This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

The case for Elizabeth Warren

Go to page : 1, 2  Next

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 2]

1The case for Elizabeth Warren Empty The case for Elizabeth Warren on 1/17/2020, 10:12 pm

Floridatexan

Floridatexan

The second article in a Vox series making the best case for the leading Democratic candidates.

By Ezra Klein@ezraklein Jan 15, 2020, 6:30am EST

Vox writers are making the best case for the leading Democratic candidates — defined as those polling above 10 percent in national averages. Vox does not endorse individual candidates. Our case for Bernie Sanders can be found here.

"Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s most viral debate moments feature blistering rebuttals to challengers who dare emphasize presidential constraint or political limits. “I don’t understand why anybody goes to all the trouble of running for president of the United States just to talk about what we really can’t do and shouldn’t fight for,” she snapped at former Rep. John Delaney in the July debate. “I don’t get it.”

But the next Democratic president will be limited by Senate Republicans, as well as a political system that amplifies the voices of the rich and the connected. Warren offers the best shot at a transformative presidency even if those limits remain in place, and she’s got the clearest plan for attacking those limits head-on.

The case for Warren over her competitors is threefold. She understands America’s problems better than anyone else in the field, in part because it’s her research and analysis that now forms the base for much of the policy debate. She understands how to focus and wield the powers of the regulatory state better than anyone else, because she’s actually done it, and because it’s core to her political project. And she is, far and away, the candidate with the clearest plan for making ambitious governance possible again..."

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/1/15/21054083/elizabeth-warren-2020-democratic-primary

2The case for Elizabeth Warren Empty Re: The case for Elizabeth Warren on 2/1/2020, 1:42 pm

othershoe1030

othershoe1030
Lately, I've been getting my political fix on Twitter and of course, TV. that being said to explain my absence from this forum. I can't help but return and just voice my observations about the upcoming Democratic primary.

Nearly which ever Dem I see makes a great argument as to why they would be the best nominee in November. Any of the leading contenders would be better than 45. They have good experience and positions, saving health care, protecting the environment, our institutions, etc. etc.

I fear Bernie's supporters in that if he is not successful they likely will stay home in a snit. This is not acceptable. Some candidates have more support in the black community than others. They are largely backing Biden at present.

The number one goal for us is to defeat 45, period. At least on that we can agree. I am a bit distressed to hear the yammering about Bloomberg "buying the nomination". I think it would be a case of cutting off our nose to spite our face" if Bloomberg were dismissed out of hand Just Because he's a successful businessman. All (fill in the blank) are not created equal. There are despicable billionaires like the Koch brothers and then there are liberal democrats like the Kennedy's and Bloomberg. Mike could run as a clean, normal yet exciting candidate whose supported some very good positions largely held by democrats. I think he would shred 45 in all sorts of ways. 45 couldn't get away with any BS. Mike knows him and knows how to handle him. He would not owe anyone anything after he was elected. I think he would scare the socks off of the baby POTUS.

I'm just saying, hearing Bernie whine about 'here the billionaires go again, buying the nomination/election". With the amount of money it takes to run these days, coupled with the green light 45 has just been given to call on foreign nations for help both with money and black opps, I say we need all the help we can get. This is not the time to turn down a candidate just because he's successful. I mean really.

I also like Amy, and will vote Blue no matter who, and really am not all in for Mike. I'm just saying he may deserve a very serious second look and not be tossed out because he's sitting on a self-made pile of money.

3The case for Elizabeth Warren Empty Re: The case for Elizabeth Warren on 2/1/2020, 6:51 pm

Telstar

Telstar
Hey if it comes down to it, why not Mike? Mike's daily barrage of attack adds against IPOTUS surely help to melt support for the orange cancer and if it helps Mike, good. Keep at it Mike. sunny

4The case for Elizabeth Warren Empty Re: The case for Elizabeth Warren on 2/1/2020, 10:11 pm

othershoe1030

othershoe1030
cheers cheers cheers

On Tuesday, senators representing 153 million Americans outvoted senators representing 168 million Americans.


https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2020/01/gop-senators-representing-a-minority-of-americans-are-preventing-a-fair-impeachment-trial/

November!

I called Senator Wicker's office (MS) to tell them again that I was in favor of the Senate hearing witnesses. I told the woman on the phone that the truth would all come out sooner or later, that it was futile to try and cover up all the misdeeds because the press was hard at uncovering everything. She agreed. She said some people were advocating for the Democratic Party to be abolished. She said they used to be Democrats (1940's or 50's?) Dixie-crats, I'm thinking.

I asked her if she liked his Tweets. No, she did not. I asked her if she'd seen pictures of the section of border wall that was blown over on the Mexico-California border? No, she had not. I asked her if she thought his constant "misrepresentations" were a good thing. She said she thought that was just the way he talked, exaggerating things. I wished her a good day. I may call some time soon and ask her about some breaking news that she's likely not heard about yet.

5The case for Elizabeth Warren Empty Re: The case for Elizabeth Warren on 2/2/2020, 1:33 am

Telstar

Telstar

6The case for Elizabeth Warren Empty Re: The case for Elizabeth Warren on 2/2/2020, 1:48 am

RealLindaL


othershoe1030 wrote:Lately, I've been getting my political fix on Twitter and of course, TV. that being said to explain my absence from this forum. I can't help but return and just voice my observations about the upcoming Democratic primary.

Nearly which ever Dem I see makes a great argument as to why they would be the best nominee in November. Any of the leading contenders would be better than 45. They have good experience and positions, saving health care, protecting the environment, our institutions, etc. etc.

I fear Bernie's supporters in that if he is not successful they likely will stay home in a snit. This is not acceptable. Some candidates have more support in the black community than others. They are largely backing Biden at present.

The number one goal for us is to defeat 45, period. At least on that we can agree. I am a bit distressed to hear the yammering about Bloomberg "buying the nomination". I think it would be a case of cutting off our nose to spite our face" if Bloomberg were dismissed out of hand Just Because he's a successful businessman. All (fill in the blank) are not created equal. There are despicable billionaires like the Koch brothers and then there are liberal democrats like the Kennedy's and Bloomberg. Mike could run as a clean, normal yet exciting candidate whose supported some very good positions largely held by democrats. I think he would shred 45 in all sorts of ways. 45 couldn't get away with any BS. Mike knows him and knows how to handle him. He would not owe anyone anything after he was elected. I think he would scare the socks off of the baby POTUS.

I'm just saying, hearing Bernie whine about 'here the billionaires go again, buying the nomination/election". With the amount of money it takes to run these days, coupled with the green light 45 has just been given to call on foreign nations for help both with money and black opps, I say we need all the help we can get. This is not the time to turn down a candidate just because he's successful. I mean really.

I also like Amy, and will vote Blue no matter who, and really am not all in for Mike. I'm just saying he may deserve a very serious second look and not be tossed out because he's sitting on a self-made pile of money.

cheers   cheers   cheers   cheers   I'm with you 1,000%!!

7The case for Elizabeth Warren Empty Re: The case for Elizabeth Warren on 2/2/2020, 1:51 am

RealLindaL


othershoe1030 wrote:November!

I called Senator Wicker's office (MS) to tell them again that I was in favor of the Senate hearing witnesses. I told the woman on the phone that the truth would all come out sooner or later, that it was futile to try and cover up all the misdeeds because the press was hard at uncovering everything. She agreed. She said some people were advocating for the Democratic Party to be abolished. She said they used to be Democrats (1940's or 50's?) Dixie-crats, I'm thinking.

I asked her if she liked his Tweets. No, she did not. I asked her if she'd seen pictures of the section of border wall that was blown over on the Mexico-California border? No, she had not. I asked her if she thought his constant "misrepresentations" were a good thing. She said she thought that was just the way he talked, exaggerating things. I wished her a good day. I may call some time soon and ask her about some breaking news that she's likely not heard about yet.

Kudos to you, other!  Keep up the good work!

8The case for Elizabeth Warren Empty Re: The case for Elizabeth Warren on 2/2/2020, 12:22 pm

othershoe1030

othershoe1030
Another day, another batch of data. Bret Hume on Fox New Sunday, just expressed the idea that not many voters were paying attention to the impeachment process and that it wouldn't matter much in November. He is ignoring the fact that 45 will never miss an opportunity to crow about being "acquitted" the same way he crows about his "landslide" victory in the electoral college. Rubbing the nation's nose in the Senate vote to not remove him will serve as salt in our wounds and to fire up dems.

Michael Moore, a Bernie surrogate, referred to the RNC type democrats as "corporate democrats". He points out they changed the rules to allow Bloomberg but had the old rules in place to get rid of Castro and Booker. He also pointed out an undeniable fact regarding the post primary general election: Anyone who does not support the Democratic candidate is solidly in the Trump Camp. I have a signed copy of Bernie's book: The Speech. I agree with a lot of his ideas. I'm not afraid that he'd take the nation into  real socialist territory but that it would be so easy for the R's to scream Socialist that many voters would hesitate to vote for him, vote for Trump or stay home, putting them functionally in the Trump Camp.

We are in political quicksand. Roger McNamee has written a book called Zucked about the scourge of social media's influence on the electorate. He said there is 10 times the amount of activity aimed at tearing apart the dems to weaken us. I can only hope that there will be a steady and heavy stream of unrelenting reporting, court findings and exposures of all 45's self-dealing and mafia-like (apologies to the mafia) deals that the voters will throw him out.


9The case for Elizabeth Warren Empty Re: The case for Elizabeth Warren on 2/2/2020, 4:13 pm

RealLindaL


Quoting/responding to othershoe:

"Rubbing the nation's nose in the Senate vote to not remove him will serve as salt in our wounds and to fire up dems."

Good point, and that thought may help some of us take deep breaths when listening to Trump's bragging diatribes over the coming months (although, frankly, I can rarely stand even to hear the man's voice any more, and may have to skip watching the State of the Union address for the first time this year because Trump makes me sick).

"Michael Moore, a Bernie surrogate, referred to the RNC type democrats as 'corporate democrats'. He points out they changed the rules to allow Bloomberg but had the old rules in place to get rid of Castro and Booker."

Don't know how Moore can read the DNC's mind on Castro and Booker, but I'm actually very glad they're providing Bloomberg a possible way in.

"He also pointed out an undeniable fact regarding the post primary general election: Anyone who does not support the Democratic candidate is solidly in the Trump Camp."

That's the bottom line, of course.

"I have a signed copy of Bernie's book: The Speech. I agree with a lot of his ideas. I'm not afraid that he'd take the nation into  real socialist territory but that it would be so easy for the R's to scream Socialist that many voters would hesitate to vote for him, vote for Trump or stay home, putting them functionally in the Trump Camp."

Absolutely so, and the same problem applies to Warren.  Either one will result in those endless screams of socialism and TRUMP WILL WIN, as I (along with countless others) have been warning for months.

"I can only hope that there will be a steady and heavy stream of unrelenting reporting, court findings and exposures of all 45's self-dealing and mafia-like (apologies to the mafia) deals that the voters will throw him out."

Long shot, but may it be so in November.  Don't want to see another impeachment proceeding in 2021 unless it's unavoidable, and in any event hate the thought of years of Pence.

10The case for Elizabeth Warren Empty Re: The case for Elizabeth Warren on 2/2/2020, 5:49 pm

Telstar

Telstar
Trump and his minions will scream socialism no matter who wins the Dem nomination, and that includes Bloomberg. Remember Come November and vote BLUE across the board. Vote IPOTUS out along with his gang of treasonous republican swine. Twisted Evil

11The case for Elizabeth Warren Empty Re: The case for Elizabeth Warren on 2/3/2020, 1:35 am

RealLindaL


Telstar wrote:Trump and his minions will scream socialism no matter who wins the Dem nomination, and that includes Bloomberg. Remember Come November and vote BLUE across the board. Vote IPOTUS out along with his gang of treasonous republican swine. Twisted Evil

I seriously doubt Trump would fool most people by calling Bloomberg a socialist, though of course he could and would try.

It goes without saying that anyone, including the dog catcher or the garbage collector, would be a better choice than Donald Trump and company.

12The case for Elizabeth Warren Empty Re: The case for Elizabeth Warren on 2/3/2020, 11:27 am

zsomething


Bernie remains a plague. I'm afraid that whether he gets the nomination or not, his toxic cult-following participation's going to wreck us, one way or another. Either we stupidly give him the nomination and a wave of "October surprises" sink him (the Republicans are sitting on a huge ammo dump of videos, etc. that'd doom Bernie), or he doesn't get it and his crazy fanbase can't accept it, think they've been "robbed," and fuck things up... the way they did last time. We have Trump now because of Bernie. We'll likely get him again for the same reason. I mean, I'll vote for Bernie if I have to -- I'll vote for anybody just to keep Trump out -- but I'm partisan to the bone. The average voter's not gonna be that rabid. They won't pick the better of two bad choices... they'll just stay home. And when turnout is low, Republicans win.

As for Warren, yeah, they'll call her a "Socialist," the same as they will Biden, Buttigeig, Klobachar, Bloomberg, or whoever else the Dems win. The conservative base has no idea what "socialism" even means, for the most part, they've just been trained that it's "bad" and they'll go against it because they do what they're told. But, being called a "socialist" by the right-wing is a lot different than calling yourself a socialist. Most independents and moderate voters know that Republicans call everybody that, and there's a "boy who cried wolf" factor going in spades. But Bernie wouldn't benefit from that, since he claims that mantle outright. Him they'd call a flat-out Communist... and that would likely stick, since Bernie's had Commie flags on his office wall and buddied up with Soviets a lot during the Cold War. There's even footage on YouTube of a drunk, naked Bernie having a sing-along with 'em. You know if they let that leak out of their war-chest early, they've got much worse stuff.

So, I'm not overly worried about Warren being called a "Socialist." It'll be a factor that she'll have to combat, sure, but I think she's up to it. Warren has a chance of winning. Bernie, though? Nope. He could win the primary, but if he's our nominee, we're going to get a Dukakis/Mondale map out of it. I'll vote for it, I'll tell everybody I know to vote for him, but, it'll be futile.

13The case for Elizabeth Warren Empty Re: The case for Elizabeth Warren on 2/20/2020, 4:43 pm

Telstar

Telstar
Warren endorsed by Black Lives Matter co-founder's Black to the Future Action Fund

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) was endorsed for president by Black Lives Matter co-founder Alicia Garza's Black to the Future Action Fund on Thursday.

Garza posted on Twitter that her political organization and think tank would back Warren in its first presidential endorsement.

“At @BlackToTheFutu1, we’re all in for @ewarren,” she posted, linking to an interview with Axios.

"Elizabeth has a clear, progressive plan to change the policies and practices that leave Black communities out and keep us falling behind," Garza added in a statement.



https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/483840-warren-endorsed-by-black-lives-matter-co-founders-black-to-the-future

14The case for Elizabeth Warren Empty Re: The case for Elizabeth Warren on 2/20/2020, 5:53 pm

RealLindaL


zsomething wrote:Warren has a chance of winning.  Bernie, though?  Nope.  He could win the primary, but if he's our nominee, we're going to get a Dukakis/Mondale map out of it.  I'll vote for it, I'll tell everybody I know to vote for him, but, it'll be futile.  

Unusual as it is, z, I have to respectfully disagree with you on this one, as I haven't seen anything to convince me that either Warren or Sanders has a chance in hell of defeating Trump. Ain't gonna happen. Seems to me that you of all people might recognize that the huge contingency consisting of Independents and moderate Republicans will be required to beat Trump, and neither of these candidates will capture that vote. My opinion only, of course, and I'm sticking with it, for all the good it will do in this f'd up race.

15The case for Elizabeth Warren Empty Re: The case for Elizabeth Warren on 2/20/2020, 6:32 pm

Telstar

Telstar

16The case for Elizabeth Warren Empty Re: The case for Elizabeth Warren on 2/21/2020, 10:02 am

zsomething


RealLindaL wrote:
zsomething wrote:Warren has a chance of winning.  Bernie, though?  Nope.  He could win the primary, but if he's our nominee, we're going to get a Dukakis/Mondale map out of it.  I'll vote for it, I'll tell everybody I know to vote for him, but, it'll be futile.  

Unusual as it is, z, I have to respectfully disagree with you on this one, as I haven't seen anything to convince me that either Warren or Sanders has a chance in hell of defeating Trump.  Ain't gonna happen.  Seems to me that you of all people might recognize that the huge contingency consisting of Independents and moderate Republicans will be required to beat Trump, and neither of these candidates will capture that vote.  My opinion only, of course, and I'm sticking with it, for all the good it will do in this f'd up race.

I can understand the concern, and I could be wrong, but I think Warren has a chance at broader appeal. Even though she has a lot of the same policy plans as Bernie, she's not as insanely inflexible as he is. And she does have methods of implementing them that aren't just some vague "revolution," which I think is just a word Bernie got intrigued with when he was younger and doesn't really understand (politicians don't lead "revolutions" -- they're the target of them). Now, I don't think all of Warren's plans will work, but she is much more of a wonk and sees the limitations. Bernie seems to just think that "wishcraft" will make things happen if he can get everybody to want it hard enough. And his followers are gonna fold their tents and wander off back to their Playstations as soon as they figure out he expects real work out of 'em.

I don't know if you watched her town hall last night, but Warren even took shots at the "revolution" plan Bernie has, saying people don't know who'll be left out of it, and how vague and shaky it all is.

I definitely see some drawbacks to her, but the more I watch her, the more I think she just might be able to overcome them. She's very adaptable, where Bernie is rigid, and can build consensus where Bernie's got a proven record of nothin'-doin' in that respect. She gets it that she has to work with the system to do things. Bernie somehow thinks he can destroy the system and replace it with like-minded copies of himself who will be able to just "demand" things without having any kind of "or else" to enforce the demands.

Anyway, I don't think your concerns are unfounded... but, I do think she has a chance to win 'em over, where Bernie won't. Bernie will have a very solid base of cult-minded true believers, but they won't be nearly enough to flip anyone else. Their antagonistic weirdness will likely even do the opposite. Warren, though, is more welcoming and open to other ideas. She has more of a chance to sway some people, and also a much stronger womens' vote, while bringing in Bernie's loonietoon base... who mostly seem set to vote-for-nobody-but-Bernie, like they did last time, which is why we ended up with Trump.

17The case for Elizabeth Warren Empty Re: The case for Elizabeth Warren on 2/21/2020, 3:28 pm

othershoe1030

othershoe1030
The one thing we Dems agree on is that Trump has to be defeated. I have not yet settled on any one candidate, which is hard to believe. I agree with what I see here about Warren being a realistic and very good candidate. Who could imagine that she was able to get the Consumer Protection Bureau created?! That was such a huge accomplishment.

Amy too, is accomplished, having passed 100 bills in her time in the Senate. Bernie, on the other hand, I heard this morning, has only passed 2 or 3 bills in his 30 years in office!

I too think we'd end up with a nearly totally red map on election night if Sanders were the nominee. However, I think I must be missing something. Remember prior to the 2016 election when polls gave Hillary an 80% chance of winning? Michael Moore went on talk shows with his hair on fire warning everyone about getting out and voting because Trump had a good chance of winning. Now Moore is backing Bernie.

I don't get it. What does he see that we're missing?

18The case for Elizabeth Warren Empty Re: The case for Elizabeth Warren on 2/21/2020, 5:02 pm

zsomething


othershoe1030 wrote:The one thing we Dems agree on is that Trump has to be defeated. I have not yet settled on any one candidate, which is hard to believe. I agree with what I see here about Warren being a realistic and very good candidate. Who could imagine that she was able to get the Consumer Protection Bureau created?! That was such a huge accomplishment.

Amy too, is accomplished, having passed 100 bills in her time in the Senate. Bernie, on the other hand, I heard this morning, has only passed 2 or 3 bills in his 30 years in office!

I too think we'd end up with a nearly totally red map on election night if Sanders were the nominee. However, I think I must be missing something. Remember prior to the 2016 election when polls gave Hillary an 80% chance of winning? Michael Moore went on talk shows with his hair on fire warning everyone about getting out and voting because Trump had a good chance of winning. Now Moore is backing Bernie.

I don't get it. What does he see that we're missing?

Michael Moore is an old hippie, and he's always going to back any other hippie he sees. I think that's the appeal of Bernie to a lot of people: in my experience with them, a lot of them are old hippies nostalgic for their youth and wanting to see one of their own win. Last time there were people on Daily Kos posting all these "back to the garden" things, weeping because Bernie reminded them of the time they vomited in their girlfriend's hair at Woodstock or some such silliness. He's a nostalgia act.

Then there are a bunch of kids now who feel like they missed out on something by being born too late for it, and they wanna be hippies now, and Bernie seems to be their ticket to that. It's not his policies so much, because he's got almost no actual plans -- they just dream about some "revolution" because they think he'll do it for them. They don't realize that "revolution" is going to require them doing all the real work and Bernie sitting back and Jim-Jones-ing himself all the credit.

Michael Moore has totally bought into that. Moore is one of these guys who promotes a Democrat... and then the second they win he declares them a "secret Republican" and starts pretending he never backed them, because he's terrified of actually having responsibility for something. He's like a libertarian that way -- not wanting to back anybody who'll actually win and then be revealed as non-perfect, or, worse, proving that his ideas aren't actually valid. That's why Moore turned on Hillary early -- he thought she'd win and he didn't want to be seen as an ally when she did something not-"progressive"-enough. Moore always took shots at Obama, too.

Really, the more Moore is ignored, the better off the world is.

As for Bernie's bills in the senate, well, if you want a post office re-named, then Bernie's yer dude. If you want anything actually meaningful done, that requires concensus-building and compromise, you're better off with a Klobuchar or Biden or Warren. Bernie's good at passing things so unimportant that nobody bothers to object to them. If he's gotta get people to join him on something... nope. People like that he's "unyeilding in his principles," but effective politicians know that sometimes it's better to bend a little and get 75% of something you want (which you can build on more later) than it is to be rigid and get zero. O' course, the Bernie fans consider 'em "sell-outs," but they have no clue how things actually work.

19The case for Elizabeth Warren Empty Re: The case for Elizabeth Warren on 2/22/2020, 2:13 am

RealLindaL


zsomething wrote:Really, the more Moore is ignored, the better off the world is.

Spot on as ever.

20The case for Elizabeth Warren Empty Re: The case for Elizabeth Warren on 2/22/2020, 5:13 am

Telstar

Telstar

21The case for Elizabeth Warren Empty Re: The case for Elizabeth Warren on 2/22/2020, 12:00 pm

othershoe1030

othershoe1030
Z, I hope your analysis of Moore is correct. It concerns me still, that in the late days of the 2016 campaign he sensed something among his working class connections that led him to believe that the message Trump was aiming at them was catching hold.

Yesterday we learned that a month ago the Sander's campaign was briefed by Intelligence people that the Russians were intervening on his behalf, helping in some way to give his candidacy a boost. It is obvious that this would also help DJT, since Bernie would be the easiest to beat.

In order to win in 2020 the Dems need a strong centrist who will defend the pre-existing conditions protections of the ACA, while offering an attractive public option for those who want it. Bernie's destruction of private insurance companies is a non-starter for those swing voters we hope to win over. Wasn't it said during the fight for the ACA that 20% of the GDP was related to healthcare expenditures? That was one reason Obama chose not to disrupt such a significant sector.

I'm glad the Culinary Union in Nevada didn't endorse anyone. Looking forward to seeing how the caucuses turn out today. We could use some clarity about now.

22The case for Elizabeth Warren Empty Re: The case for Elizabeth Warren on 2/22/2020, 12:09 pm

Telstar

Telstar
othershoe1030 wrote:Z, I hope your analysis of Moore is correct. It concerns me still, that in the late days of the 2016 campaign he sensed something among his working class connections that led him to believe that the message Trump was aiming at them was catching hold.

Yesterday we learned that a month ago the Sander's campaign was briefed by Intelligence people that the Russians were intervening on his behalf, helping in some way to give his candidacy a boost. It is obvious that this would also help DJT, since Bernie would be the easiest to beat.

In order to win in 2020 the Dems need a strong centrist who will defend the pre-existing conditions protections of the ACA, while offering an attractive public option for those who want it. Bernie's destruction of private insurance companies is a non-starter for those swing voters we hope to win over. Wasn't it said during the fight for the ACA that 20% of the GDP was related to healthcare expenditures? That was one reason Obama chose not to disrupt such a significant sector.

I'm glad the Culinary Union in Nevada didn't endorse anyone. Looking forward to seeing how the caucuses turn out today. We could use some clarity about now.



Yes I think we could use some clarity now but I'm afraid we may have to wait until Super Tuesday before we get it.

23The case for Elizabeth Warren Empty Re: The case for Elizabeth Warren on 2/22/2020, 12:50 pm

othershoe1030

othershoe1030
Telstar wrote:
othershoe1030 wrote:Z, I hope your analysis of Moore is correct. It concerns me still, that in the late days of the 2016 campaign he sensed something among his working class connections that led him to believe that the message Trump was aiming at them was catching hold.

Yesterday we learned that a month ago the Sander's campaign was briefed by Intelligence people that the Russians were intervening on his behalf, helping in some way to give his candidacy a boost. It is obvious that this would also help DJT, since Bernie would be the easiest to beat.

In order to win in 2020 the Dems need a strong centrist who will defend the pre-existing conditions protections of the ACA, while offering an attractive public option for those who want it. Bernie's destruction of private insurance companies is a non-starter for those swing voters we hope to win over. Wasn't it said during the fight for the ACA that 20% of the GDP was related to healthcare expenditures? That was one reason Obama chose not to disrupt such a significant sector.

I'm glad the Culinary Union in Nevada didn't endorse anyone. Looking forward to seeing how the caucuses turn out today. We could use some clarity about now.



Yes I think we could use some clarity now but I'm afraid we may have to wait until Super Tuesday before we get it.

Exactly. Deciding on who to support has been more of a process of elimination than of positive attraction. Those I didn't like, or who had dropped out of the race leaving the remainders. I'm about over Mayor Pete. Amy got him right saying he'd memorized talking points (that were appealing and well thought out) but hadn't dealt with politics on a national scale. A valid point.

Biden seems too out of touch, constantly making references to past events. It is a matter of organization and survival at this point.

The talking heads got me worried about Bernie hitting a point of no return by earning enough delegates to make him unstoppable. That is worrisome.

Also of concern is DJT's approval numbers that are going UP! From what I'm seeing, this administration is dismantling the institutional state by firing experienced career people and replacing them with cronies of the president. This doesn't seem to bother enough people?!

I guess it's down to Warren, Bloomberg and Amy at this point? Who am I forgetting?

Floridatexan

Floridatexan
Elizabeth Warren is the only candidate who can stop Bernie Sanders (if that's really your goal)
.
This year, our nominee is going to be a progressive. Bernie Sanders is the clear front-runner right now. Even though only 1.7% of delegates have been assigned, Sanders has leads in upcoming states (including delegate-rich California). Things can change! But as of now, things are looking good for him to amass a strong plurality of delegates.

Elizabeth Warren, on the other hand, is off to a woeful start. So why is she the best positioned candidate to give Sanders a run for his money? This poll says it all:
The case for Elizabeth Warren Candidate-match-ups-01


In national polling, the Sanders-plus-Warren numbers have hovered in the mid-to-high 40s all cycle. Here is the freshest of national polls, CBS/YouGov:

Sanders 28%
Warren 19%
Biden 17%
Bloomberg 13%
Buttigieg 10%
Klobuchar 5%
Steyer 2%
Gabbard 1%
If Warren gets knocked out of the race, Sanders will pick up the lion’s share of her support, putting him into the 40s. Then he just needs to pick up a few points here and there from the rest of the field and the undecided, and he’s got half of the vote, game over. The center-left can consolidate all it wants, but it wouldn’t matter.

That's why Warren does better against Sanders in those two-candidate matchups.

This is a good thing for ideological progressives—heads we win, tails we win. And it’s a real challenge to everyone else panicking about Bernie at this very moment. Do you hasten Sanders’ victory by trying to consolidate around subpar candidates like Biden, Buttigieg, Klobuchar, or Bloomberg? Or do you bite the bullet and go with a candidate who yes, sits on the party's left flank, but has a track record of achievements and pragmatism, and one who better reflects the core base of the Democratic Party?

It’s literally support Warren, or Bernie wins.

*************



(Read the comments.)

************

25The case for Elizabeth Warren Empty Re: The case for Elizabeth Warren on 2/24/2020, 4:22 pm

PkrBum

PkrBum
"Achievements and pragmatism"?

You must have a different definition for those words than Webster.

Sponsored content


Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 2]

Go to page : 1, 2  Next

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum