those trailing in second.

Cowardly strategy, indeed.

[BillZBubb]

137. Your response is typical Hillary fan drivel. The "we're winning, you're losing" game is asinine.

Why hasn't Warren endorsed Hillary?

[Ned_Devine]

228. I like it when people write something in the subject line

I like it when people write something in the subject line and then write the same thing in the body of the email just in case you missed it.

[muriel_volestrangler]

193. 'Cowardly'? Attacking trump is fucking 'cowardly'?

That is the stupidest, fuck-wittedest, idiotic thing I have ever read on DU. It makes no sense. It's anti-Democratic. Not even Trump himself would say something that stupid.

For fuck's sake.

[pmorlan1]

213. That's your spin

It always amazes me that people will twist other people's words and then attack what they themselves said and not what the person actually wrote.

[pmorlan1]

212. Calculating yes

Only time will tell whether she did this just for her own personal gain. It is possible she did it to endear herself to the establishment and because of that she may think that it will allow her to work from the inside for change while Bernie works from the outside. Sadly a lot of progressives have tried that route only to find that the establishment changes them more than they change the establishment. Her move has certainly thrown a yellow caution flag for us to pay very close attention to what she does going forward.

[tonyt53]

14. The first inkling of the notion that she will openly back Hillary, and you guys stab her.

Elizabeth Warren has accomplished more than most people, but that does not seem to matter. She will make a fine Senate majority leader. Get used to disappointment.

[Skwmom]

24. She cheered Clinton's blame it on the regulators financial plan, ignored Clinton's refusal to

break up the big banks until we are in another damn mess, and supported the Export-Import Bank corporate welfare.

Her selling out has been evident for months.

[LanternWaste]

109. I guess that'll be the new meme, excuse and justification for the next week or two.

"Her selling out has been evident for months..."

I guess that'll be the new meme, excuse and justification for the next week or two.

[Exilednight]

41. what Senate mJority. we are the minority and will stay there.

Clinton has no coattails.

[tonyt53]

76. New to politics, aren't ya?

[Exilednight]

125. what six seats can we win?

[Lord Magus]

169. FL, IL, OH, PA and WI will flip. AZ, MO and NC are possible with Trump's anti-coattails.

And check your math. Only 4 seats need to flip for a majority if the VP is a Dem. More than that will.

[Exilednight]

172. There are 2 independents, who may or may not caucus with us.

Fl, Oh and Pa are iffy at best. Az is a slim possibility due to large Hispanic community. VP only counts if the VP pick is not a Senator or a Senator from a state with a Democratic governor.

[Lord Magus]

235. Are you joking?

No there is not any chance that either of the independents is going to stop caucusing with us.

[redstateblues]

15. The truth is that voters have rejected Bernie Sanders

[sufrommich]

17. I imagine Sanders will get the same treatment from the

progressive purists once he gets on board to defeat Trump. Unfortunately,the right does have a monopoly on self righteous assholes. Good luck with that.

[Arkansas Granny]

18. Elizabeth Warren hasn't endorsed either candidate, so her attacks on Trump are meant to weaken him

and Sanders supporters take offense at this? Something is wrong here.

[BlueMTexpat]

237. Up is down. Black is white.

Good is bad.

And I mistakenly followed this thread over here from the HRC group ... and will now cease and desist.

[NCTraveler]

19. Love Warren.

It's my opinion she will play an extremely large role in the future of our party.

[laserhaas]

26. Loved Warren

Yup...the Dem party and Warren have a great future

Together

[floriduck]

94. I agree with that. The Party is better for having her. She's a fighter too.

[Zynx]

20. Good God. This is what's wrong with the way Bernie talks about things.

He presents himself as though he is the only pure soul and that anyone who seeks any form of compromise, even among progressives, is a corrupt shill and a traitor.

[mikehiggins]

47. Sanders says "this is where I stand" and makes no apologies. He doesn't claim to be the

"only pure soul" or any of that kind of thing his opponents wish to label him with.

He has been consistent throughout and while that may be disconcerting to people who are much more used to politicians who bob and weave and shape their messages to suit whatever demographic they are trying to win over at any moment, it is what he's done since this all started.

As to a candidate being a "corrupt shill" I don't think for a second that Sanders takes that position about anyone. As to a candidate being a "traitor", it seems that if you have no real beliefs and principles there is nothing you can betray. All is up for grabs. All that matters is winning.

[BillZBubb]

53. Bullshit. You've obviously never listened to Bernie.

Hillary is the corrupt shill. She's the corporate bought and paid for candidate. Wake up.

[FSogol]

25. LOL, under the bus, under the bus!

[stone space]

29. She better save some room under that bus for Bernie. He'll likely be joining her there, soon. (nt)

[seabeyond]

35. Warren.... UNDER the bus.

[Peacetrain]

45. Oh for the love of God..

[mmonk]

46. She has to play it down the middle in order to fight for us

against financial sector lobbyists. Therefore, she has to jockey for position in the party.

[Renew Deal]

48. The true "progressives" are on board for the GE.

The rest are dead weight that can be abandoned. Warren knows this.

[WhiteTara]

50. And the bus rolls back and forth over Warren. nt

[Zorra]

55. She lost a lot of credibility with the left by not stepping up and endorsing Bernie.

The left admires, and supports, leaders like Bernie who always do the right thing, even if it may cost them politically.

In this case, not doing the right thing by supporting Bernie has disappointed many people who thought Senator Warren might really stand with the 99%...

woo me with science convinced me to switch from advocating Sen. Warren to advocating for Bernie in 2014. Her reasoning was that Bernie's consistent track record of honesty, transparency, and unquestionable support for the 99% made him a much superior candidate for Prez than Sen. Warren.

Here are a few of her posts on the subject:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025966052#post15

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026594354#post3

[randome]

61. Too bad Sanders couldn't step up and build coalitions among his co-workers.

It takes more than stump speeches to capture the electorate. Whatever Sanders stands for, whatever he does, it clearly was not what was needed.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[blackspade]

206. I could say the same about Clinton.

Especially in the general election.....

[obamanut2012]

88. She was Sone of the first people who asked Hillary to run for President

So, I don't see why anyone is surprised by her not endorsing Bernie.

[Lord Magus]

168. No she didn't.

Bernie was never entitled to her endorsement.

[pmorlan1]

203. He was and is a better candidate

I've always preferred Bernie to Warren.

[MineralMan]

63. Elizabeth Warren will NOT be thrown under the bus.

Anyone who attempts to do that exposes him or herself as outside of the world of reason, altogether.

She will join the rest of Senate Democrats in supporting the Democratic candidate for President, and she will do it enthusiastically. Those who would attack her will find themselves standing in tiny groups some distance from the rest of us.

The time for sensible support to elect a Democrat as President and Democrats all the way down the ballot is near. Attacking the boorish Trump is another factor that will come to the fore.

Whoever wrote this article is simply incorrect about how Warren's support will be received. The writer is blinded by something, and I'm not sure what that is. But it will not reflect the mood of the bulk of the voters. It simply will not.

It is pissing into the wind, and that's something most people have learned not to do by experience.

[Starry Messenger]

72. We have been saving your seat for you, Elizabeth!

[yourpaljoey]

77. She should have backed Sanders right from jump street

Either you stand for something or you do not.
We are fighting for the soul of the Party.
She knows that.

[Merryland]

98. right on!

[obamanut2012]

79. And under the bus goes Elizabeth Warren

Jerry Brown was nice enough to save her a seat by the snacks.

This is truly parodic by now.

[aikoaiko]

83. I wished she endorsed Bernie early, but she has to protect herself from Clinton vindicteness

After HRC is the presumptive nominee, I expect she'll endorse HRC for the presidency. It would be amazing if she waited until after the convention

Clearly she resisted the "endorse HRC early, endorse HRC often" arm twisting so many faced.

She's threading the needle pretty well.

[LuvLoogie]

92. What vindictiveness? You mean like not paying off Bernie's debt, nor paying for his Rome trip?

[aikoaiko]

97. When the Clintons feel betrayed, there can be "hostilities".

[LuvLoogie]

112. Elizabeth is establishment of her own volition. She worked closely with the Obama administration

to establish the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. She's in.

Her own unwillingness to endorse Bernie is, in a large, part due to his attacking Democrats and Democratic solidarity.

She has her own base of support, which she will need for her reelection to the Senate. I'm sure she and Hillary discussed endorsement timing and all that. They are allies; they are Democrats.

Bernie's difficulty in gaining political support from other politicians, is not due to his policy positions. It is due to his tactics. He attacks others for compromising, while excusing his own compromises, contradictions, and hypocrisies.

[aikoaiko]

124. Well that doesn't explain why she didn't endorse early like the masses.

No, I think she is trying to thread a very small needle hole that will make some people unhappy on both sides, but will keep the majority happy. You really cant discount Clinton vindictiveness.

Like me, I'm fine with her endorsing HRC for the presidency, but not over Bernie while the primary voters were still voting.

[LuvLoogie]

139. I agree she is threading the needle. But I think that Hillary gets that.

Liz saw that Bernie's supporters were her's before she convinced them she was not running. She may have left the slightest syntactical smidgen of hope out there for a while to gauge their substance. The people who like Liz Warren are still going to like and support her. The people who are just looking for a horse to pull their wagon are going to keep looking.

[emulatorloo]

87. What a horrible thing to say about Senator Warren.

[Merryland]

96. I agree, Skwmom

I don't think she knows - or is keeping a secret - as to which side she's on, and that's not to her credit. This is the most serious primary split I can recall - and to be a "uniter" when the differences are so obvious seems to me the essence of politicking in self-interest. And I know the argument is how dangerous Trump is. Bernie is the only one who can bring the party together by beating Trump - all the polls show this. Warren is far from a heroine in my eyes.

[displacedtexan]

199. So she's either stupid or calculating? These are the reasons?

"I don't think she knows..." or "the essence of politicking in self-interest" are the reasons she's "far from being a heroine" in your eyes?

Truly heavy sigh.

[Sheepshank]

103. So you wouldn't want her for VP ...am I right?

[Gothmog]

105. It was only a matter of time before Senator Warren was thrown under the bus

[azmom]

106. I'm deeply dissapointed she did not step up

and support the movement early on. She could have made a real difference.

[Recursion]

110. This, incidentally, is why I am *certain* Sanders's fans would abandon him in 20 seconds

once he got a position of actual responsibility.

[obamanut2012]

111. What does Rocky de la Fuente think about this?

I'd love the know -- link, OP?

[RandySF]

113. Two, I hear the bus coming

[OilemFirchen]

119. Nobody expects the Emoprog Inquisition.

I welcome the leftist purge. Let the true progressives regain the political left and shove the anarchists, libertarians, Marxists and chronic malcontents back to their historical home - the utter fringe of society - where their barking at the moon literally falls on deaf ears.

I see no down side here.

[obamanut2012]

121. Marxists ARE the true left, and I am one of them

And, an awful lot of us support Hillary. Please don't red bait a significant part of her supporters.

[OilemFirchen]

149. There's an exception to every rule.

That makes you exceptional!

[pmorlan1]

214. LOL

Now we know where to file your first incendiary comment about this.

[JoePhilly]

148. + 1

[geek tragedy]

175. they will demand a Walk of Atonement for her.

Shame! Shame! Shame!

[leveymg]

120. Warren is the best hope for reuniting the party after HRC departs

Somebody has to try to put Humpty Dumpty back together again.

[Beacool]

153. Hillary is not going anywhere, other than the WH.

[StevieM]

161. I agree that she will win the GE. But let's just suppose, hypothetically, that this race was won by

the GOP. That still wouldn't equate with a destroyed party which needed to be put back together again like humpty dumpty. We weren't exactly shattered in 2004 when we didn't win that particular election. And in this one we will be picking up Senate seats regardless, unlike in 2004.

The Hillary haters are just determined to create a narrative of destruction if they don't get their way.

[Maven]

130. Ah, so Warren is now part of the evil 'establishment' because she attacks Trump instead of Hillary

Got it!

[pmorlan1]

215. Nope

The only thing you got was the spin from the Hillary supporters.

[djean111]

132. I certainly do not feel betrayed.

I would vote for her as president in a heartbeat. She is doing what she has to do.

We need her in the Senate, if she is not president, though, and - putting her on a ticket as Hillary's VP would not get my vote. That would just be pandering, and then there is the fact that the Third Way considers Warren "out of hand" - so she would just be neutralized.

I don't really think that there are people out there who would switch support to Bernie based on Warren's endorsement. That seems silly. Maybe because I have never given a flying fuck about endorsements - it really is all about the issues.

[2banon]

133. "She cannot erase the history that has led to this moment."

For her part, Elizabeth Warren cannot bring Sanders supporters and the current establishment together. She cannot erase the history that has led to this moment. All the Massachusetts Senator can do is alienate her own supporters by attempting to do so, and carrying water for the establishment.

[geek tragedy]

176. .

12 days.

[anotherproletariat]

136. Wow...just wow. Do they ever look into a mirror and have some self-reflection?

It is sorely needed now.

[Eric J in MN]

138. Warren can't say anything to make me like HRC, but

...if Warren is the VP nominee that will make me like the bottom half of the ticket.

[zappaman]

141. TRAITOR!!!!!

[tandem5]

144. When Sanders stumps for Clinton an angel's wings will be torn off!

[Pastiche423]

165. That is absolutely correct!

And so sad.

[Feathery Scout]

145. TRUMP is the enemy. Unity is what we need.

So glad Elizabeth Warren is taking steps to help us bridge the gap.

[JoePhilly]

146. Bwahahaha ... the "movement" wanted Warren long before it "accepted" Bernie ...

... as its standard bearer.

And now ... the same "movement" throws Warren under their Big Bus of Woe!!!

[pmorlan1]

216. Actions Speak Louder Than Words

You can make fun of people all you like but the bottom line is that the issues are far more important than any one person. They always have been. Personally I actually prefer Bernie as our spokesperson but that's just my personal choice. I trust Bernie more because of his long record of sticking to his principles. Sen. Warren is more of an unknown to me. I don't know as much about her character as I do Bernie's. Her non-endorsement of Bernie, however, was a yellow flag of caution for me. Going forward I will certainly be watching not only her words but her actions. And as we all know - actions speak louder than words.

[larkrake]

152. she is our diplomat and will sooth arguments- we need a liason in the senate

and her policy target is banks and wall st and her approach so far has done much good

[DinahMoeHum]

154. Sheesh, nothing but the best for the oppressed, n'est ce pas?

Even Elizabeth Warren ain't good enough for the writers of that garbage?
Pray tell, who among the Democratic Party IS good enough?
BTW, Bernie Sanders (as an Independent) doesn't count, and neither does any third-party candidate.

Political Purity, My Aunt Fanny. What a waste of bandwidth.

[Beacool]

157. More purist claptrap from people who are shortsighted.

So your candidate didn't win the nomination. Well, it sucks to be you. Just as it sucked to be a Hillary supporter in 2008.

As we were told repeatedly back then, get over it!!! There's a lot more at stake than your wounded feelings and disappointment. Most of Hillary supporters voted for Obama because he was the obvious better choice. I would think that progressives with two brain cells put together would realize that a Trump presidency would be a disaster for the nation.

It's OK to be upset and to mourn the loss after working so hard for your candidate, but please lick your wounds and look at the big picture.

[Skwmom]

164. If you aren't for systemic corruption and a govt that caters to the 1% while screwing the poor and

middle class, you are a purist. That is really some fucked up thinking.

[dreamnightwind]

158. I for one agree with the article

Warren has fallen, a lot, in my eyes, by safe sniping at Republicans rather than joining in the real fight, which for me is to return power to the people rather than the wealthy corporate funders who write the campaign checks for both major parties.

Attacking Republicans is pretty much like shooting fish in a barrel. Anyone can do it, whether they're DLC Democrats or Bernie supporters. In fact it is the favorite tool of corporate Democrats. Look at us, we aren't them, so you need to vote for us instead of them! At this point we should be well past that game, and many of us are.

The hard work is excising the corporate capture from our own party so we can once again be a viable alternative that represents the voice of the people rather than the smiley-face party of the oligarchs.

Warren has in the past positioned herself as our best ally in this work. Funny thing happened this election, she didn't show up in this fight, at all. We had a real knock-down primary where the monied Democrats were up against the populist side. Warren's response was to quietly lend out her staff to help campaign for Hillary on the ground in contested primary states, without making any statements about where she herself stood. The very definition of cowardly.

She appears to be resigned to fighting small winnable battles, so she can claim victory, helping her political career and keeping herself in the good graces of our corrupt party establishment.

I expected more from her. Of all the times to join in and help the little guy, this was it, and she was either on the wrong side of it or she was unwilling to help. I won't forget.

[StevieM]

162. Maybe she just disagrees with you? Isn't that a remote possibility? (eom)

[NorthCarolina]

159. People are fed up with the rigged system and the status quo.

We all know that to be the case, even those folks supporting Hillary know that to be the case unless they've been under a rock for the part year. They will not be able to squelch the movement under some banner of party unity. It is bigger than Bernie now, and most importantly it is not going away. Tom Brokaw has apparently seen the writing on the wall and now sees fit to do some truth tell'n. Bernie will be 45.

[pampango]

160. "Elizabeth Warren is betraying progressives." I've heard it all now. n/t

[bravenak]

163. This is getting more ridiculous by the day

[sarae]

187. I think it passed peak ridiculousness about 2 months ago.

We're entering new territory here. SO EXCITING!

[bravenak]

189. I am trying to wait patiently

This needs to ends soon for my sanity

[Zambero]

167. Someone please define "the establishment"

It is a subjective term at best. The GOP has an "establishment" as well, but that one utterly despises the Democratic version. Trump is considered "anti-establishment", so does that make him good? Given the highly enigmatic nature of this oft-repeated but poorly defined term, what do these camps have in common with each other that entitles them to share the same label?

[Lord Magus]

170. Warren doesn't "bridge the gap", she's a better more effective progressive senator than Bernie.

Bernie wasn't entitled to her endorsement and didn't earn it.

[obamanut2012]

217. You said this perfectly

Yes, my thoughts exactly.

[CobaltBlue]

171. Skwmom—I am considering this more. Meaning…

I was thinking, even before she unseated Scott Brown in the 2012 Massachusetts U.S. Senate election, for a seat which was held by Ted Kennedy, that Elizabeth Warren should be the 45th president of the United States.

She was born in 1949. And when it became undeniable she wasn’t going to run for president, I thought, “She knows the system. It isn’t worth getting screwed quite possibly by her own party's lowlife colleagues.” And when she kept saying no, I said to myself, “Elizabeth Warren may actually find that being president of the United States does not appeal to her. She would not be alone in feeling that.”

If Elizabeth Warren was ever going to run, the year 2016 was it. Unless Donald Trump wins a Republican pickup of the presidency in 2016, and gets unseated in 2020 like a 1980 Jimmy Carter, this opportunity passed.

The Democrats were clearly planning to run Hillary Clinton all along. One thing that I found, in her one-on-one early debates with Bernie Sanders, is that Hillary Clinton had no vision until Bernie revealed his.

I wonder, had Hillary Clinton been Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders been Elizabeth Warren, would we get a 2016 Democratic presidential nominee in Warren?

I think the insiders would have done to Elizabeth Warren what was done to Bernie Sanders—but with less ease. There wouldn’t be the maligning of the independent–only-recently-a-Democrat label. And the Hillary voters would have been for Joe.

It may not have been a mistake for Elizabeth Warren not to run. But, anyone with a sense of recognizing real leadership damn well knows this was a blown opportunity. (Given her Tweets, Warren knew how to handle “loser” Trump before the entire party.)

How much longer will Good, Loyal—and those Establishment—Democrats get their way with b.s. nominations like Al Gore, Joe Lieberman, John Kerry, John Edwards, and this year’s Chris Van Hollen, Ted Strickland, Kathy McGinty, probably Patrick Murphy and, at the top of the ticket, Hillary Clinton?

My hope for Elizabeth Warren, for now, is this: Stay in the U.S. Senate. If an offer for vice president is made, graciously decline. It would be offered because the Democratic establishment would essentially neuter her influence via the second banana slot.

[ancianita]

192. You're right. Except that, imo, if progressism grows, she'll become a viable candidate in 2020.

She definitely should decline a VP slot, though she could bring progressives to the ballot box, because her influence on Congress should grow.

[geek tragedy]

173. now the Faith Militant are attacking Warren

because she failed to fall in behind the High Sparrow.

LMAO.

We all knew this was coming.

12 days.

[randome]

179. It was a finch, goddamnit!

Although High Sparrow sounds better than, say, Fair Finch.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[geek tragedy]

181. High Sparrow

http://gameofthrones.wikia.com/wiki/High_Sparrow

[randome]

182. Okay, I didn't get the connection, not being a GoT fan.

The HS even looks like Sanders.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[geek tragedy]

183. It's kinda eerie actually nt

[Android3.14]

177. As a staunch Bernie supporter, I have to disagree with the word "betrayal"

Warren may be misguided, perhaps, and the HRC campaign has been an anti-democracy statement on the stupidity and lust for a monarch that is so prevalent with our culture. Still, Warren is doing like the rest of us, trying to make an omelette out of rotten eggs.

[Skwmom]

191. But you're left with rotten eggs when you embrace a corrupt and broken system to prop it up.

I am sure Warren has her supporters. But MANY people are a lot more skeptical than they were before. They think all of Bernie's support will just transfer to her. I think they are going to be surprised to find that it does not.

Warren made her choice to prop up the corrupt status quo when she remained on the sidelines. When the true history of the U.S. is written, and it will be, I don't think history is going to look to kindly on Elizabeth Warren and many others.

[Demsrule86]

178. Always room for any Democrat

who does not support soon to be" also ran" Bernie Sanders under the bus. Elizabeth, you join many good and decent Dems who merely don't bow down to the Bern it up and actually want to win in November in order to save the progressive movement and the courts.

[justiceischeap]

180. If people within the Democratic Party are so fed up

why is Clinton winning? I grant you it's a close race but at the end of the day, Clinton is still winning.

And I have to wonder if that's less about Sanders and more about Clinton. If it were Warren and Sanders running, it wouldn't be this close. Current Sanders supporters would be saying Bernie Who?

Whether you like it or not, during this electoral cycle, the majority of the Party stand with Clinton and her pragmatic approach to politics and not the Sanders approach of Bern It All Down.

[joshcryer]

185. Warren is a demagogue.

But that doesn't mean I love her anyway.

[99Forever]

186. Betraying progressives is the new normal for the Democratic Party.

Tell me again who it is that has MY back. (And not just to shove a dagger in it.)

[TwilightZone]

190. So, when Sanders drops out and endorses Clinton, as he has said he would...

are you going to brand him a sellout, too?

Some Democrats understand that a united front behind the nominee is more important than a mostly meaningless bump in a primary process that's been effectively over for a while. Some Democrats understand that defeating Donald Trump in November is more important than meeting some imaginary standards of ideological purity.

Elizabeth Warren is one of those people. Bernie Sanders is likely one, as well.

[muriel_volestrangler]

194. 49 people recommend a thread that says Warren attacking Trump is a betrayal of progressives

Dear god, DU has turned into a madhouse.

Here's a clue, people: Trump is the enemy. Senator Warren is your friend. She is a progressive. Trump is not.

[Andy823]

200. Yep and

I bet if you check out their posting record, they have been some of the ones who have helped with the "scorched earth" bashing and trashing that has been going on here for over a year. Anyone who would turn on Warren after all she has done, is not really a progressive. They are also probably in the same group as all those who "will never" vote for Hillary, who claim both Democrats and republicans are the same, and who belong to the Bernie or Bust clan.

[pmorlan1]

220. That's your spin

As one of those 49 people who recommended this thread I didn't read that piece the way Hillary supporters have mischaracterized it in the thread. It should be clear to anyone who follows politics that Sen. Warren chose to stay out of, what those in the Sanders camp believe is a fight for the soul of the Party. In so choosing she has given a valid impression to a lot of us that she is going along to get along. Attacking Trump is a side issue that the Hillary supporters have grabbed onto to attack Sanders supporters. Big surprise.

Sen. Warren had an opportunity to join us in our fight during the primaries and instead jumped to the GE so that she didn't have to choose a side. Pointing this out is not attacking her for going after Trump (we all do that) but for not standing with us in our hour of need. To some, playing both sides is OK but for a lot of us it's not. As we all know choices have consequences. I'm sure she will get many benefits from the establishment for her choice not to back Bernie and his supporters but she will also lose a lot of respect from others who thought she was behind us. Going forward a lot of us will watch closely to see if her words and her actions are in sync. This may turn out to be an isolated incident and it may turn out to be a pattern. Only time will tell. I'm in the camp that recognizes that what she did was typical go along to get along behavior but I will wait to see if it happens again. Others may not give her a second chance and I can understand their feelings.

[muriel_volestrangler]

224. You don't seem to have read this - 3rd paragraph, 1st sentence

"It seems clear that Warren’s Twitter arguments are an effort to unite the party."

So, no, you're wrong - attacking Trump is not "a side issue", it's what the article is all about. It's what the author - a rabid anti-Hillary person (just look up his name, and pretty much all you get is attack on Hillary) is writing about, and what you recommended. He goes on to make historical comparisons of Trump's 'populism' with Jackson and Grant. Trump runs through the article you recommended, and it's a criticism of what Warren is doing - ie attacking Trump rather than giving the author a cheap thrill by supporting his candidate for the Democratic nomination.

Warren has a good sense of what the USA's problems are - at the moment, Trump is top. The author, and the people recommending his dreck, do not.

[pmorlan1]

225. Not Convincing

You're free to believe whatever floats your boat and I'm free to totally disagree with you. I know what I'm recommending and I don't need you or anyone else to tell me what it is.

[Lord Magus]

233. Remember, we've got plenty of Trump supporters trolling this place.

[LWolf]

195. What so many don't seem to get

is that there is no icon who can bring the revolution together under Hillary Clinton.

It's not about Warren. It's not about Sanders...it never has been, and he has reminded us of this just about every time he speaks. It's not about Hillary Clinton.

Warren can encourage people to unite. Sanders can, and will, if he doesn't prevail. It won't matter.

A movement for the 99% that wants, among some other things, to take neo-liberals out of power is simply not going to unite behind a neo-liberal. This is so hard for so many to understand, because it just doesn't fit into their box of "how things work."

[redstateblues]

210. Jeez. News flash. 99% of the people in this country are not suffering

It's not oligarchs driving all the new Toyotas and Chevys and buying houses. There is a huge income inequality problem in this country but repeating that untruth does not help the cause. Maybe I just happen to live in a city that is booming but I see a lot more than just 1% that are prospering. There are many who are not sharing in the prosperity for sure and they need help but the solution needs to be more focused. The top 40-50% that are doing well do not need the help that the 20% living in poverty do. Helping the top 50% is not going to help those that are slowly sinking. This whole business of calling people like Elizabeth Warren neo liberal is madness.

[LWolf]

211. Jeez.

Please don't bring this condescension to all those who are not included in your recovery. To dismiss us out of hand is to make the whole point of your opposition.

[book_worm]

196. I knew it EW is now under the bus!

[kjones]

197. What, no EW VP? Jesus....you guys turn on a dime...

[Andy823]

201. At least she is trying to unite the party

Posts like this are only good for "destroying" the party. Seems like some here don't want the party to unite, now why would that be?

[tandot]

202. Another post by someone who is neither progressive nor a Democrat

6/16 can't come soon enough

[oberliner]

219. He has explicitly said he will encourage people to not vote for the Democratic nominee for president

I never thought I'd be encouraging people to not vote for the Democratic nominee for president. But I am

http://www.salon.com/2015/11/30/more_like_reagan_than_fdr_im_a_millennial_and_ill_never_vote_for_hillary_clinton/

[oberliner]

218. From the author of: "I’m a millennial and I’ll never vote for Hillary Clinton"

Subheading:

I never thought I'd be encouraging people to not vote for the Democratic nominee for president. But I am

http://www.salon.com/2015/11/30/more_like_reagan_than_fdr_im_a_millennial_and_ill_never_vote_for_hillary_clinton/

This person is the anti-thesis of what this website is about, namely encouraging people to vote for the Democratic nominee for president.

[Sheepshank]

222. Sanders supporters hurry and preemptivly throw Warren under the bus....

...for her likely upcoming endorsement of Hillary. Defense mechanism in action.

That is my take away from this thread.

[Garrett78]

223. Warren, Chomsky, eventually Sanders...all under the bus.

[Happyhippychick]

229. What happens when Bernie endorses Hillary? Is he going under the bus too?

Nt

[stevenleser]

239. Of course. Then it will be "I can't believe I supported him only for him to sell out"

Last edited Sun Jun 5, 2016, 05:20 PM - Edit history (1)

The perpetually outraged always need new targets.

[RBInMaine]

236. Oh enough of this Tea-Left insanity. Please, go to TrumpLand and practice crazy there.