General Discussion

Atman

(31,464 posts)

162. All are fatally flawed. Warren perhaps the least so.

Thu Sep 25, 2014, 10:02 AM

Sep 2014

Bernie Sanders is a self-proclaimed SOCIALIST. Americans will never, ever vote for a Socialist, despite the fact that we're already pretty much a Socialist nation anyway. But we've been trained well.

Hillary has two strike against her from the get-go. Not that she isn't capable, but she'll still have to work with a Republican Congress, due to gerrymandering and stupid people in America. If you think gridlock is bad with a black guy in charge, wait until you see what these old rich white dudes do when then have to take orders from a WOMAN named CLINTON. It'll make Obama look like Powder.

Elizabeth Warren is talented and capable, but she's got that "woman" baggage. She's already fighting Wall Street, which the suits don't like. Did I mention that she is a woman? The power structure is geared for the rich white men. They will block EVERYTHING until another rich white man is in office. It saddens me to say this. I don't want it to be true, but it is true. The rich white men are pricks and assholes, and until a rich white man is back in office -- or until attrition takes out the lot of them -- things will not get better. No millionaire Southern leader is going to take orders from some ornery woman. It isn't going to happen. Not in our lifetimes.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

243 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Hillary was once defeated by a newbie/no-namer, she can be defeated again. [View all] Veganhealedme Sep 2014 OP

Obama was not a "newbie/no namer" , his 2004 speech got him huge national and international attentio JI7 Sep 2014 #1

He Ws Promoted Like Crazy After That Speech billhicks76 Sep 2014 #72

TOS: Don't go overboard with the crazy talk. brooklynite Sep 2014 #146

Lol...Not :) billhicks76 Sep 2014 #187

I repeat my comment... brooklynite Sep 2014 #192

+1! Enthusiast Sep 2014 #204

Bernie said on Chuck Todd's program... fadedrose Sep 2014 #112

+1! Enthusiast Sep 2014 #206

+1 YoungDemCA Sep 2014 #127

"huge" in the Beltway mayhap, but out here in the hinterlands bread_and_roses Sep 2014 #193

Obama was a household name by 2007. geek tragedy Sep 2014 #2

But Bernie CAN win LordGlenconner Sep 2014 #28

America will not, under any circumstances, elect a SOCIALIST president. Atman Sep 2014 #147

"America will not" - People said that about a 2nd Bush term... and yet it happened. Veilex Sep 2014 #203

Perfect allinthegame Sep 2014 #185

If by perfect you mean Veilex Sep 2014 #205

True Cali_Democrat Sep 2014 #63

I had never heard of him. Most Americans had not heard of him other than his convention JDPriestly Sep 2014 #71

Actually I would argue that Obama was much more well-known then Cali_Democrat Sep 2014 #80

Do you have any links/facts to support that? thesquanderer Sep 2014 #101

No, but does the other poster have links to support their assertions? Cali_Democrat Sep 2014 #102

Okay, I have some facts! thesquanderer Sep 2014 #103

I didn't know who Obama was during the first debates. Never heard of him. LawDeeDah Sep 2014 #105

Good find! nt laundry_queen Sep 2014 #227

Thanks! JDPriestly Sep 2014 #242

Sorry, once Hillary brushes both of them out of her way customerserviceguy Sep 2014 #120

Only time will tell for sure. Veilex Sep 2014 #209

Hillary's "inevitability" took a huge ding the first time around...she was rejected by Democrats. Ikonoklast Sep 2014 #226

Yeah, yeah, I keep hearing that customerserviceguy Sep 2014 #240

"This is revisionist history" - Hardly Veilex Sep 2014 #207

Bullshit. Maybe for people here, not for the average person! nt Logical Sep 2014 #106

He was the 2004 Keynote speaker, and had written two best-selling novels. geek tragedy Sep 2014 #123

He was so popular that Hillary had a 30 point lead on him.... Logical Sep 2014 #126

Not where he was campaigning. geek tragedy Sep 2014 #129

I never heard of the Clintons Generic Other Sep 2014 #122

Bill ran against an exceptionally weak field since the big names sat it out, because geek tragedy Sep 2014 #124

The important question is, Will Goldman Sachs still pay her for entertaining them if she loses? Tierra_y_Libertad Sep 2014 #3

question is... VanillaRhapsody Sep 2014 #5

The simple answer is....No. Tierra_y_Libertad Sep 2014 #11

and why do we Democrats care what an Indie thinks VanillaRhapsody Sep 2014 #13

I've been a Democrat since 1965...you? Tierra_y_Libertad Sep 2014 #15

and elizabeth warren WAS a Republican soooo VanillaRhapsody Sep 2014 #17

And Hillary was a Republican and Reagan was a Democrat. former9thward Sep 2014 #50

no she wasnt VanillaRhapsody Sep 2014 #61

How does one become "officially" independent? By decree? Tierra_y_Libertad Sep 2014 #74

when you can no longer be counted on to vote VanillaRhapsody Sep 2014 #76

Whose definition? Yours? Tierra_y_Libertad Sep 2014 #99

dictionaries VanillaRhapsody Sep 2014 #152

I'll inform my state government to check the dictionary to see if I'm registered as an Independent. Tierra_y_Libertad Sep 2014 #156

please do... VanillaRhapsody Sep 2014 #167

"dictionaries Perhaps you have heard of them?" Veilex Sep 2014 #211

You don't know the history of your candidate? former9thward Sep 2014 #92

oh as a child? VanillaRhapsody Sep 2014 #154

So now college students are "children"? former9thward Sep 2014 #158

You're the one who made the absolute claim that Hillary Veilex Sep 2014 #212

Then my original position that if you DON'T commit to vote for the winner of the Democratic primary VanillaRhapsody Sep 2014 #221

I'm in awe of your utter lack of logic. Veilex Sep 2014 #224

its VERY logical VanillaRhapsody Sep 2014 #225

lol Veilex Sep 2014 #232

no actually I'm a programmer VanillaRhapsody Sep 2014 #234

I've already seen what you equate to a dictionary definition... Veilex Sep 2014 #238

and warren was an adult... VanillaRhapsody Sep 2014 #190

Hillary is a corporate dem... DavidG_WI Sep 2014 #97

bullfuckingshit VanillaRhapsody Sep 2014 #177

Then I guess this is all just smoke and mirrors... Veilex Sep 2014 #213

Then I guess you haven't seen this.... VanillaRhapsody Sep 2014 #219

Interesting how your site there fails to count actions such as taking bribes from Goldman Sachs... Veilex Sep 2014 #222

She certainly is. She can speak all the pretty speeches she wants LawDeeDah Sep 2014 #197

For you too VanillaRhapsody Sep 2014 #220

And the jury results are in.... aikoaiko Sep 2014 #223

Yes, she was. DRoseDARs Sep 2014 #188

registered? VanillaRhapsody Sep 2014 #189

By no reasonable person's definition does one need to be registered to identify. DRoseDARs Sep 2014 #196

Yes she was Veilex Sep 2014 #210

first Bernie is not a Dem VanillaRhapsody Sep 2014 #4

Why is more important for you to vote for the label instead of the ideology? Dawgs Sep 2014 #19

I think it's performance art. n/t winter is coming Sep 2014 #94

I think so too LondonReign2 Sep 2014 #171

Sucinctly identified. Veilex Sep 2014 #214

+1 laundry_queen Sep 2014 #228

Our political system is fundamentally designed to... DavidG_WI Sep 2014 #96

+1 Enthusiast Sep 2014 #208

First of all Joseph Liebermann was also a Dem before he wasn't when he ran in an election too! cascadiance Sep 2014 #24

I myself would vote for Bernie in a heartbeat, but most americans wouldn't, mostly for stupid dionysus Sep 2014 #132

Wen Bernie declares as a dem, he'll be a dem. morningfog Sep 2014 #30

K/R. He was known, but ran as a black man, with a funny sounding name, "B. Hussein Obama", so, yeah NYC_SKP Sep 2014 #6

Post removed Post removed Sep 2014 #7

Obama was very well known. MohRokTah Sep 2014 #8

Never? Seriously? senz Sep 2014 #59

Oh, I thought he won in 2012, too. n/t Iwillnevergiveup Sep 2014 #86

Re-election is different from being elected for the first time MohRokTah Sep 2014 #87

Pure BS, for people here, not for the average person. nt Logical Sep 2014 #107

So well known that he got 0% support in the June 2006 poll LondonReign2 Sep 2014 #172

He wasn't even considered a possible run by the vast majority in 2006. MohRokTah Sep 2014 #218

Indeed LondonReign2 Sep 2014 #239

Warren will be too busy campaigning for Clinton... brooklynite Sep 2014 #9

So... how do you define the difference between a "mainstream liberal" and "unrepentent leftist"? cascadiance Sep 2014 #29

Lunch bobduca Sep 2014 #38

Well, actually the Warren thing comes from her own quote... brooklynite Sep 2014 #45

So Bernie's message of economic fairness for working people senz Sep 2014 #60

Yes, that's what I'm saying... brooklynite Sep 2014 #93

Obama got the Kennedy endorsement. End of story leftstreet Sep 2014 #10

"Hillary is inevitable - unless she completely screws up her campaign" DonCoquixote Sep 2014 #20

Oh yes, Penn's 'Strategy For Winning' !! leftstreet Sep 2014 #22

If she's smart, she'll pull in some of Obama's team. eom MohRokTah Sep 2014 #25

Hillary not being in control of her campaign is a huge failing. LawDeeDah Sep 2014 #110

...like she did in 2008. Liberal_Stalwart71 Sep 2014 #178

of course they can win AtomicKitten Sep 2014 #12

thats weather not politics.. VanillaRhapsody Sep 2014 #14

Vote? Most likely. Campaign and donate? Depends. morningfog Sep 2014 #42

Despite the odds marions ghost Sep 2014 #16

we have a Progessive VanillaRhapsody Sep 2014 #18

That is a really debatable statement marions ghost Sep 2014 #23

Hillary is a VERY progressive candidate. MohRokTah Sep 2014 #27

Candidates that are pro H-1B Visa expansion, amongst other things are NOT progressive in my book! cascadiance Sep 2014 #34

Purists who make demands for purity MohRokTah Sep 2014 #37

Hmm... We ask for anything that's "not corporatist" and we're called "purist"! cascadiance Sep 2014 #49

Those calling out names like "purist" are just trying to dilute already diluted demands Veilex Sep 2014 #215

And so-called conservative democrats LondonReign2 Sep 2014 #174

I know of no such democrats on DU. eom MohRokTah Sep 2014 #217

Since you specifically stated elsewhere LondonReign2 Sep 2014 #235

Then put up the link MohRokTah Sep 2014 #236

Here you go buddy LondonReign2 Sep 2014 #237

Viva Huey Long! morningfog Sep 2014 #35

Tell me marions ghost Sep 2014 #36

Too numerous to list here. MohRokTah Sep 2014 #43

Pro war, pro Wall Street, pro TPP, pro Keystone XL yet you call her "VERY progressive". Scuba Sep 2014 #57

S/he said "progessive" KamaAina Sep 2014 #51

She's not even pro-gessive marions ghost Sep 2014 #91

I would say, "pro-regressive." woo me with science Sep 2014 #161

even better marions ghost Sep 2014 #169

Yep. MohRokTah Sep 2014 #26

Purists covet the struggle LordGlenconner Sep 2014 #33

there are two purists groups who are THE PROBLEM noiretextatique Sep 2014 #40

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! MohRokTah Sep 2014 #44

i suggest you noiretextatique Sep 2014 #133

Wow, such a fallacious post. MohRokTah Sep 2014 #136

I'll accept that you don't like Third Way's policies...what makes them purists? brooklynite Sep 2014 #48

Well supporting things that that the Kochs paid them to when they used to be in the DLC... cascadiance Sep 2014 #53

they have pure corporate interests at heart noiretextatique Sep 2014 #134

the same thing that makes leftists "purists" noiretextatique Sep 2014 #198

Purity generally refers to an unwillingness to accept an intermediate goal... brooklynite Sep 2014 #199

I've always disliked purists too, MohRokTah, especially the ones who voted Nader in 2000, senz Sep 2014 #64

I beg to differ tiredtoo Sep 2014 #79

LOL, that is really funny. Good one! :-) Logical Sep 2014 #108

LMAO! LondonReign2 Sep 2014 #173

Its not about defeating a Democratic candidate bhikkhu Sep 2014 #21

A back stabbing primary in this case is when the rest of us are all getting "stabbed in the back"... cascadiance Sep 2014 #41

Its not Clinton you need to worry about bhikkhu Sep 2014 #241

Then who are you suggesting is "backstabbing" in the primary?... cascadiance Sep 2014 #243

She is Evitable! morningfog Sep 2014 #31

Wasn't Hillary inevitable and unbeatable in 2008? SheilaT Sep 2014 #32

We have alternatives this time, too. Jim Lane Sep 2014 #65

Who is Martin O'Malley? SheilaT Sep 2014 #104

Martin O'Malley is Governor of Maryland. Jim Lane Sep 2014 #231

Thank you. SheilaT Sep 2014 #233

There's something called the black vote BeyondGeography Sep 2014 #39

Polls showed Hillary Clinton had that vote for the most part. MohRokTah Sep 2014 #46

Obama wasn't just another newbie BeyondGeography Sep 2014 #56

at this point and even earlier on there were Obama support groups around the country JI7 Sep 2014 #113

Some people don't want to hear this. DemocratSinceBirth Sep 2014 #148

Yep. And remember, Obama presented himself as the less conservative of the two of them!!! blkmusclmachine Sep 2014 #47

Definitely. And I say that as a Hillary supporter. Nye Bevan Sep 2014 #52

A) Warren has stated repeatedly she isn't running justiceischeap Sep 2014 #54

Which makes me wonder why anyone would be optimistic about her chances in the general election. pa28 Sep 2014 #55

Because the GOPers won't waste a credible nominee on her leftstreet Sep 2014 #58

This message was self-deleted by its author Cali_Democrat Sep 2014 #62

The bottom line on Hillary Man from Pickens Sep 2014 #66

Sanders, Warren, either will get my vote. nt NorthCarolina Sep 2014 #67

I keep saying it: Hillary just isn't that good at this running for president thing cali Sep 2014 #68

Theres a certain element that she lacks and I can't describe it tularetom Sep 2014 #83

agreed but who else?! that is the problem..... dionysus Sep 2014 #135

nice to see you! cali Sep 2014 #138

yeah i haven't been around much. hope all is well. O'Malley seems a decent fellow. dionysus Sep 2014 #194

One of the things I love about Bernie senz Sep 2014 #69

Correction: Bernie's not the "only one" who tells the truth -- Eliz Warren does, too. n/t senz Sep 2014 #75

Seems to me like someone came to light a fire here rurallib Sep 2014 #70

Exactly and even if someone totally hates, hates, hates, Hillary, why not promote their favored FSogol Sep 2014 #73

You seem to be a little "naive" about the political process vis-a-vis, Historic NY Sep 2014 #77

It is called money. still_one Sep 2014 #78

Hillary's previous defeat... mostly simple sexism NotHardly Sep 2014 #81

I disagree with Hillary on policy. She will never get my vote. EEO Sep 2014 #84

"We need a woman president" marions ghost Sep 2014 #88

The 2008 election may have been won by a newbie, how many elections did newbies lose, odds Thinkingabout Sep 2014 #82

So tell me rock Sep 2014 #85

Provided she runs, in 16 months you'll either be defending her or you'll be trashing her... wyldwolf Sep 2014 #89

Can't wait for the clampdown can you? nt Union Scribe Sep 2014 #153

I would feel that way about ANY Dem. It gets old really quick. wyldwolf Sep 2014 #159

Obama was a widely known national figure in 2007. NYC Liberal Sep 2014 #90

Widely known to people who follow politics. Lots of voters don't. n/t winter is coming Sep 2014 #95

that's true. I personally registered many of those in 2008 wyldwolf Sep 2014 #98

And more widely known outside than Warren or Sanders NYC Liberal Sep 2014 #100

he was known as much as John Kerry, Hillary Clinton by the 2004 Elections JI7 Sep 2014 #114

No, he wasn't. n/t winter is coming Sep 2014 #115

yes he was , by election day he was that well known, not just nationally but internationally JI7 Sep 2014 #117

Then I must have known some remarkably ignorant apolitical people back in 2007, winter is coming Sep 2014 #118

yes, probably the type of people you talk to , there are wingnuts who say everyone they talk to JI7 Sep 2014 #119

Do poll results from this same time in the 2008 Presedential cycle count? LondonReign2 Sep 2014 #175

Fail Capt. Obvious Sep 2014 #166

Obama was new and introduced in 2004 to convention delegates, I was there. People know Sanders. TheNutcracker Sep 2014 #109

Welcome to DU... SidDithers Sep 2014 #111

We need to GOTV 2014. This post does nothing to help get the vote out this November. greatlaurel Sep 2014 #116

You must be kidding marions ghost Sep 2014 #141

You are working against the Democratic Party interests this November 2014 by attacking HRC now. greatlaurel Sep 2014 #142

Very true. FSogol Sep 2014 #143

WRONG marions ghost Sep 2014 #150

Neither do your wild, stupid accusations Union Scribe Sep 2014 #155

Hillary doesn't seem to have the same degree of support today that she had in 08. Kablooie Sep 2014 #121

What lack of support are you referring to? brooklynite Sep 2014 #125

actually, she has more support this time around JI7 Sep 2014 #128

True. But I remember it was touch and go between Obama and McCain towards sabrina 1 Sep 2014 #130

Sanders could not win a GE MattBaggins Sep 2014 #131

Sanders, really? Beacool Sep 2014 #137

Just put the GOP trolls on permanent ignore. They are becoming more transparent in their desperation greatlaurel Sep 2014 #149

Did you know marions ghost Sep 2014 #163

+1 Veilex Sep 2014 #216

Like it or not quaker bill Sep 2014 #139

I don't disagree with the premise JustAnotherGen Sep 2014 #140

All are fatally flawed. Warren perhaps the least so. Atman Sep 2014 #162

At this time, 8 years ago, the "newbie/no-namer" was organizing financial and political support... brooklynite Sep 2014 #144

Sanders abd Warren are "unknowns?" On what planet. Atman Sep 2014 #145

Good point (on your head) marions ghost Sep 2014 #195

Wishful thinking. Hillary is the one! 3rdwaydem Sep 2014 #151

Your name is "3rdwaydem" and you're backing Hillary Clinton? Atman Sep 2014 #157

Really? 3rdwaydem Sep 2014 #160

NANNY NANNY BOO BOO! I live in Connecticut. Atman Sep 2014 #164

Sanders running will have a similar effect as Ralph Nader in 2000 liberal N proud Sep 2014 #165

Like I said above marions ghost Sep 2014 #170

Gore won in 2000, remember? grahamhgreen Sep 2014 #176

Had Nader not taken some of the votes the margin would have been larger liberal N proud Sep 2014 #179

Maybe. grahamhgreen Sep 2014 #181

Not if he switches parties & runs as a Dem, senz Sep 2014 #182

Like that is going to happen. liberal N proud Sep 2014 #184

It will be a MIRACLE if Hillary is elected. Sorta like Obama. librechik Sep 2014 #168

They would stick to those principles after the election. Fearless Sep 2014 #180

Hardly anyone knew who Bill Clinton was back when he went to Iowa eom marym625 Sep 2014 #183

I don't care if I get bombed for this, but here goes.... mrmpa Sep 2014 #186

maybe democrats would win more if we thought about how to defeat republicans greenman3610 Sep 2014 #191

As others have pointed out, Obama was hardly a no-namer by the time campaigning begun. Tommy_Carcetti Sep 2014 #200

And if memory serves me correctly rocktivity Sep 2014 #201

Sanders or Warren can win! Enthusiast Sep 2014 #202

livingwagenow...nt SidDithers Sep 2014 #229

No more clintons, no more bushes bobduca Sep 2014 #230