Is Elizabeth Warren is our strongest and best candidate?

[2_heal_my_country]

First, a little about me, so you know where I am coming from. I am a 72-year-old white male who was an elected officer in a private sector labor union. I am also, like Elizabeth Warren, a former Republican.

The presidential campaign has just begun. Yet, we can already see the outline of the strategies the candidates will use. Trump has nothing positive to run on, so he will base his campaign on attacking his opponents.

We already see the false accusation of the “Ukraine scandal” against Joe Biden. It may be false, but so were the eMail and Benghazi scandals directed against Hillary Clinton. We must always remember that in politics, what is true is not as important as what people perceive to be true. During the Second World War, the United States Office of Strategic Services did a report on Hitler’s psychological approach to politics. This report also sheds some light on Trump’s style of politics. “Hitler’s primary rules were: never allow the public to cool off; never admit a fault or wrong; never leave room for alternatives; never accept blame; concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything that goes wrong; people will believe a big lie sooner than a little one; and if you repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it.” All Trump needs is a sliver of fact he can hang his story (lie) from and you will never hear the end.

Joe Biden is basing his campaign on being the most electable candidate. He says he can persuade Independents, disillusioned Republicans, and Trump Democrats to vote for him. Polls show some of these non-ideological voters will believe there is something to Trump’s story about Biden and his son. Biden will lose these voters. These are moderates who only desire a return to normalcy. They are the core of Biden’s strength which enables him to claim he is the most electable candidate. Trump will not stop focusing on the so-called “Ukraine scandal.” He will “repeat it frequently enough so that people will believe it.” The voters will become confused, they will not know who to believe, and give up. They have no taste for more scandal. They may not vote for Trump, but they will stay home and not vote.

This will reduce Biden to relying on the anti-Trump vote and the Democratic base. Trump’s scandal based attack will reduce the number of people voting for nice-guy Joe Biden as a person. The perception of honesty and integrity is one of Biden’s great strengths. Biden may still get enough votes to win based on the anti-Trump vote and the Democratic base. But these same voters would be available to any of our other candidates who do not scare voters away. Biden is no longer a strong candidate who can easily beat Trump since Biden is a weak campaigner. This is shown by his previous losing presidential campaigns. The people elected Joe Biden as VP, but not because of his own campaign. The people elected Obama as President and Joe was part of his team. Even now Biden’s greatest strength in the primary is his connection to Obama.

Against our other two major candidates, Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders, Trump will use the accusation they are Socialist. He will claim they will destroy the American economic system. This is the old “Devil you know is better than the Devil you don’t know” trick used to scare voters. There are many middle-class and lower-class voters who will fall for it. This includes the members of my union who are not deplorable, but are open to fear. Like most people, their primary concern is for their families and themselves. “It’s the economy, stupid” is something Trump used successfully once. He will try to use again as he sells his “we never had it better” story (lie).

This accusation of being a socialist is easy to make against Bernie Sanders. When asked, Bernie will always self-identify as a Democratic Socialist. Bernie should call himself a “Social Security Democrat” since he is not really a Socialist. He does not advocate that the workers will own the means of production. A lot of voters still associate the word Socialist with Soviet-style communism. Bernie is not a Soviet-style communist; he’s an FDR-style Social Democrat. He wants to upend existing power structures and change them so they benefit the many over the few. His goal is to make America more like Scandinavia. Yet, Bernie keeps shooting himself in the foot by stressing he is a Democratic Socialist.

Words are labels which are shortcuts to thoughts and emotions. It is based on these labels that many Americans think and react to. Trump knows this and is a master in labeling people. So Bernie would be a weak candidate because of the Socialist label. Many voters, especially older ones, will be scared away from him. Socialism as a concept may be popular with a lot of young Americans. They have grown up seeing the failure and inequality of modern American capitalism. But they do not know of the repression associated with the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). But their parents do. Advocating for Socialism is a very risky way to try to win a general election. After Bernie’s heart attack, we will now also have the questions raised about Bernie’s health. Bernie Sanders would be a very weak candidate against Donald Trump.

Trump and the Republicans will label any of our candidate as a socialist. But some of our candidates will be more difficult to label this way. Elizabeth Warren is one of them. Warren has always said she believes in capitalism, and for most of her adult life, she was a Republican. She taught commercial law at Harvard Law School. She knows both the strength and the weakness of modern-day capitalism. We can make the case, Warren knows better than any other candidate (including Trump) what we need to repair our economy. She has many plans on how to fix it. The central theme of Warren’s campaign is fixing broken capitalism that has become corrupt and no longer works for everyone. These are not just words to her, the “Consumer Financial Protection Bureau” (CFPB) is her baby. Like FDR, she wants to save capitalism, not destroy it.

Her commitment to the average person is shown by her life and what she has fought for. She grew up in a lower-middle-class home and attended the school of hard knocks. The lessons this school taught her included her father becoming disabled by a heart attack when she was 12. The bank repossessed the family’s car, and her family almost lost their home to foreclosure. Warren knows what it is like to live on the edge and feel the pain of not knowing what tomorrow will bring. When she was 13, Warren started waiting tables at a restaurant to help her family. With a little luck, and a lot of hard work, she became one of the nation’s most influential professors of commercial law. Unlike Donald Trump, Elizabeth Warren never had a silver spoon in her mouth. She knows what it is like to be a regular average person. This will help to make her a strong candidate.

In 1996, at 47 years of age, Warren left the Republican party and became a Democrat. She entered the public arena because she saw the shortcomings in the law and how it hurt ordinary people. Elizabeth Warren explained the reason for her change of heart and party this way. She had been non-political and believed you should not live beyond what you can afford. One day, as a professor, they tasked her with writing a book on bankruptcy. When she began her research, she was a typical Republican. She believed that most people filing for bankruptcy were working the system or had been irresponsible in incurring debts. But after her research, she concluded that such abuse was rare and that the legal framework for bankruptcy was poorly designed. She saw that most people filing for bankruptcy closely resembled her own family, who struggled financially. They were not the irresponsible deadbeats, she had expected. The only deadbeats were people like Donald Trump who filed serial bankruptcies and walked away enriched. She described the way the research challenged her fundamental beliefs as “worse than disillusionment.” It was “like being shocked at a deep-down level.” She realized the Republican Party was no longer “principled in its conservative approach to economics and to markets. It is instead tilting the playing field in favor of big financial institutions and against middle-class American families.” Warren corrected her beliefs and changed her party. These are traits of a good President. She will always have an open mind and will learn and admit when she is mistaken.

Elizabeth Warren then became an activist. She lead the fight against a bank-sponsored bill that restricted access to bankruptcy for average people. Later Elizabeth was respected for her stances in favor of more stringent banking regulations after the 2007–08 financial crisis. She took the lead in creating the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) in 2010. Since 2011, the CFPB has received over 1.2 million consumer complaints about dealings with financial firms. The CFPB has returned more than $12 billion to 29 million people wronged by financial institutions. These include credit card companies and banks.

Warren worked for years as an advocate for the common person from outside the political world. But in 2012 she decided she could have a greater impact by becoming a part of the legislative process. Warren entered and won the U.S. Senate election in Massachusetts. She became the state’s first female Senator. Elizabeth Warren is not a career politician. After only eight years of impacting government from the legislature, she is ready to have a greater impact for the people. Therefore she is running for President. Her administrative experience in creating the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau along with her legislative experience will serve her and we, the people, well.

There is nothing in Elizabeth Warren’s history that opens her up to the charge of being a socialist. She is a moderate who wants to end the Corporatism which has corrupted and distorted Capitalism. There is a great deal that shows she will end the corruption and act as a real reformer for American Capitalism so that once again it works for everyone. Only this will make America great. So Elizabeth Warren is our strongest and best candidate.

As you can see I like Warren, but before I commit I want to hear the counter-arguments, both for and against. Thank you

[Sherman A1]

1. Possibly

but possibly not and certainly not my first choice.

[2_heal_my_country]

10. Your first choice is an interesting candidate

If I am not mistaken his $1,000/month basic income plan will replace all other forms of government assistance. That would be $24,000/year for a husband and wife, but do the children also receive the $1,000. If I am not mistaken they do not. And what about one-parent families, do they have to get by on $12,000 per year.

[Sherman A1]

23. He is indeed an interesting choice

and my only choice. I will vote for the nominee, but Yang is the one I will do what I can to support. The rest not so much.

As you your question. Let me link to the campaign page, these are not in any particular order.

THE FREEDOM DIVIDEND
Andrew would implement the Freedom Dividend, a universal basic income of $1,000/month, $12,000 a year, for every American adult over the age of 18. This is independent of one’s work status or any other factor. This would enable all Americans to pay their bills, educate themselves, start businesses, be more creative, stay healthy, relocate for work, spend time with their children, take care of loved ones, and have a real stake in the future.

Other than regular increases to keep up the cost of living, any change to the Freedom Dividend would require a constitutional amendment.

It will be illegal to lend or borrow against one’s Dividend.

A Universal Basic Income at this level would permanently grow the economy by 12.56 to 13.10 percent—or about $2.5 trillion by 2025—and it would increase the labor force by 4.5 to 4.7 million people. Putting money into people’s hands and keeping it there would be a perpetual boost and support to job growth and the economy.

It would be easier than you might think. Andrew proposes funding the Freedom Dividend by consolidating some welfare programs and implementing a Value Added Tax of 10 percent. Current welfare and social program beneficiaries would be given a choice between their current benefits or $1,000 cash unconditionally – most would prefer cash with no restriction.

A Value Added Tax (VAT) is a tax on the production of goods or services a business produces. It is a fair tax and it makes it much harder for large corporations, who are experts at hiding profits and income, to avoid paying their fair share. A VAT is nothing new. 160 out of 193 countries in the world already have a Value Added Tax or something similar, including all of Europe which has an average VAT of 20 percent.

The means to pay for the basic income will come from four sources:

1. Current spending: We currently spend between $500 and $600 billion a year on welfare programs, food stamps, disability and the like. This reduces the cost of the Freedom Dividend because people already receiving benefits would have a choice between keeping their current benefits and the $1,000, and would not receive both.

Additionally, we currently spend over 1 trillion dollars on health care, incarceration, homelessness services and the like. We would save $100 – 200+ billion as people would be able to take better care of themselves and avoid the emergency room, jail, and the street and would generally be more functional. The Freedom Dividend would pay for itself by helping people avoid our institutions, which is when our costs shoot up. Some studies have shown that $1 to a poor parent will result in as much as $7 in cost-savings and economic growth.

2. A VAT: Our economy is now incredibly vast at $19 trillion, up $4 trillion in the last 10 years alone. A VAT at half the European level would generate $800 billion in new revenue A VAT will become more and more important as technology improves because you cannot collect income tax from robots or software.

3. New revenue: Putting money into the hands of American consumers would grow the economy. The Roosevelt Institute projected that the economy will grow by approximately $2.5 trillion and create 4.6 million new jobs. This would generate approximately $800 – 900 billion in new revenue from economic growth.

4. Taxes on top earners and pollution: By removing the Social Security cap, implementing a financial transactions tax, and ending the favorable tax treatment for capital gains/carried interest, we can decrease financial speculation while also funding the Freedom Dividend. We can add to that a carbon fee that will be partially dedicated to funding the Freedom Dividend, making up the remaining balance required to cover the cost of this program.https://www.yang2020.com/policies/the-freedom-dividend/


INCREASE ASSISTANCE FOR SINGLE PARENTS
Being a parent is the toughest job on the planet, even with a partner and strong extended family to rely on. It’s even tougher for the 13.6 million single parents out there, most of them mothers. The numbers are set to rise sharply – today, 40% of the children born in the United States are born to unmarried mothers, up from 15% in 1980.

We should be doing more to help them and the approx. 21 million children being raised in single-parent households.

Outside of programs such as the Freedom Dividend to raise them out of poverty and support their ability to provide food and housing for their family, the best thing we can do for these parents is to help them find and build a support network.
https://www.yang2020.com/policies/single-parent-assistance/

FREE MARRIAGE COUNSELING FOR ALL
Children raised in two-parent households have better outcomes across almost every dimension. Studies also show that being in a happy marriage contributes to longevity and life satisfaction. However, there is currently very little support out there for people who are looking for assistance in managing their marital relationship.

Because of the huge societal good that comes from keeping married couples who want to stay together in their relationships, marriage counseling for interested couples should be free or heavily subsidized by the government. https://www.yang2020.com/policies/free-marriage-counseling/

EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION FOR ALL
Education in America starts too late. It has been shown that there are massive benefits to offering pre-kindergarten options to children throughout their lives, especially for those from low-income families. It also increases sociability, and it relieves the financial burden of finding daycare for families who struggle to afford it. https://www.yang2020.com/policies/early-childhood-education/

MEDICARE FOR ALL
Access to quality healthcare is one of the most important factors in overall well being, and yet America is one of the few industrialized nations not to provide healthcare for all of its citizens. Instead, we have a private healthcare system that leaves millions uninsured and bankrupts even some of those who do have health insurance. At the same time, our cost of care is higher than in almost any other industrialized country while providing worse outcomes. The Affordable Care Act was a step in the right direction, providing funds to states to innovate while expanding Medicaid substantially. However, it didn’t address the fundamental issues plaguing our healthcare system:

Access to medicine isn’t guaranteed to all citizens
The incentives for healthcare providers don’t align with providing quality, efficient care
This must change.

Through a Medicare for All system, we can ensure that all Americans receive the healthcare they deserve. Not only will this raise the quality of life for all Americans, but, by increasing access to preventive care, it will also bring overall healthcare costs down.

With a shift to a Medicare for All system, costs can also be controlled directly by setting prices provided for medical services. The best approach is highlighted by the top-ranked Cleveland Clinic. There, doctors are paid a flat salary instead of by a price-for-service model. This shift has led to a hospital where costs are visible and under control. Redundant tests are at a minimum, and physician turnover is much lower than at comparable hospitals.

Doctors also report being more involved with their patients. Since they’re salaried, there’s no need to churn through patient after patient. Instead, they can spend the proper amount of time to ensure that each patient receives their undivided attention and empathy.

Outside of a shift to a Medicare for All system, we can look to the Southcentral Foundation for another important shift necessary in the way we treat patients: holistic approaches. At this treatment center for native Alaskans, mental and physical problems are both investigated, and, unsurprisingly, the two are often linked. By referring patients to psychologists during routine physicals, doctors are able to treat, for example, both the symptoms of obesity and the underlying mental health issue that often is related to the issue. The referral also leads people with issues they may otherwise try to bury – sexual abuse, addictions, or domestic violence issues – to bring them up with a doctor so that they can be addressed.

By providing holistic healthcare to all our citizens, we’ll drastically increase the average quality of life, extend life expectancy, and treat issues that often go untreated. We’ll also be able to bring costs under control and outcomes up, as most other industrialized nations have.

Finally, being tied to an employer so that you don’t lose your healthcare prevents economic mobility. It’s important that people feel free to seek out new opportunities, and our current employer-provided healthcare system prevents that. https://www.yang2020.com/policies/medicare-for-all/

[thesquanderer]

70. It sounds like you missed item 4 in the post you were replying to, on how it is paid for.

It says:

Taxes on top earners...By removing the Social Security cap, implementing a financial transactions tax, and ending the favorable tax treatment for capital gains/carried interest

...which means that, as you say, "Bill Gates would receive $1,000 per month. Donald Trump will receive $1,000 per month. Bezos will receive $1,000 per month." BUT being in that "top earner" class, those items listed means that you'd expect their taxes to go up by MORE than $1,000 per month, so they are still net-negative on this plan.

The poor and disabled you mention can only come out even or ahead... even if they stay with what they've got, ahead if they determine that $1,000 a month is better than what they're already getting.

[Sherman A1]

80. A UBI

is all about Democratic Values.

[Sherman A1]

79. All Citizens 18 and above would receive the Freedom Dividend.

It does not punish anyone as you seem to indicate, but offers a benefit to those who are shareholders in the country as are we both. Yes, a person receiving welfare would have to make a choice as to which is better for them. I assume that most would take the greater amount whichever that would be. To my understanding no benefits would be cut. As to the cost of prescriptions and health care those are addressed in the policy proposals listed below. Tell me what is your preferred (or the other) candidate(s) stating about the coming wave of automation and job displacement? How are they prepared to address this issue? What are their policy proposals?

MEDICARE FOR ALL
Access to quality healthcare is one of the most important factors in overall well being, and yet America is one of the few industrialized nations not to provide healthcare for all of its citizens. Instead, we have a private healthcare system that leaves millions uninsured and bankrupts even some of those who do have health insurance. At the same time, our cost of care is higher than in almost any other industrialized country while providing worse outcomes. The Affordable Care Act was a step in the right direction, providing funds to states to innovate while expanding Medicaid substantially. However, it didn’t address the fundamental issues plaguing our healthcare system:

Access to medicine isn’t guaranteed to all citizens
The incentives for healthcare providers don’t align with providing quality, efficient care
This must change.

Through a Medicare for All system, we can ensure that all Americans receive the healthcare they deserve. Not only will this raise the quality of life for all Americans, but, by increasing access to preventive care, it will also bring overall healthcare costs down.

With a shift to a Medicare for All system, costs can also be controlled directly by setting prices provided for medical services. The best approach is highlighted by the top-ranked Cleveland Clinic. There, doctors are paid a flat salary instead of by a price-for-service model. This shift has led to a hospital where costs are visible and under control. Redundant tests are at a minimum, and physician turnover is much lower than at comparable hospitals.

Doctors also report being more involved with their patients. Since they’re salaried, there’s no need to churn through patient after patient. Instead, they can spend the proper amount of time to ensure that each patient receives their undivided attention and empathy.

Outside of a shift to a Medicare for All system, we can look to the Southcentral Foundation for another important shift necessary in the way we treat patients: holistic approaches. At this treatment center for native Alaskans, mental and physical problems are both investigated, and, unsurprisingly, the two are often linked. By referring patients to psychologists during routine physicals, doctors are able to treat, for example, both the symptoms of obesity and the underlying mental health issue that often is related to the issue. The referral also leads people with issues they may otherwise try to bury – sexual abuse, addictions, or domestic violence issues – to bring them up with a doctor so that they can be addressed.

By providing holistic healthcare to all our citizens, we’ll drastically increase the average quality of life, extend life expectancy, and treat issues that often go untreated. We’ll also be able to bring costs under control and outcomes up, as most other industrialized nations have.

Finally, being tied to an employer so that you don’t lose your healthcare prevents economic mobility. It’s important that people feel free to seek out new opportunities, and our current employer-provided healthcare system prevents that. https://www.yang2020.com/policies/medicare-for-all/

CONTROL THE COST OF PRESCRIPTION DRUGS
Prescription drugs in this country cost too much; individual drugs change prices at the whims of those running pharmaceutical companies. Patent trolls can drive the prices of certain medications up while providing no value themselves to the US healthcare system. And while drug companies complain constantly about the high cost of research, they seem to overlook that almost all FDA-approved drugs over the past several years relied on research funded by the NIH. They also overlook the record-high profits they’ve been experiencing in recent years.

It’s making it impossible for Americans who need drugs to afford their treatment—many are choosing between their medicine and food or shelter.

Work with Congress to pass a law allowing Medicare to negotiate drug prices. It’s ridiculous that this doesn’t happen already—it would save the public an enormous amount of money each year.
Use international reference pricing to set a baseline (in other words, see the average cost for a medication in other countries), and allow for forced licensing of medications if companies can’t come to a reasonable agreement with the federal government on cost in line with international prices.
If a company is charging too much, someone willing to charge a reasonable amount will be granted a license to make the medication.
Create public manufacturing facilities to produce generic drugs to keep the costs of them at a minimum.
If all the above fail, allow for the importation of prescription medications from other countries.

We need to put pressure on these companies to get their prices under control, and more in line with the rest of the world. https://www.yang2020.com/policies/prescription-drug-costs/

[brewens]

2. She is for people that understand what really needs to be fixed. Wall Street being scared of her

should be proof of that. I don't see her making any effort to reassure Wall Street crooks that nothing much will change and they will be allowed to continue the looting if she is elected.

I think her message should be just that. Stop the looting! That should get us a great turnout from liberals. Centrists will vote for her anyway, like the centrists always expect us liberals to do for their candidates.

[Demsrule86]

7. I don't want the economy destroyed...I have a 401 K and a bank...my hubs works for

corporation...all this talk about breaking up banks and Amazon etc...and going after Wall Street could cost many jobs and send Wall Street to China...no thanks. She has my support in a general because she is obviously better than any GOP, but her policies in some cases leave me cold. I do like some of her policies of course. But hubs and I need jobs.

[brewens]

8. If stopping all the high frequency trading and insider trading scams will "destroy the economy",

then maybe it needs to be destroyed as it is. They are afraid of being forced to earn money honestly. Some people don't realize how much they rake off the top, or how that screws all of us. Not to mention those people not paying their fair share in taxes.

I'd go farther and have Warren propose a world wide war on white collar crime. Go after fraud, tax evasion, money laundering, bribery and everything else billionaires are using to rob everyone around the world.

[Demsrule86]

13. If we are not careful...Wall street moves to China...China is working on it.

[LanternWaste]

21. Evolution works much better than revolution.

Objective ignorance of consequence is a great tool for the self-righteous, because after everything is broken, they can simply say, "well... we meant well."

[2_heal_my_country]

54. Warren has never called for a revolution

She has called for reform and evolution back to the two Roosevelts.

[2_heal_my_country]

20. In fact her plan will create more jobs

Companies merge in order to reduce redundancy by letting people go. Breaking up these companies reverses the process and will create new jobs. In addition, there will be room for new start-ups since the monopolistic company will be less dominant in that sector of the market. No matter who is elected the stock market will crash after the election. The federal funds rate is currently 1.75% to 2% and will continue to be reduced to delay the recession until after the election. It can only be reduced to 0%, and then as they say the sh*t will hit the fan. Many independent economists think the recession will be worse than the recession of 2007-8 since the bubble in the stock market is so much bigger. I want the President at that time to knows first hand what she is doing, and is on the people's side.

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="

" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[Demsrule86]

69. Startups pay for shit and many fail in the first year...it will destabilize the economy.

As for a recession...Warren has ideas set in stone...she knows what she knows...we need more flexibility and experience in a recession. Biden has the experience. I believe Warren's plans would make any recession worse. Please understand I like Warren and will vote for her in a general but she is not the best candidate for a number of reasons for 20.

[2_heal_my_country]

118. What are the reasons she is not the best

As an expert in commercial law, she knows how the economy functions in real-time. Biden is a life-long politician with no special knowledge. By changing parties when she became more informed she proved her flexibility. Outside his election in a small state, he has done nothing in elections.

[Demsrule86]

141. She is not flexbile about this... and will cause great damage to the economy with some of her

proposals. We need to regulate and tax business not destroy it or break up successful business. I want to be able to get a mortgage, have a 401k and have a job...I don't see her plans as helpful in this regard.

[Doodley]

27. Do you feel your own personal situation is more important than breaking up?

monopolies and creating a more level playing field for smaller businesses?

[Demsrule86]

68. It is not my own personal situation...I do not believe it is a good idea for the economy to

break up the banks or force business to break up...unless there a serious anti-trust issues. I don't want to send Wall Street with the good jobs to China either. I also believe this idea will get us destroyed in the general. We need reasonable taxing,subsidized manufacturing for green energy, re-thinking NAFTA/ other treaties and regulation...not what Warren is advocating. We need to create jobs and business opportunities in this country...I listened to Warren's plans for manufacturing and it was all based on globalism and making third world countries have 'standards' which will be ignored in the real world...I just don't think her plans will work.

[2_heal_my_country]

119. Wall Street is not a manufacturer

using low skill assembly-line workers. It will never go to China. However, many of its jobs will be lost to computerization and trading programs.

[Demsrule86]

140. It could go to China actually...China is working on it right now. China will most likely

surpass us in terms of economic success in the next ten years...and the fact you used 'low skilled' assembly workers shows why Warren and her supporters don't get it...there is nothing low skilled about today's manufacturing...kind of a condescending to consider AUW union workers 'low skilled'...don't you think? Warren's idea to 'help' US workers is to fix the issues of wages and pollution in existing 'bad' trade agreements in countries she apparently would still allow to take our jobs through newly passed /fixed 'trade agreements'...such 'fixes' are never enforced and are meaningless...I hope to God she doesn't use the 'retraining' word...no coming back from that. She doesn't get the Mid West.

[The Mouth]

149. Amen.

First, foremost, and above anything else I WILL FIGHT TO THE DEATH *ANYTHING* THAT THREATENS MY EMPLOYMENT, PENSION OR HOUSING STATUS.

Without a job, I am nothing, zero. Employment means more than every other factor put together, times 100.

I personally think, at this time, she is highly qualified and competent enough to reform the boat without sinking it.

It's the economy, above and before everything else, by orders of magnitude for me.

[Gothmog]

3. Without support from African American voters, Warren will not be the nominee

Link to tweet

[Thekaspervote]

6. This!

[Baclava]

14. Blacks are 12% of the population, Women are 50%, young women voters numbers are rising

In record midterm turnout, women continued to vote at higher rates than men.

Voter turnout was higher among adults of all ages in 2018 relative to 2014 – but increased the most among younger voters.

Between 2014 and 2018, turnout among adults under 25 nearly doubled – from 17.1% to 32.4%.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/05/03/in-year-of-record-midterm-turnout-women-continued-to-vote-at-higher-rates-than-men/

------------------------


Therefore the young and women voters are the fastest rising groups, exactly those who should be voting for Liz!

[Gothmog]

39. African American women voters are key to victory in 2020

Without the support of this group, no one will be the nominee of the party

Texas will be a battleground state if Biden is the nominee. If Warren is the nominee, Texas will not be competitive

[Thekaspervote]

84. This.... history tells us NO dem has won the GE without the support of AA voters

Also, recent polls in WI, FL and MI show Biden with big leads

[2_heal_my_country]

121. I don't understand why KAMALA HARRIS

has not gotten more support from the AA community.

[femmedem]

134. Just anecdotal, but the president of my local NAACP branch turned on her when she attacked Biden.

She was also, rightly or wrongly, uncomfortable with some of her record as a prosecutor.

[treestar]

77. But what percent of Democrats?

The nomination is decided by Democrats.

[qazplm135]

35. and if she wins NH and Iowa

and possibly Nevada, then guess what, AA voters will take another look at her...just like they did Obama after he had some wins.

She's going to have several more opportunities to woo the AA vote and anyone who thinks that somehow we are locked into Biden don't know jack about AA voters.

[Gothmog]

42. Poll: Biden holds 24-point lead over Democratic field among black voters

Link to tweet

Former Vice President Joe Biden is the top pick among black voters, with a 24 point lead over his closest competitor in the 2020 Democratic primary field, according to a new poll.

A Hill-HarrisX survey found that 36 percent of registered black voters said they want Biden to be the party's nominee, followed by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) with 12 percent support.

No other candidate received double-digit support. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) tied for third place, garnering 8 percent each.

[qazplm135]

46. and where was Hillary at with AA voters in October 2007? 57 percent

She had TWICE the support almost that Biden has now among AA voters on 17 October 2017.

How did Obama win with that level of support for her among AAs??

[Gothmog]

48. Warren is not President Obama

Good luck with this theory.

[qazplm135]

55. Neither was Hillary

and yet there she was in 07 with almost two thirds AA votes going up against an AA candidate.

The "theory" is that AA voters can easily change their minds in the span of a few months.

We don't automatically vote for an AA candidate (see Obama, see Jackson) and we don't slavishly stick to one candidate all the way through. We vote pragmatically. We vote for winners. We vote for those who have proved themselves and that we think have the best shot of winning. We've always voted that way.

The ONLY reason why Joe Biden (or Hillary Clinton) lead/led at this point in the race, is because currently, AA voters think he/she have/had the best shot of winning in the GE.

The MOMENT that isn't true anymore, AA voters will pivot.

[Polybius]

127. That was early on when it looked like Hillary would coast to the nomination

By early 2008, Obama had the AA vote locked.

[qazplm135]

156. yes

it changed.

[Polybius]

159. By April, there were actually AA members of Congress that pulled their endorsement of Hillary

And then endorsed Obama. I have never seen that happen before.

[SleeplessinSoCal]

168. 2008 Iowa caucuses made the difference for AA's, it seems.

The fact that Russian troll farms targeted AA's in 2016 with made up stories about HRC is infuriating. We have to spend even more time and money chasing down troll tripe. And we need to find more to do than discussing our challeges. I know many will be going door to door and manning the phones. I hope our most tech savvy members will advise.

I also hope our candidate can keep up with the latest dirty tricks. They ought to be really interesting and invisible. We have to be ready for whatever comes.

[Cha]

163. Nobody

is 'cept him!

[qazplm135]

170. including

Biden.

[Cha]

171. Which Nobody Ever said he was.

[qazplm135]

172. great

so we all agree Biden could as easily lose his lead among AAs just like Hillary did.

Great!

[Thekaspervote]

87. This article might help give you some answers to your question

A short snippet from the link below

He argues that Joe Biden, the former vice president, is the candidate most likely to get black voters to the ballot box.
“What we fundamentally need is someone who can energize our community to come out. I don’t think any of the candidates will help us with a Barack Obama-style turnout, but I think Biden is like getting back into old comfortable shoes that will allow us to get our footing back.”



https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/some-pennsylvania-democrats-regret-not-voting-in-2016-they-say-theyll-be-sure-to-cast-a-ballot-in-2020/2019/08/23/e2d4f4c0-a1b0-11e9-b732-41a79c2551bf_story.html

[qazplm135]

89. ummm I only had one question

and I answered it.

I don't care about some dudes opinion behind a paywall.

[Gothmog]

101. Why Black Voters Prefer Establishment Candidates Over Liberal Alternatives

I personally believe that Iowa and New Hampshire are essentially meaningless. These states are 90+% white and do not represent the demographics of the party. The primary process does not really start until South Carolina where the voting population reflects the demographics of the party as a whole.

I found this article from 538 to be very informative https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/why-do-black-democrats-usually-prefer-establishment-candidates/

So here are a few explanations for why black voters have tended to side with the establishment wing of the Democratic Party. I have tried to order these explanations from strongest to weakest (in my view, at least):

1. Establishment candidates typically have existing ties to the black community
This will sound tautological, but an establishment candidate is … well … established. A candidate who is part of the establishment wing of the Democratic Party likely has fairly strong ties to major constituencies in the party, such as labor unions, women’s rights groups and, of course, black leaders and voters. So when black voters backed Gov. Andrew Cuomo over Cynthia Nixon in New York’s Democratic gubernatorial primary last year, or Andy Beshear over Adam Edelen in Kentucky’s Democratic gubernatorial primary earlier this year, that was not shocking. Not only did Beshear and Cuomo spend years developing their own ties with the black communities in their states, but their fathers did, too. (Steve Beshear was governor of Kentucky, Mario Cuomo the governor of New York.)

Clinton in 2016 and Biden in 2020 similarly entered the primaries with longstanding ties to black voters. It’s worth considering if the story here is not that establishment candidates are smarter in appealing and connecting with black voters during the campaign, compared to anti-establishment candidates. Maybe it’s that the establishment candidate in a race is likely to be the person who enters the campaign with the strongest support among black voters.

2. Black voters are pragmatic
White Democrats are significantly more likely than black Democrats to describe themselves as liberal. Perhaps that’s the simple explanation for why most black voters eschew more liberal candidates. But scholars of black voters argue that the liberal-moderate-conservative framework does not apply well to predicting the actual policy positions and voting behavior of black Americans.

I agree with the conclusion of this article

But even if Sanders or Warren gets more support among black voters in 2020 than the Vermont senator did in 2016, I tend to think Biden will remain fairly popular with black voters overall — because of his ties to Obama and other black leaders and the perception that he can defeat Trump. So there is a very real possibility that black voters will play the same role in the 2020 presidential primary that they have played in Democratic politics over much of the last four years: blocking the path of the liberal left as it attempts to dethrone the party’s establishment.

[qazplm135]

104. establishment types usually win the nomination

But Obama wasn't one of those, and he was fairly liberal.

Dukakis was pretty liberal too.

Black voters want to win so they vote who they think is the strongest, that is usually but not always the establishment candidate. And this time around, our establishment candidate has some pretty clear holes given the steady drop in his gap.

[Gothmog]

105. Warren is not an establishment type

It is not going to be easy for her to win the support of African American voters

[qazplm135]

106. she already went from zero to 12 percent in SC

so yeah, it won't be nearly as hard as you wish it to be.

[Gothmog]

175. Warren is at 3% in South Carolina

Link to tweet

[BlueWI]

177. Black voters are always a debating point here.

Hopefully the interests of black communities across the country will be reflected centrally in policies too. The systematic robbery of housing capital from black communities in the Great Recession is still underreported.

There are significant differences in candidate preference by age and region too among black voters. Biden served under President Obama and still hasn't gotten a 50% share of black support. So, there's really no reason for the end zone dancing about black voter support for Biden other than pro-Biden partisanship.

[Thekaspervote]

86. Since EW holds a 2 pt lead in NH and IA there will be no big gains for her there

So here’s how the numbers play out in IA & NH and the next 2 early primary states

In the first four states, here's how it stacks up (RCP averages):

41 Iowa Warren 26.2, Biden 24, Sanders 16.3 (16, 15, 10)
24 New Hampshire Biden 23.2, Warren 21.0, Sanders 17.2 (9, 8, 7)
36 Nevada Biden 24.0, Sanders 21.7, Warren 18.3 (14, 12, 10)
54 South Carolina Biden 38.3, Warren 16.0, Sanders 13.3 (38, 16, 0)

That would give:

Biden 15+9+14+38 = 76
Warren 16+8+10+16 = 50
Sanders 10+7+10+0 = 27

[qazplm135]

88. holding a lead isn't winning

She could very easily win all three states, or win two of them, or one of them, or none of them.

So DEPENDING on how she does, her support with the AA community will rise or not. IF she wins all three states, you are nuts if you don't think her standing with AA won't rise significantly. If she loses all three states then there will be nothing she can do to raise her AA support. If she wins some, then her support will rise some.

And thus her delegate counts could be 50...or 40...or 60...

And a 26 delegate lead isn't even 1 percent of the delegates need to win, much less total delegates. So the delegate count won't matter squat. Who won and loss will matter quite a bit.

[Thekaspervote]

90. Didn't say it was

Her support with the AA community is really lacking

[qazplm135]

92. just like Obama's was...

til it wasn't...because he won.

[Thekaspervote]

96. It still doesn't change the fact that EW does not have the support of the AA voters!!

[qazplm135]

103. lol it's like a circle

I'm sure you were making the same silly argument in Oct 2007 against Obama.

[Cha]

128. You have NO clue what she was "doing in Oct 2007".

[Demsrule86]

155. I supported Obama from the beginning...bu I wouldn't have if I thought he wasn't the best candidate

to win the election. I liked him very much...still do. And I like Biden also. It is insulting for some Warren supporters to say these things about Biden supporters. We have a right to choose the candidate we support as much as anyone. The nastiness and mockery I have seen is just plain wrong and should stop. People who act like this (not saying you) should consider they only push people away from supporting their candidate in a primary. People like Biden and will not respond well to this sort of thing.

[qazplm135]

157. the twenty or so Biden fans on here

who push the "only Biden can win" line are not folks I'm too worried about their response.

[2_heal_my_country]

51. At this point I really don't care about the horse race

within our party. I care about the GE. Realize no one will get as many Black voters as Obama, he was the first. Once the campaign really starts in the new year, it will be clear to what extent Biden has been hurt.

[Funtatlaguy]

53. I'd like to see this polling done.

Blacks only.
Nationwide.
“If all other candidates dropped out and your choice in the Democratic primary came down to only Biden and Warren, who would you choose?”

[BlueMTexpat]

95. Why do you believe that

she will not receive this support when they get to know her better?

[Cha]

113. Thanks for the reality check, Goth.. Retweeted!

[2_heal_my_country]

120. Yes, this is a great advantage for Biden

But that support is not due to anything he did. It is because Obama picked him to be VP.

[ecstatic]

123. If EW kills it in the next few debates AND starts to appear electable,

that number could change in an instant. Everyone loves Biden, but if another candidate emerges as stronger and more electable, black support will shift to that candidate.

[Demsrule86]

4. No, she is East Coast-not attractive to the Rust belt - particularly WI and does not have the

support of the AA community.

[Gothmog]

44. Texas will be a battleground state unless the party nominates Warren or sanders

If Warren or Sanders is the nominee, the Texas will not be competitive

[Demsrule86]

66. I agree...Arizona, Georgia and Colorado Senate seats also.

She is the wrong candidate for 20. Sure I support her in a general but the question is how bad will it be for us?

[Gothmog]

117. In Texas we are defending two flipped seats and seeking to flip 6 more

If Warren is the nominee, we can kiss these seats goodbye

[Demsrule86]

142. I know. We could lose the House and forcing red district Democrats to vote for impeachment is

completely stupid. Some here think that because they hate Trump he can't reelected and we have the house for life...neither of those things are true.

[2_heal_my_country]

67. Realize Biden has 100% voter recognition, while

Warren is unknown to many voters. The campaign is introducing her to many of these voters. They seem to like what they see, and that is why she is rocketing up in the polls. She is still unknown to many, but she is ahead or tied with Biden in a number of polls. We will see what the future holds since it is early in the process.

[Thekaspervote]

93. EW has very good name recognition ... that is no longer an arguement

[Demsrule86]

167. Sadly thanks to Trump she is not unknown...and I do not believe she will win the states we need.

she is not the big tent candidate we need in 20 to take back the Senate (red and purple state opportunities), hold the house (House majority happened because 40 or so moderates won in 18) and to win the presidency...Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Michigan are vital...particularly Wisconsin. She will not take those states IMHO.

[Thekaspervote]

91. Indeed!

[eppur_se_muova]

5. Is she is or is she ain't ?

[Bayard]

9. tRump trying to bring Biden down with lies

He is desperate to do so. If he succeeds, what will he manufacture about Warren?

[BeyondGeography]

11. She's our best campaigner

And could be our best candidate. We'll see.

[UncleNoel]

12. IMO Not our best candidate, though she is a great candidate

Biden is out best bet!

[Drunken Irishman]

15. Head-to-Head polls suggest no - no she's not.

Warren has seen a surge among Democratic voters but that surge has not been equal in her head-to-head polls with Trump. There, her numbers have not budged at all, despite likely being more known today than she was five months ago. The only tangible data we have to tell us whether someone is the best, and strongest candidate, to win this election, are, unfortunately, head-to-head polls. Everything else is speculation based on nothing more than hope and expectation.

But despite this being the lowest point of the Trump presidency, and his approval being in the toilet, Warren has struggled coming remotely close to beating Trump comfortably - either nationally or in some of the key states the Democrats need to win to win the presidency.

Since mid-Sept., here's Warren's head-to-heads vs Trump:

IBD/TIPP (9/26 - 10/3): +2
Emerson (9/21-9/23): +2
FOX News (9/15-9/17): +6
SurveyUSA (9/13/-9/16): +2

Three of the four polls have her leading by just two-points nationally.

Those same polls with Biden?

IBD/TIPP: +7
Emerson: +1
FOX News: +14
SurveyUSA: +8

Outside Emerson, which has Biden leading by one, every other national poll has him comfortably ahead - including doing 7 points better in the FOX News poll than Warren and 6 points better in SurveyUSA.

From my perspective, Warren needs to prove she can build a national lead against Trump before I concede she's the strongest candidate to beat him. So far, that narrative has not been established in the polls and, really, that's the only hard data we have that we can point to in this argument.

[Turin_C3PO]

26. I support Biden

for the reason you mention, head to head polls against Trump. But I do think, when it comes down to it, that Warren will beat him convincingly also. We shall see.

[Drunken Irishman]

36. idk - after 2016, I am not sold on anything.

I remember many DUers stating the exact same thing - Hillary will win convincingly, even when the polls suggested she would not.

I made a post in November, 2016, shortly after the Comey Letter dropped, that said the race was tightening and that we could be in for an extremely difficult election night. It wasn't to be alarmist but to point out that the vibe on DU wasn't jiving with the reality of the polls. Many here (not all - but a lot) dismissed the polls because they couldn't conceive it possible Trump could not only be competitive with Hillary ... but also win. I was never of that mindset. I knew it was possible Trump could find a narrow path to victory and that the election was ridiculously close, despite the opponent being Trump. In that post, though, someone replied convinced the election would not be close and that Hillary would win in a landslide.

Here's the exchange:

4. Sorry just no

The fundamentals of this election have not changed nearly enough to matter.

Trump's path to the electoral college is still virtually impossible.

The media is doing a great job of continuing to paint this as a close race but it has never been one nor is it now.

Yes Trump will get way more votes than we think a sane country should ever give him but he will still lose spectacularly.

He has to run the board to win and even with the polls tightening that is not going to happen. It just isn't.

I would be happy to bet on that.

I replied stating that I felt Trump was still likely to lose but it was ridiculous to think he couldn't win and that it would be a blowout.

Their reply:

Nah sorry I don't buy the Idea he has a shot for a minute. There will be a lot of noise and bluster but come the 8th this thing is going to be called the second polls close on the west coast. Possibly even before.

The fact is, polls generally give you a good indication of where the election is heading. In 2016, there was a late shift toward Trump that was even picked up by some state polls. A lot here just refused to believe it.

I think Warren can absolutely win convincingly - but I also have nothing to base that on beyond my gut feeling. Until she actually does convincingly lead in the polls, tho, I will still be somewhat skeptical.

[Turin_C3PO]

41. My belief is also based on my gut feeling.

If the polls don’t show Warren increasing her lead against Trump as the months roll on, then I’ll re-evaluate. I’m a realist and not one who doesn’t believe polls. We will see how this all plays out. As it stands now, Biden is still the favorite in the primaries due to African-American support. Warren can’t win without increasing her share of that demographic.

[2_heal_my_country]

72. I knew Hillary was going to lose

In fact, I posted the following here:

Hillary This Is What Must Be Done
1) Advertise where the Undecided voters are, not the High Information committed voters. I have seen a lot of Ads for Hillary on politico and similar sites. I have seen none on sites like "Publishers Clearing House" (PCH) which runs contests and sweepstakes and attracts a lot of low information voters or similar sites. However, I see a lot of Donald Trump ads on these sites.

2) Tell people WHY they should vote for you, in your ads. The "I'm with her" ads are useless in this light. You need to convince the uncommitted voter to vote for you. This must be done out of self-interest, not because it is a club that you want to belong and give money to. There is no reason why anyone should support you. Your ads should say "This is how Hillary can help make your life better." Link to a page which lists short statements of how she can improve life for the average person. (It can also include the sign-up sheet to join the campaign.)

3) Tell people that you recognize that they want change, but they want change in the right direction. Trump is an oligarch, and the people who advise him and his cabinet will be composed of oligarchs such as Carl Icahn, the ruthless "corporate raider" who engaged in asset stripping. Unlike Trump, some of your key advisors will be Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and other progressives like them. You pledge to take unlimited money out of politics, through appointing justices to the Supreme Court who will overturn Citizen United. You will also end the revolving door between the public sector and private sector, with at least five years between employment in government and the companies they regulated, oversaw or they worked for.

4) That any conflict that lasts more than six (?) months will require a declaration of war. No more endless undeclared wars.

[revmclaren]

112. How could you have posted this

since your profile states that you joined DU 4 days ago.

You posted.....

72. I knew Hillary was going to lose
In fact, I posted the following here:

Hillary This Is What Must Be Done
1) Advertise where the Undecided voters are, not the High Information committed voters. I have seen a lot of Ads for Hillary on politico and similar sites. I have seen none on sites like "Publishers Clearing House" (PCH) which runs contests and sweepstakes and attracts a lot of low information voters or similar sites. However, I see a lot of Donald Trump ads on these sites.

2) Tell people WHY they should vote for you, in your ads. The "I'm with her" ads are useless in this light. You need to convince the uncommitted voter to vote for you. This must be done out of self-interest, not because it is a club that you want to belong and give money to. There is no reason why anyone should support you. Your ads should say "This is how Hillary can help make your life better." Link to a page which lists short statements of how she can improve life for the average person. (It can also include the sign-up sheet to join the campaign.)

3) Tell people that you recognize that they want change, but they want change in the right direction. Trump is an oligarch, and the people who advise him and his cabinet will be composed of oligarchs such as Carl Icahn, the ruthless "corporate raider" who engaged in asset stripping. Unlike Trump, some of your key advisors will be Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and other progressives like them. You pledge to take unlimited money out of politics, through appointing justices to the Supreme Court who will overturn Citizen United. You will also end the revolving door between the public sector and private sector, with at least five years between employment in government and the companies they regulated, oversaw or they worked for.

4) That any conflict that lasts more than six (?) months will require a declaration of war. No more endless undeclared wars.




You could not have posted unless you were here under a different name.

Hmmmm...


ONLY!!! 2019 and beyond.

[Cha]

162. The OP seems to have

vanished!

[revmclaren]

165. Yup...

Guess they thought that being PPRed once before didn't count. Going to get worse before the general election. We have to stay vigilant.

ONLY!!! 2019 and beyond.

[Thekaspervote]

97. Oh... a voice of sanity...thank you!!

[Gothmog]

111. Joe Biden bests Trump by 9 points

Link to tweet

[DCofVA]

16. Is Elizabeth Warren our strongest and best candidate?

YES!

And, welcome to the Democratic Underground.

[2_heal_my_country]

73. Thank you

[Thekaspervote]

99. It's your opinion

[DrToast]

17. You're naive if you don't think Trump won't make up shit about Warren

[2_heal_my_country]

78. Sure, Trump will try to make up stuff about Warren

But he needs something to hang it on. Warren's 24 y/o lover story was mocked and laughed at because there was nothing to hang it on. If Trump tries Pocahontas again, Warren can thank him and ask him if he knows she saved the life of John Smith and therefore might have saved Jamestown, the first permanent settlement in what would become the United States.

[DrToast]

82. The Biden/Ukraine attacks aren't sticking either

American's know Joe Biden. He was associated with probably the cleanest administration ever.

It's fine if you like Warren, but don't say it's because Biden has baggage on Ukraine.

[DrToast]

143. Biden does considerably better with independents compared to Warren

Virtually every head-to-head poll shows Biden doing much, much better against Trump compared to Warren.

[TidalWave46]

18. What is going to harm Warren in the general is a big positive for her in the primary.

Her plans. Many of us who pay attention to the primary process are further to the left than society and even our own party. The manner in which she has outlined many very bold plans is helping her in the primary. It is going to be a hindrance in the general.

I don't consider it to be all that big of a deal because Republicans are simply going to call her a socialist in the general. They have worn that play out except among their base. They would call Joe Manchin a socialist if he ran.

[not_the_one]

19. excellent post

As you can see, I think Pete is by far the best candidate. Things are so bad at this point, we need to completely rethink how we approach our tattered democracy. Pete is smart, articulate, and has the knack for communication. He could be the new and improved democratic leader. He would actually surround himself with the best people. If not this time, maybe next.

But I also realize the obstacles in front of him. If the AA community refuses to give him a chance, more than likely he is going nowhere.

If he can make a showing in Iowa and New Hampshire, things could change. If he did get some momentum, and the young vote rallied behind him (which is going to be YUUGE!) he could do it without the mainstream AA. But it would be difficult.

I also feel that Biden is not our best face to put forward, for the reasons you state. His broad support is a mile wide (based on name recognition), but an inch deep, and once the turd starts concentrating on him, much of that support may dissolve away.

Warren has the one issue of sometimes coming across as a schoolmarm... Unfortunately, Americans may not "want to drink a beer" with a schoolmarm. (We can thank W Bush for THAT useful metric in selecting a presidential candidate...) If only Americans were as politically astute as we DUers are.

Overall your argument for Warren is spot on. As long as women and young people vote in large numbers, then add all the gays and pro-women men, we can't lose.

AS LONG AS THE VOTES ARE ACCURATELY COUNTED. That is another issue entirely.

As I have stated before, I will vote for dead roadkill in the middle of the road IF they have a D behind their name...

And I will vote for Biden WITH ENTHUSIASM!!! (who is MUCH BETTER than roadkill! The only one WORSE than roadkill is Tulsi.)

[FirstLight]

22. ...

Warren is not my cup of tea... While I like her spunk and drive, and even some of her ideas, she just comes across as abrasive to me. My teen daughter who is voting in her first primary says she's just another Hillary, and that generation was turned off by how the DNC shoved her down our throats...

But honestly, any Democrat who can kick Trump's ass is good for me!

[Kahuna7]

24. Nope. I can see Mitt Romney launching a viable third party run..

if Warren is our nominee. Mitt would consider Warren a threat to capitalism. Mitt would garner votes from moderate Dems, moderate republicans and independents.

[Turin_C3PO]

25. Moderate Democrats will vote for the nominee.

No way they’ll vote for Romney. I trust them to not be that stupid.

[Kahuna7]

28. I don't agree. Romney may present very well

compared to Warren and Trump. The difference between how you and I think is you like Warren, and I never have. And I'm not alone.

[Turin_C3PO]

33. I believe

Dems will vote for anyone to get rid of Trump. Romney is not a moderate, he’s a right winger. Warren’s situation is the same as Biden’s. Many progressives don’t really like him but they’ll vote anyone but Trump. There will be some exceptions but not many. This election is too important.

[Kahuna7]

37. Romney would lay claim to the original ObamaCare and run as a moderate. nt

[BeyondGeography]

107. You sound hopeful

[Kahuna7]

108. I'll be back to tell you, I told you so...

From NYMag, lest you think I'm linking to a rw source...

The Emerging Anybody-But-Warren Campaign

[BeyondGeography]

109. Don't worry, I'll write an OP in praise of your uncanny foresight

[Kahuna7]

110. Great. You'll owe me one. I updated my post. See the article

from NY Mag. And no, I didn't come to my conclusion based on this article. I came to my conclusion based on several years of watching how ruthlessly republicans operate.

[Doodley]

29. Warren does not have the broad support that Biden does.

Biden is seen as the safe pair of hands that we need after Trump. Can you really say the same about Warren?

[Kahuna7]

30. And when all her plans are examined for what they would cost the taxpayers...

Last edited Mon Oct 7, 2019, 05:37 PM - Edit history (1)

That's not going to play well to moderate voters.

[Thekaspervote]

100. Indeed not, and she keeps that very close..not informing perspective voters how it will be

Paid for. Agree, it will not play well.

[Doodley]

154. Agreed

[qazplm135]

32. RCP polling averages

would seem to disagree at this point.

[Kahuna7]

34. Just like with Bernie, she hasn't been vetted. The media is all agog because

she has a plan for this and a plan for that. Let her run on all those plans in a general and see how far they will get her. Also, a lot of her polling ahead of trump are in the margin of error.

[qazplm135]

38. welp got news for ya

RCP polling averages say it's 50/50 she is the nominee at this moment in time.

Now, will she be? Dunno. Plenty of time left for stuff to change one way or the other.

But if she is the nominee, I expect you to STFU and get in line and vote her and vociferously support her against Trump, just like I would do if Biden is the nominee.

[Kahuna7]

40. I'm not talking about as nominee. I'm talking about the general...

try to keep up. And you don't get to tell me whether or not I will STFU and get in line. You have a lot of damn nerve. Slavery ended a long time ago. I think for myself....if that's okay with you.

[qazplm135]

43. no it's not

fuckers who play this "I don't like our nominee so I'm sitting out or voting with my nose" are what got us here in the first place.

So yes, IF she's the nominee, then get the fuck in line or else just admit you don't give a damn about democratic values or morals or anything, you just care that you have a personal stick up your rear about Elizabeth Warren and fuck everything else.

If you can't "think for yourself" that Elizabeth Warren is infinitely preferable to Donald Trump, then, well, you can't think for yourself period.

[Kahuna7]

52. You know what, I'm a 65 year old black woman who has been voting

for more than 45 years. You might want to check your tone.

[qazplm135]

56. I don't care who you are

I'm a 50 year old AA who has been voting since I was 18.

So any other blocks you want to check?

As noted below, this is a Democratic site...if you can't commit to supporting WHOMEVER the ultimate nominee is, then you better check your own tone.

[Kahuna7]

58. Obviously, you don't care. You are a very disrespectful individual.

Maybe you should try to act your age.

[qazplm135]

60. I give respect

to those that show they deserve it.

Anyone who refuses to commit to vigorously supporting whomever the nominee is against Trump doesn't.

[Turin_C3PO]

45. It's in

the TOS of DU that we have to support the nominee when the general election comes up. Of course you’re free to sit out or vote Trump but I think you’re smarter than that.

[Kahuna7]

47. I've been with DU for over 15 years, and know the TOS, which I did not break...

I never said how I would vote if she's the nominee and don't appreciate anybody trying to abuse or shame me because they presume to know what I would do under any given circumstance. Nobody gets to tell me to STFU. That's against the ToS.

Don't get fooled by my low post count. I had to re-register after the election day hack in 2016. Because I had registered so long ago, I couldn't remember what email I used and had to open a new account.

[qazplm135]

59. and you STILL haven't said

that you'd vote for her if she was the nominee...so wondering why you are having such a problem doing so.

AND I didn't tell you to STFU, I said IF she's the nominee, that I expect you to STFU and vociferously support her just like I will STFU about Biden and vociferously support him if he's the nominee.

[Kahuna7]

61. You did tell me to STFU and get in line. Don't try to clean it up now...

You don't get to force me to do anything. Period.

[qazplm135]

62. lol no, I didn't, here let me quote it for you again...

"But if she is the nominee, I expect you to STFU and get in line and vote her and vociferously support her against Trump, just like I would do if Biden is the nominee."

See the word "if?"

See the word "expect?"

See where I say the same thing about me and Biden?

[Kahuna7]

63. Go play with someone else who might be entertained by your antics.

I'm not.

[qazplm135]

64. I have no care about entertainment

I do care about four more years of Trump.

[emmaverybo]

71. Fear-mongering about these ambitious, investment-intensive plans is already afoot in RW circles.

Trump is holding his fire on her now because he wants to run against her.

I have to admit that I don’t agree 100 percent with her ideas. And I am absolutely for investing more in social services and universal healthcare, but not M4All. That will be a real sticking point for many voters in the GE.

I do not think she will have the widest margin over Trump in the GE. Without Biden as a target and
given how media ends up helping Republicans win, she could be far more beset than I think she is prepared for. She is conversant and confident about domestic economic plans and arguments against Wall Street and the whole 99 percent thing, but I don’t hear much more out of her.

Her supporters are infatuated with her. They do view her as a compelling and brilliant figure, as having Obama-like charisma, an ability to inspire multitudes. The challenge is will enough voters
outside the progressive bubble be moved by her?

[Kahuna7]

74. I don't know about right wing circles, but Amy Klobuchar. states...

she doesn't think they're realistic. And I agree. How is it realistic that college debt will be cancelled. How does that happen? The lenders are under no obligation to forgive them and you can't make them. So, how is that going to be funded? And how will ongoing college debt be funded? IMO, just like with all the innovations we have had to adjust to maybe the answer to free or low cost college is online universities. Though, a lot of people probably won't like that either.

Link to tweet

[emmaverybo]

83. I have outstanding student debt so that freebie would really help me. But I am against it. Get

the forgiveness programs up and running, maybe allow low income to charge it off, freeze interest
during hardship etc. incremental changes and relief under certain conditions.

For myself, I took the darn thing out, too much, and it is mine to deal with. I am lucky I can. Will take years, but no one else should have taxes raised or dollars taken from other needed areas to pay for my college education, something many have not had the benefit of.

Agree with Amy, every statement. All respect to supporters and to Warren’s accomplishments on our behalf in the economic realm.

[qazplm135]

31. this fascination with picking the "strongest and best"

is what kills us.

We have no idea who ultimately will be "the strongest and best."

We have no idea who ultimately would "win the most electoral votes" or have the "most coattails."

So it's simple, vote for the candidate you personally like the best and who you think has the best policies.

That's it. Trying to figure out who is "the best" is silliness, and it's part of why we lose, because are ardor in figuring out who is "the best" leads to resentment and acrimony when our "the best" candidate doesn't win.

[emulatorloo]

50. Trump will lie about Warren as well. Then he will lie about the next front runner.

We need to stay united with all of our candidates and fight back against the lies told about them.

[lapfog_1]

57. "This will reduce Biden to relying on the anti-Trump vote and the Democratic base."

pretty sure that's a 60-40 win.

An EC wipe out for tRump.

Whereas a Warren nomination will simply be a "Democratic Base" turnout.

And who knows about anyone else.

I've said here before... if every person who even leans Democratic (registered Green or Independent or Communist, whatever) doesn't vote for the potato with a pulse we nominate then we don't deserve to have a democracy. Getting the never Trumpers and other independents who are middle of the road (with a wide stripe painted yellow) to vote for our person is the key to actually winning this after all of the other sides cheating and lying is done.

[beachbumbob]

65. Not likely, as her message doesn't resonate with centrists

we know some one has to pay the bills. A warren nomination would likely lack coattails for democrats to win in many conservative areas that Biden would possibly be of help.

But hey, we all have opinions

[highplainsdem]

75. No, she isn't. Not according to the polls.

[tirebiter]

81. I prefer Biden's stance on nuclear power

Joe's against it. From what I understand she is willing to include it in the effort against climate change since it creates no carbon emissions. The idea of clean nukes is 250,000 times worse then clean coal. I have heard nothing from Warren or any of the other candidates about turning over the Price Anderson Act.

[DrFunkenstein]

133. Warren: Nuke Power Completely Phased Out By 2035

Sen. Elizabeth Warren made clear in a Sept. 4 climate town hall meeting that if she is successful in taking office as president, she will not invest in nuclear energy.

The Democratic presidential hopeful pledged to not only prevent the building of new power plants, but also said she would phase out all nuclear power by 2035 and replace it with renewables.

https://www.masslive.com/news/2019/09/sen-elizabeth-warren-pledges-not-to-invest-in-nuclear-energy-and-focus-on-renewables-instead.html

Warren's “Oh come on, give me a break” during the debate showed how she not only has the right ideas, but she also knows how to play the game to keep people's eye on the ball even when the GOP try to distract.

[LonePirate]

85. I believe Warren is the best candidate to address the massive economic problems in this country.

Almost all of our societal problems stem from the massive economic problems we face.

[BlueMTexpat]

94. You articulated very well the

same points that have persuaded me that she is indeed the best candidate for 2020 ... and we have a LOT of good ones!

I am a 75-year-old woman who has had several career incarnations throughout my life: Peace Corps Volunteer where I taught English as a Foreign Language to secondary students; an elementary school teacher abroad; a teacher of French at the secondary level in the US; an international development worker (with USAID); an attorney with a private law firm in the US; an attorney with the USG; and, until my "official" retirement, I was an attorney managing programs and international staff within international organizations. Following that "official" retirement, I taught university students focusing on international business as an associate professor. I finally completely retired three years ago. I miss interacting with the students - they helped keep me young.

I truly identify with so much in Elizabeth's life - early marriage, divorce, raising my children on my own (with family help) for some years and ultimately meeting a second husband with whom I have shared 38+ years - and many of her ideas mirror my own in many ways, although hers are much more focused, developed and thought-out. I respect and admire her. Enormously.

I have been a lifelong Democrat. But her epiphany in choosing to become a Democrat is actually one of her most appealing facets for me.

To me, once she identifies a problem, she thinks it through, thoroughly researches it, and can explain it cogently and with simplicity. Most importantly, she is able to inspire like-minded people into helping her hone and refine her ideas so that the problem can be addressed in the best possible fashion, viz., her creation of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau practically from scratch.

From me, you will hear mostly pro arguments. Yes, she needs more seasoning in foreign affairs and other areas. But she is able to see the Big Picture and to inspire others to see it too. That is why I am a committed supporter.

[marlakay]

122. For a short time in my life

In my 20’s I went to a right wing type church was very pro-life and voted republican. Though my first vote was Jimmy Carter.

In my 30’s I voted for Bill Clinton so somewhere a change happened and I became pro-choice in my 40’s, I am now 63 and very progressive and working on campaigns since 2003.

People can change, there is no way in the world I would ever vote republican again and I am sure with how Elizabeth thinks she is the same.

I also struggled as a single mom no child support to raise my girls, no Aunt Bee like Elizabeth she was lucky.

I have followed her since she first started working on saving us financially and Jon Stewart had her on his show, she was a bit nervous in front of camera. Working with Obama and being a senator brought confidence to her.

[BlueMTexpat]

125. Glad that you too are

aboard! And you have my most sincere admiration!

Had I not had the support of my family when I most needed it, I would never have made it! I had no child support either. Like Elizabeth, I was very lucky.

[Nazipuncher]

98. Yes. She has my vote.

The contrast with Trump is a strength.

[Gothmog]

102. Biden continues to perform better than Warren in head-to-head match-ups against Trump

Link to tweet

[Cha]

114. Retweeted! This is what I'm talking about!

Thanks, Goth!

[revmclaren]

115. You still haven't answered my question on how you could have posted

on DU in the past about how Clinton would lose when you've only been on DU for 4 days.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287301807#post72


Who were you before. Inquiring minds want to know..

ONLY 2019 and beyond.

[I_UndergroundPanther]

116. Warren is the best candidate imho

She has got hedge fund managers flipping out. She really will get stuff done to change capitalism into something that works for everyone. And she won't be slapping wrists of rich people, she'll make it so the rich pay up on taxes and remove the bullshit that lets the rich buy policy.

[jcgoldie]

124. She's hands down our best candidate for president

Her authenticity and energy are tremendous and she is willing herself to the top of the polls. Detractors here want to blame media coverage or other nonsense, but insofar as she is receiving positive coverage its a function of her charisma and preparation. There's a reason betting markets are so high on her and thats because her strength is evident if you are paying attention.

[YOHABLO]

126. Super Delegates anyone? Talk amongst yourselves.

[Polybius]

129. She's the best candidate, but not the strongest head-to-head against Trump

Nevertheless, I'm supporting her over Biden because I vote for the candidate that I agree the most with, it's about principle.

[Demsrule86]

145. I can't believe you said this...do you understand that no matter how great she is...if Trump wins,

it doesn't matter. The only thing important in 20 is getting rid of fucking Trump. If Biden is the best candidate to do so than he should be the nominee...Mother of God, I do not understand how anyone could support a candidate who they believe has less chance of ousting Trump because they 'agree' with them. I am not condemning your choice, I just don't understand. Everything anyone 'agrees' with is lost if Trump wins, and we could lose the house. I will vote Warren in a general, but I think she loses the EC in a similar manner to Hillary. I support Biden who has the best chance to rid this country of the orange cancer destroying this country-Trump...one of the most dangerous presidents ever to be elected...if he was elected.

[Polybius]

150. I think the only difference between me and the other is that I admit it

There can't possibly be any Sanders supporters who think he'll win more states than Biden. Now, with that being said...

I still think Warren will beat Trump fairly easily. I don't think Trump (if he hasn't resigned or been removed by 11-3-2020) can win against nearly anyone running, with the exception of Bernie and Beto. He's just too damaged. So Biden might win 400 EV's. Warren wins with 320, and I get the candidate in that I like most.

[Demsrule86]

153. The GOP cheat like hell...we only win when we have strong numbers...but thanks. It blows my

my mind that you would vote for a candidate with less of a chance of beating Trump because you like the policies or what have you. But I appreciate the honesty. I think you are wrong though...I really do meaning no disrespect.

She has not even faced a serious vetting yet and her numbers will go down and Trump could win... consider that. What would it mean for the country and for us if Trump or any Republican wins in 20. We would end up with a 6-3 or worse court...Medicare, ACA and social security would most likely be ruined...it would be a shit show. Warren has faced no vetting and she isn't winning in the states we need. It will only get worse if she is the nominee. I will support her in a general, but I believe we will lose.

[Polybius]

158. If I thought that she would lose I wouldn't vote for her in the primary

For example, I like Bernie too because of his health plan, but I think he would lose 40-45 states. Of course I would still vote for him in the general. I don't want to offend Sanders voters, but that's my position, and I'm sure we can agree there.

I vote for those that I think will win and I agree the most with. I think she can win pretty handily. Yes, I think Biden can get 375 to 400 votes, but 320 is sufficient, plus I get a candidate that I agree with more (I like her health care plan better, which is my main reason). I think she'll win pretty easily. She's a great campaigner and Trump is super-damaged. For all I know it might be Warren vs. Pence.

[Layzeebeaver]

130. Yes

I think she is.

I’m biased. I’ve liked her style, positions, and delivery. She is accessible to a lot of folks.

Yes, people can complain about her not being left of left of left. If we also need to understand that we can’t change the county with only one president. We need a generation of leftish presidents and an aligned congress to re-establish a proper balance to the country. Warren could be the first in a long line if we stick to our principles.

Just vote. It’s democratic. Just vote democratic.

[DrFunkenstein]

135. Imagine Warren Debating Trump

Clinton was hesitant to go after Trump because she was afraid of the optics of an aggressive woman. Warren has no such qualms. She will dance rings around Trump like Muhammad Ali, peppering him with blows before she sets up the knock out.

Remember she was able to afford George Washington University because she went on a full debate scholarship.

Biden's debate performances have been tepid at best, and his inability to deal with Trump's accusations in real time - despite being obviously a long time coming - have showed that he is no longer anywhere near the top of his game.

Warren is absolutely at the top of her game in terms of getting crowds fired up, message discipline, and debate performances.

[MoMof6]

138. Possibly

She has some ideas with which I certainly agree. I am having increasing trouble with her truthfulness, however.

Even so I am keeping an open mind and will review the facts (as I can best determine them) as the election season moves on.

[DrFunkenstein]

151. Does She Have a Problem?

She may want to frame M4A in terms of cost, rather than take the conservative bait, but I'd hardly say that amounts to some sort of mendacity, let alone deception.

Considering that she said she was willing to go for a buy-in option as a transition to universal coverage makes me even less worried about it.

[Joe941]

147. Probably not, but she is one of the top.

[Awsi Dooger]

160. I wouldn't pay attention to the race at all if we nominated her

Not one second. I don't see how it would work. I prefer a handful of big picture variables over policy:

* Hillary is superior to Elizabeth
* Trump is better positioned as incumbent than during 2016
* Ready made nickname
* Easily defined as Massachusetts socialist. Notice they have been holding back socialist lately. Not an accident. They don't want to wear out that term. It would resurface and dominate in fall 2020 if Warren is nominated



We desperately need more foresight than this. Trump would have to do something to shove his approval below 40% again for Warren to prevail

[BlueMTexpat]

164. You sound like the

"Wall Street Democratic (!) donors" and Mark Zuckerberg.

Hmm.

[MBS]

166. These are not the only major candidates to consider!

I predict that at least one of those “major”three, and possibly two, will fade in the polls by the time of the caucuses, and that one or two others will rise in importance.Keep your mind open to the dark horses, too!

[Happy Hoosier]

169. I think she is great, but....

I would prefer she not be so dogmatic about populism. She’s smart... she needs to get all the facts for demanding breakups of big companies, for example.

[NCLefty]

173. I think she's strongest physically and mentally (in the top 3).

I think she's my secret pick. I just need to know that America will like her too and that she can trounce Trump in any debate--not just on policy but when he says insults etc. She needs to OWN him and make him look like the clown he is.

She SHOULD be able to beat Trump handily, because he's Trump. But then I feel that way about all our candidates. :p

[Gothmog]

176. Without support from African American voters, I doubt that Warren will be the nominee

Link to tweet