General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Thomas Franks, the Clintons and "phony" Democratic populists in the New Gilded Age [View all]JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)The repeal of Glass-Steagall was foolish, and a lot of people paid for that foolishness.
Have you read Elizabeth Warren's book A Fighting Chance?
She explains why her views on the world changed.
Elizabeth Warren studied bankruptcy and the factors that cause people to end up in bankruptcy courts. She has the understanding that we need in the White House today.
Bill Clinton was a bit of an improvement over the Reagan/Bush I era, but we have really serious economic problems in this country. They are partly due to the first Clinton era. We need to restructure our tax system so that those who benefit the most from, say trade agreements or superhighways or our military engagements in the Middle East pay their fair share to fund them. We need to find a new way to finance higher education. We need to rethink the economics behind our military/defense system. We need to rethink our economy in terms of how to save our environment, feed and clothe everyone, educate our kids, provide good health care, keep our infrastructure safe, insure economic opportunity while promoting creativity and all that without going broke.
The Clintons are just not the people we need today. They are too closely tied to the Wall Street crowd. Wall Street is a part of Hillary's constituency. Wall Street already has far too much power.
I support Elizabeth Warren. I really want her to run. She is charming. People take to her easily. She is modest. She grew up in Oklahoma and in spite of her career teaching law at Harvard, she appears to be a down-to-earth very mid-western or western woman who raised a family in spite of hardships. She has a warmth that is captivating. She should be our candidate. I know there is a lot of investment in Hillary, but Elizabeth Warren is the right pick.