General Discussion

merrily

(45,251 posts)

134. "says she still sometimes votes Republican" I don't think Warren has said that since she ran as a

Mon Oct 27, 2014, 11:33 AM

Oct 2014

Democrat.

Before Warren ran for the Senate, I was very skeptical of her, based a lot on her wiki and sources cited in her wiki and, on another board, blasted those who gushing over her based on almost nothing (or so I believed at the time). I hope that I am always at least somewhat skeptical of all politicians, but Warren has not disappointed me much since she ran for Senate. I don't know when she said she still sometimes votes for Republicans, but she is currently doing a bang up job campaigning against them in many states.

And choosing Bill Clinton is what made Hillary a Democratic First Lady. IMO, it's also what made her a Democrat. (I know the bit about her leaving the Rockefeller convention because of her changing views on Republican racism, but I do not buy it, especially in light of her "racially-tinged" campaign against Obama. Panetta also cites Republican racism as the reason he became a Democrat and I don't buy his story, either.)

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

194 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Centrism is for "LOSERS" -- what Thomas Frank says about Carter/Obama is a MUST READ [View all] nashville_brook Oct 2014 OP

"That we are living through an endless repeat of the 1970s is becoming more apparent all the time." bananas Oct 2014 #1

if only the music was as good. nashville_brook Oct 2014 #4

More like the widespread Repub upset wins in the 1978 mid-terms actually, hifiguy Oct 2014 #158

Well, at least we got rid of the harvest gold and avocado appliances Warpy Oct 2014 #5

those appliances were proof there's no dignity in austerity nashville_brook Oct 2014 #7

I was shocked when I moved here to NM Warpy Oct 2014 #11

dang, i had no idea there was a barrier to that! nashville_brook Oct 2014 #14

A passport card to drive into Mexico costs $30 for an adult and lasts 10 years Bluenorthwest Oct 2014 #51

First time applicant costs $55. former9thward Oct 2014 #93

that's plenty high enough to create a barrier. nashville_brook Oct 2014 #98

yep. mountain grammy Oct 2014 #34

Any analysis involving Raygun must include Iran hostages fasttense Oct 2014 #60

check out Perlstein's book, there's a lot more to Reagan winning than the October Surprise nashville_brook Oct 2014 #78

There were so many factors in that election. Yet, I see people here use it as an excuse merrily Oct 2014 #139

K&R.... daleanime Oct 2014 #2

Well here's a nice antidote to Sunday Hippie Punching. DirkGently Oct 2014 #3

capitulation is neither pragmatic nor effective... nashville_brook Oct 2014 #9

Either they're trying to sell us on their own spinelessness Warpy Oct 2014 #12

Centrism sucks... 99Forever Oct 2014 #6

centrism brought us the 2010 shellacking... nashville_brook Oct 2014 #8

Clintonian conserva-dem think won't cut it now. DirkGently Oct 2014 #20

well, you know who was a "Goldwater Girl"... nashville_brook Oct 2014 #23

My complaint with the tagging of Hillary as a 'Goldwater Girl' is that it is used by people who Bluenorthwest Oct 2014 #52

I agree. The fact that she was a Goldwater Girl pales in the face of her support for the Iraq War. rhett o rick Oct 2014 #64

^^shazam! nashville_brook Oct 2014 #75

Snap! L0oniX Oct 2014 #92

Youch! DirkGently Oct 2014 #112

Yep. She did not only vote for the invasion, she urged her fellow Senators to vote for it. merrily Oct 2014 #136

Democrats trusted her. Where they might not listen to the Dim-Son, they rhett o rick Oct 2014 #167

By her own statement, she did not read the NIE. And now, she says her Iraq vote was a mistake. merrily Oct 2014 #168

+1 Marr Oct 2014 #175

Blammo. hifiguy Oct 2014 #162

"says she still sometimes votes Republican" I don't think Warren has said that since she ran as a merrily Oct 2014 #134

some are starting to wonder if Hillary is serious about running nashville_brook Oct 2014 #140

A good friend IRL keeps reminding me that politics is cyclical. merrily Oct 2014 #145

i'm finding young people way more bitter and ready for real change than my peers in the 80s nashville_brook Oct 2014 #154

Very shortly after MTP deigned to have Sanders on, Ed Shultz interviewed merrily Oct 2014 #159

We as a Nation are still in the Wellstone ruled Oct 2014 #10

it was a leveraged buyout of the party. nashville_brook Oct 2014 #13

And Obama didn't bother to change most of the R positions that he could have cui bono Oct 2014 #32

Did not know that. THAT pisses me off. ancianita Oct 2014 #45

Whether one like it or not, most of these appointees Legalequilibrium78 Oct 2014 #79

With due respect, that is the biggest bunch of horse pucky I've read in a long time. rhett o rick Oct 2014 #105

spot-on. the continuation of regulatory capture is just one example of this failure. nashville_brook Oct 2014 #157

Totally untrue. The Bushites selected people not only for party, but religious views as well. merrily Oct 2014 #170

He replaced the U.S. Attorneys. former9thward Oct 2014 #102

Dimson replaced them gradually. Presidents before Dimson did it much faster. However, merrily Oct 2014 #171

I worked in the U.S. Attorney's Office in Phoenix while in law school. former9thward Oct 2014 #173

My "views" about hiring during Dimson's administration came straight out of C Span's coverage of merrily Oct 2014 #174

well to be fair we're starting to defend policies: unfortunately that just means bluewashing stuff MisterP Oct 2014 #15

Thomas Frank knows nothing about winning elections. geek tragedy Oct 2014 #16

hahahahaha! nashville_brook Oct 2014 #19

How many elections has he won himself? geek tragedy Oct 2014 #22

what expertise? look, this isn't rocket science -- you either have values or you don't nashville_brook Oct 2014 #25

lots of people with pure principles wind up irrelevant. nt geek tragedy Oct 2014 #39

and lots of people with murky principles .... PassingFair Oct 2014 #74

you make me laugh. nashville_brook Oct 2014 #88

Step 1: Attack the messenger. Check. cui bono Oct 2014 #38

Just for the hell of it, lemme try to explain the difference Jackpine Radical Oct 2014 #49

Bingo! Caretha Oct 2014 #87

"Pragmatic" is also declaring, based on zero evidence, that whatever actually got done was the best merrily Oct 2014 #189

did you read post #39? grasswire Oct 2014 #54

Yup LondonReign2 Oct 2014 #115

precisely. nashville_brook Oct 2014 #76

Fuck the phrase 'reality based' LondonReign2 Oct 2014 #114

I want Democrats to win elections. geek tragedy Oct 2014 #117

You want the person with the D behind their name LondonReign2 Oct 2014 #119

I know that the worst Democrat is better than geek tragedy Oct 2014 #122

The worst Democrats LondonReign2 Oct 2014 #123

That is substance- free ranting, not a fact-based geek tragedy Oct 2014 #124

The Swarm really needs to brush up on their debating skills LondonReign2 Oct 2014 #126

Sorry someone disagreeing with your opinions geek tragedy Oct 2014 #130

Nah, it's not the disagreeing LondonReign2 Oct 2014 #132

I promote winning, you prefer pure losers. geek tragedy Oct 2014 #151

Another tripe slogan AgingAmerican Oct 2014 #163

As opposed to complaining that every Democrat who was become geek tragedy Oct 2014 #164

Congratulations on your tireless work turn the Democratic Party into the LondonReign2 Oct 2014 #172

Why do you equate winning with Republicans? nt geek tragedy Oct 2014 #191

irony alert. nashville_brook Oct 2014 #127

Tell us, what experience does Tom Frank have in geek tragedy Oct 2014 #129

by your standards Karl Rove is king. nashville_brook Oct 2014 #131

Not since 2006 and "the math." geek tragedy Oct 2014 #152

Yes, and I don't agree with you about what they stand for treestar Oct 2014 #183

As much as Pres Obama accomplished the great wealth divide will soon rhett o rick Oct 2014 #194

+1-- hillarious that the "Reality-Based" line is always coming from the same people who Marr Oct 2014 #176

This should have been obvious to all at DU and elsewhere after the 2010 debacle Doctor_J Oct 2014 #17

it was so craven -- not even a slap on the wrist for Bushcrimes. nashville_brook Oct 2014 #21

That was demoralizing. deurbano Oct 2014 #35

Completely demoralizing. cui bono Oct 2014 #41

many Dems ARE coming out charging for Dem values, and they might even win nashville_brook Oct 2014 #77

Bad morals = bad politics Doctor_J Oct 2014 #47

right, and after 8 years of not-so-much with the housecleaning, more... not-so-much nashville_brook Oct 2014 #99

Makes me wonder. We know from records that, historically, people with little or no income correlated jtuck004 Oct 2014 #66

this is a good point. economically disenfranchised are less likely to vote, that's why... nashville_brook Oct 2014 #121

jim hightower mopinko Oct 2014 #18

Probably a lot of truth in that? kentuck Oct 2014 #24

Liberals? Which liberals? cui bono Oct 2014 #42

I think it posted in the wrong thread Doctor_J Oct 2014 #50

I will vote heaven05 Oct 2014 #26

DURec leftstreet Oct 2014 #27

Follow the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ woo me with science Oct 2014 #28

+1000 nt antigop Oct 2014 #29

first thing, reject hippie punching nashville_brook Oct 2014 #30

Hear, hear. woo me with science Oct 2014 #113

Moderation in temper is always a virtue; but moderation in principle is always a vice. Thomas Paine Tierra_y_Libertad Oct 2014 #31

such good words to live by. nashville_brook Oct 2014 #86

Excellent. n/t DirkGently Oct 2014 #104

Papa and Babino Paul grin,,,,,,,,,,,, Cryptoad Oct 2014 #33

Wish Frank zentrum Oct 2014 #36

They haven't calmed down because it is in the interests of the rich truebluegreen Oct 2014 #57

Let me post this here as a topical example. Third Way apparatchiks take notice: Maedhros Oct 2014 #37

Oregon is a deep blue state. geek tragedy Oct 2014 #40

And yet Jeff won that seat in 2008 from Republican Gordon Smith. It was hard won too. Bluenorthwest Oct 2014 #53

Oregon voted for Dukakis in 1988. geek tragedy Oct 2014 #56

Portland is a deep blue city hootinholler Oct 2014 #58

That's how most blue states are. geek tragedy Oct 2014 #61

It's deep blue cities, suburbs and university towns in a sea of red n/t eridani Oct 2014 #107

John Kerry is a Centrist? emulatorloo Oct 2014 #43

Especially when the center keeps moving right. AtomicKitten Oct 2014 #44

Centrist goal post is on corporate wheels. L0oniX Oct 2014 #95

Nicely put! n/t DirkGently Oct 2014 #166

Have any of these so called Liberal experts on how Legalequilibrium78 Oct 2014 #46

how's republican light working for you? Doctor_J Oct 2014 #48

+1 nashville_brook Oct 2014 #71

You are a Doctor right? Legalequilibrium78 Oct 2014 #80

2014 has actually been a progressive-messaged campaign cycle nashville_brook Oct 2014 #84

What part of the country are those "progressives" running Legalequilibrium78 Oct 2014 #193

I agree. BlueEye Oct 2014 #55

Hillary can't win a primary against a true FDR dem nashville_brook Oct 2014 #72

Who is a "true FDR Dem?" wyldwolf Oct 2014 #94

Maybe someone who would intern an entire ethnic/immigrant group in "relocation camps"... YoungDemCA Oct 2014 #135

sorry my perspective on Obama differs from yours -- i believe policy matters and that people matter. nashville_brook Oct 2014 #143

You think? BlueEye Oct 2014 #109

"arguably center right" LondonReign2 Oct 2014 #116

Yeah, why not just try it. treestar Oct 2014 #67

The logic here is: YoungDemCA Oct 2014 #137

Wait. Republican "smears" should control who Dems run for office? DirkGently Oct 2014 #169

They should run for where their district might be treestar Oct 2014 #178

I can sort of see the passionate view that truly believes that it would work treestar Oct 2014 #177

"many of you here" seems to imply you don't identify with Democratic Underground posters nashville_brook Oct 2014 #82

okay thanks for the suggestion, duly noted. Legalequilibrium78 Oct 2014 #103

K & R !!! WillyT Oct 2014 #59

Centrism is for losers.... the_sly_pig Oct 2014 #62

"Centrism"? Man from Pickens Oct 2014 #63

Amen. woo me with science Oct 2014 #68

THIS should be an OP. n/t DirkGently Oct 2014 #69

so well said. nashville_brook Oct 2014 #70

^^^THIS^^^THIS^^^THIS^^^ L0oniX Oct 2014 #97

That's about it. Marr Oct 2014 #141

Amen to that hifiguy Oct 2014 #165

Damn straight. Thanks. riqster Oct 2014 #182

There's always going to be a center treestar Oct 2014 #65

just b/c there IS a center, doesn't mean it will win elections, much less 2016 nashville_brook Oct 2014 #73

Seems to have won elections plenty. wyldwolf Oct 2014 #81

worked out well for Reagan and Bush Jr, both. nashville_brook Oct 2014 #85

Well, I don't consider them centrists but if you do, you just defeated your own argument wyldwolf Oct 2014 #91

pssst -- they ran against centrists (that's why it worked out well for them) nashville_brook Oct 2014 #110

Let's try to think of a time when a "true progressive" ran in a presidential race... wyldwolf Oct 2014 #142

Obama *ran* as a passionate progressive -- governed as a passionless technocrat nashville_brook Oct 2014 #147

No. Obama was quite clear on his policy positions when he ran. You just swooned over his war stance wyldwolf Oct 2014 #148

some may fall into those two camps. do you dismiss them? nashville_brook Oct 2014 #155

you apparently do. Because Obama ran as a centrist on the ideas from his book. wyldwolf Oct 2014 #160

Of course it will treestar Oct 2014 #83

To the left of course. I wish people would quit posting this "center-right" bullshit eridani Oct 2014 #108

precisely -- the centrist doctrine doesn't resonate with Americans. nashville_brook Oct 2014 #111

There is no centrist doctrine treestar Oct 2014 #185

Bingo. As noted well by others "centrism" is a code word. DirkGently Oct 2014 #118

Why is that? treestar Oct 2014 #186

The "center" isn't what "centrists" represent. DirkGently Oct 2014 #188

I see that poll type cited a lot treestar Oct 2014 #184

How can not standing for one`s principles in order to "win" be a win? democrank Oct 2014 #89

He doesn't seem to include the effectiveness of the religious right and cultural elements loyalsister Oct 2014 #90

despite GOP spin, when polled scientifically, Americans are left-leaning... nashville_brook Oct 2014 #125

One thing to keep in mind democrank Oct 2014 #96

wow, my grandmother is now a "radical leftist" nashville_brook Oct 2014 #106

There's no sense of left / right perspective any more. DirkGently Oct 2014 #120

Reread reply #63. democrank Oct 2014 #100

i know, right! nashville_brook Oct 2014 #101

What a load of projection and ideological revisionism. riqster Oct 2014 #128

passionless centrists lose elections: Kerry, Gore, Dukakis, Carter2 -- fact. nashville_brook Oct 2014 #133

Is "passionless" your new subjective term prove your case in your mind? wyldwolf Oct 2014 #146

you like that, huh? it's actually from the article. you should read it. nashville_brook Oct 2014 #150

Again, why hasn't a single left 'progressive' ever even gotten the nomination? wyldwolf Oct 2014 #153

b/c the party hasn't had the stones to stand up for our values -- but that might be changing. nashville_brook Oct 2014 #156

ohhh, it's the party's fault, not the candidate's. LOL. wyldwolf Oct 2014 #161

The party is made up of all of us treestar Oct 2014 #181

When it comes to the Presidency, neither side can get its most passionate treestar Oct 2014 #180

So Obama and Clinton had passion? treestar Oct 2014 #179

Oh yeah, "passionless". Another amorphous term used as if it were quantified. riqster Oct 2014 #187

quantified: two passionate unknowns, bill clinton and barrack obama both win primaries and win nashville_brook Oct 2014 #190

Again, crap. Passionless means whatever you want it to mean at the moment. riqster Oct 2014 #192

That without a central focus will spiral into oblivion seveneyes Oct 2014 #138

Just finished "The Invisible Bridge." hifiguy Oct 2014 #144

i found Reagan's ability to self-delude (in the book) to be terrifying. nashville_brook Oct 2014 #149