Elizabeth Warren 2020

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

38 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

I think she'd be wise to wait until 2024.

Why?  She’s among the most well equipped to run against Trump/Trumpism.

It will be hard for the democrats to fuck up 2020 but I know they’re more than capable.

As much as I would like them to, the Dems are not going to get away with running a centrist democrat.  Trumpism has assaulted everything good about America while the GOP has been an accessory to borderline seditious conspiracy.

The Democrat base of women and minorities are going to be out for fucking blood, and rightfully so because they’ve been violated. They are pissed and they are mobilizing.

The big question is if Trump even runs in 2020.  I don’t see Trump running again but even without Trump, the trauma his administration has inflicted on the majority of the electorate will need atonement.  It will be ugly but necessary IMO.

Edited April 3, 2018 by Hugo Stiglitz

[burntorangebongos 10747]

Cant they find a young person with more centrist views who is qualified enough? 

[workswithseed 2112]

47 minutes ago, burntorangebongos said:

Cant they find a young person with more centrist views who is qualified enough? 

Who's is out there that could be that voice?

[6th Street 6413]

Doug muthafuckin Jones

[Biff Tannen 45691]

4 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Why?  She’s among the most well equipped to run against Trump/Trumpism.

It will be hard for the democrats to fuck up 2020 but I know they’re more than capable.

As much as I would like them to, the Dems are not going to get away with running a centrist democrat.  Trumpism has assaulted everything good about America while the GOP has been an accessory to borderline seditious conspiracy.

The Democrat base of women and minorities are going to be out for fucking blood, and rightfully so because they’ve been violated. They are pissed and they are mobilizing.

The big question is if Trump even runs in 2020.  I don’t see Trump running again but even without Trump, the trauma his administration has inflicted on the majority of the electorate will need atonement.  It will be ugly but necessary IMO.

Because our dumbfuck country isn't ready for it yet.  She's too female and too left, even if she's more than qualified and competent.  The Dems run her and the trumpkins come out to vote and I fear we are in this same dumbfuck situation again.  If they run someone more centrist and more white and more male who can get us back to the status quo, that's what they should do.  Biden would fit this bill.

[Parliament 14260]

3 hours ago, workswithseed said:

Who's is out there that could be that voice?

[77horn 216]

4 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Why?  She’s among the most well equipped to run against Trump/Trumpism.

It will be hard for the democrats to fuck up 2020 but I know they’re more than capable.

As much as I would like them to, the Dems are not going to get away with running a centrist democrat.  Trumpism has assaulted everything good about America while the GOP has been an accessory to borderline seditious conspiracy.

The Democrat base of women and minorities are going to be out for fucking blood, and rightfully so because they’ve been violated. They are pissed and they are mobilizing.

The big question is if Trump even runs in 2020.  I don’t see Trump running again but even without Trump, the trauma his administration has inflicted on the majority of the electorate will need atonement.  It will be ugly but necessary IMO.

I agree that Trump is vulnerable, but I disagree that she is the most well equipped to challenge him.  Old adage in Presidential races....winner is usually the one you'd most like to have a beer with.   With Trump/Hillary, well I'd rather have a beer with Trump.  Same with Warren.  She comes across as angry.  I don't want to have a beer with an angry person. 

Second, she has history against her.  Very few sitting Senators win.  Yeah Obama, but he was a Senator vs a Senator.  Last one before him was Kennedy, before Kennedy...well its been a long time. (And I don't think a sitting congressman has ever won.)  Dems should look to a respected governor or former governor, or held high position in Obama or Clinton White House.

As to your comment on women and minorities, yeah they'll be motivated, but Warren will turn off middle America.  Run Warren (or Bernie) and we may be saddled with Trump until Jan, 2025

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

30 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Because our dumbfuck country isn't ready for it yet.  She's too female and too left, even if she's more than qualified and competent.  The Dems run her and the trumpkins come out to vote and I fear we are in this same dumbfuck situation again.  If they run someone more centrist and more white and more male who can get us back to the status quo, that's what they should do.  Biden would fit this bill.

There’s plenty of time left for Trump to wreck the economy.  The Dems could put up a black man named Hussein with almost zero experience in public office and still win.

Edited April 3, 2018 by Hugo Stiglitz

[Loch Ness Monster 3533]

Biden and Warren are both lame. Lets get another cool President like Obama. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

19 minutes ago, Loch Ness Monster said:

Biden and Warren are both lame. Lets get another cool President like Obama. 

Kamala Harris?  I’d be down.

[6th Street 6413]

28 minutes ago, Loch Ness Monster said:

Biden and Warren are both lame. Lets get another cool President like Obama. 

Doug Jones - took down Alabama 

[Fozzz 152]

Kamala is a cop.  

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

7 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

Kamala is a cop.  

With the amount of criminals we have in office right now, Harris could be cathartic.

She’s also tough on seedy payday lenders 

[Biff Tannen 45691]

1 hour ago, 6th Street said:

Doug Jones - took down Alabama 

He took down Alabama by the skin of his teeth against a fucking racist pedophile.  I don't think the right would go for him against a halfway normal human being.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

6 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

He took down Alabama by the skin of his teeth against a fucking racist pedophile.  I don't think the right would go for him against a halfway normal human being.

For 2020, it will be easier to galvanize the left than attempt to appeal to the right with a moderate.  

Seriously, the right would currently vote for a fucking Russian if he had an (R) next to his name and be happy to do it because fuck Dems.  These people are gone.  It’s tragic and sad but this is the environment.

  The Dems need someone qualified, strong, exciting, and inspires hope.  Someone new that hasn’t run for President before.  It’s going to be another election run on emotions, and that’s okay as long as the winner is in it for the right reasons and isn’t a sellout traitor.

[Biff Tannen 45691]

1 hour ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

For 2020, it will be easier to galvanize the left than attempt to appeal to the right with a moderate.  

Seriously, the right would currently vote for a fucking Russian if he had an (R) next to his name and be happy to do it because fuck Dems.  These people are gone.  It’s tragic and sad but this is the environment.

  The Dems need someone qualified, strong, exciting, and inspires hope.  Someone new that hasn’t run for President before.  It’s going to be another election run on emotions, and that’s okay as long as the winner is in it for the right reasons and isn’t a sellout traitor.

I just don't think swinging the pendulum to the other side is the answer.  If you can get someone moderate that can actually show people that it doesn't have to be purely team politics, the nation as a whole will be better.  All you do with Warren or someone similar is get the other side revved up again for another swing back to the right in 2024.

I do 100% agree with your last sentence though.

Edited April 4, 2018 by Biff Tannen

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

The thing is, the left is actually moderate in American politics.  We don’t really have extremists leftist that run for high office like in Europe.  There is no leftist version of Trump, he’s on an island all to his own. The tea party right has gone so far off the reservation, they’re nihilists and GOP guys say this openly.

Ask yourself, who is the last extreme leftist POTUS? FDR?  How did that work out?  America needs the pendulum swing eventhough it’s really more of a swing to the middle-left.  Eisenhower is not walking through that door.

Moreover, would you describe Obama as an extreme leftist? I wouldn’t eventhough that’s what he was branded as when he came into office but he adapted and moved more to the center as his administration progressed.  

America needs to take the fucking lead in the world again.  We need to invest in education and infrastructure.  We need someone to rein in the American oligarchs from runaway consolidation of wealth and power.  You think fence sitting Doug Jones is going to get that shit done?  I don’t.  A hard nosed bitch like Warren or Harris might be just what America needs.  Trumpkins can go fuck themselves.

Edited April 4, 2018 by Hugo Stiglitz

[F250 28777]

11 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

The thing is, the left is actually moderate in American politics.  We don’t really have extremists leftist that run for high office like in Europe.  There is no leftist version of Trump, he’s on an island all to his own. The tea party right has gone so far off the reservation, they’re nihilists and GOP guys say this openly.

Ask yourself, who is the last extreme leftist POTUS? FDR?  How did that work out?  America needs the pendulum swing eventhough it’s really more of a swing to the middle-left.  Eisenhower is not walking through that door.

Moreover, would you describe Obama as an extreme leftist? I wouldn’t eventhough that’s what he was branded as when he came into office but he adapted and moved more to the center as his administration progressed.  

America needs to take the fucking lead in the world again.  We need to invest in education and infrastructure.  We need someone to rein in the American oligarchs from runaway consolidation of wealth and power.  You think fence sitting Doug Jones is going to get that shit done?  I don’t.  A hard nosed bitch like Warren or Harris might be just what America needs.  Trumpkins can go fuck themselves.

But Warren's economic populism is pretty fucking similar to Trumpism.

[Fozzz 152]

lmao 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

9 minutes ago, F250 said:

But Warren's economic populism is pretty fucking similar to Trumpism.

How?

[Biff Tannen 45691]

1 hour ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

The thing is, the left is actually moderate in American politics.  We don’t really have extremists leftist that run for high office like in Europe.  There is no leftist version of Trump, he’s on an island all to his own. The tea party right has gone so far off the reservation, they’re nihilists and GOP guys say this openly.

Ask yourself, who is the last extreme leftist POTUS? FDR?  How did that work out?  America needs the pendulum swing eventhough it’s really more of a swing to the middle-left.  Eisenhower is not walking through that door.

Moreover, would you describe Obama as an extreme leftist? I wouldn’t eventhough that’s what he was branded as when he came into office but he adapted and moved more to the center as his administration progressed.  

America needs to take the fucking lead in the world again.  We need to invest in education and infrastructure.  We need someone to rein in the American oligarchs from runaway consolidation of wealth and power.  You think fence sitting Doug Jones is going to get that shit done?  I don’t.  A hard nosed bitch like Warren or Harris might be just what America needs.  Trumpkins can go fuck themselves.

We agree, but you are seemingly missing the point that these assclowns are going to label anyone that isn't super centrist as an extreme leftist and it works on those dumbasses.  No, Obama obviously wasn't an extreme leftist, but the right made their minions believe he was.  We aren't dealing with rational people and before you tell me that there are plenty of rational people on the right that aren't his base, every day they are silent makes me less confident in that.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

There’s still a lot of time for things to develop before 2020.  However, I think most objective people are past the point of determining if Trump will be a successful president.  

The unknown is just how bad will he be?  This will be the deciding factor when it comes to 2020.  At the moment a stabilizing leader very is appealing but after a few more years of this shit, I think a dramatic realignment might be not only in order, but desirable from the majority of the voting population.

[F250 28777]

3 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

How?

Both favor protectionism such as the anti-TPP stance, critical of NAFTA, supportive of Tarrifs, Pro-labor, anti-trust rhetoric, etc... The approach may differ but the recipe is the same.

 

 

[lemonlime 5503]

14 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

We agree, but you are seemingly missing the point that these assclowns are going to label anyone that isn't super centrist as an extreme leftist and it works on those dumbasses.  No, Obama obviously wasn't an extreme leftist, but the right made their minions believe he was.  We aren't dealing with rational people and before you tell me that there are plenty of rational people on the right that aren't his base, every day they are silent makes me less confident in that.

If they're going to name whoever it is as an extreme leftist, then why worry about it?  It doesn't matter who the dem nominee is, the right will villify that person as a communist.  The dems shouldn't choose their nominee based on the labels that the right will throw at the nominee.  That label will be thrown down no matter what.

[berlinerbaer 678]

On 4/2/2018 at 1:29 PM, F250 said:

A populist message is very effective when it's coupled with xenophobia and FUD and Trump has all of that in spades. This is the one thing Trump has been consistent on during his Presidency. I don't think Warren will be able to out populist Trump.

In 2016, sure. But Trump will have muddled through 3+ years of Oval office buffoonery by 2020. His populist message will not be what it once was. 

On 4/2/2018 at 11:49 AM, 6th Street said:

Bernie energized his base in a way Warren will never be able to do. 

She is an old, uninspiring candidate that will do little to get people to the polls. 

Give me my man Doug Jones over her any day. 

LOL, Jesus, no.

Liz Warren fires up the base. Her base is Bernie's base PLUS a fair portion of the center-left. Among the two, only one openly calls himself a democratic socialist, and that ain't Warren.

She would pull more support from rank-and-file Dems in a general election against Trump than Bernie would. Nobody would sit that one out. The only question mark would be the D to R crossovers, but that would apply with any Dem candidate.

4 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

For 2020, it will be easier to galvanize the left than attempt to appeal to the right with a moderate.  

Seriously, the right would currently vote for a fucking Russian if he had an (R) next to his name and be happy to do it because fuck Dems.  These people are gone.  It’s tragic and sad but this is the environment.

  The Dems need someone qualified, strong, exciting, and inspires hope.  Someone new that hasn’t run for President before.  It’s going to be another election run on emotions, and that’s okay as long as the winner is in it for the right reasons and isn’t a sellout traitor.

This right here. A centrist would make a great VP candidate, but they aren't likely to win the nomination. Instead, aside from Biden, who can run on name recognition, the 2020 Dem nominee will meet one of two criteria:

1) Be a political shape-shifter, someone who is less tied to policy positions and able to change them as need be, ala Kirsten Gilibrand.

2) Be a bona-fide lefty with some crossover appeal. Warren and Sanders both fit this.

[berlinerbaer 678]

7 hours ago, 77horn said:

I agree that Trump is vulnerable, but I disagree that she is the most well equipped to challenge him.  Old adage in Presidential races....winner is usually the one you'd most like to have a beer with.   With Trump/Hillary, well I'd rather have a beer with Trump.  Same with Warren.  She comes across as angry.  I don't want to have a beer with an angry person. 

Second, she has history against her.  Very few sitting Senators win.  Yeah Obama, but he was a Senator vs a Senator.  Last one before him was Kennedy, before Kennedy...well its been a long time. (And I don't think a sitting congressman has ever won.)  Dems should look to a respected governor or former governor, or held high position in Obama or Clinton White House.

As to your comment on women and minorities, yeah they'll be motivated, but Warren will turn off middle America.  Run Warren (or Bernie) and we may be saddled with Trump until Jan, 2025

Trump doesn't drink. The con artist strikes again.

[Buzzrock 14922]

She always sounds so exasperated, like she’s at her wit’s end. She needs to learn to modulate her messaging.

[RPM 26322]

On 4/2/2018 at 7:18 PM, XR4ticlone said:

Why are you posting pics of Trump Gary Johnson voters?

[Sawbonz 27578]

If trump is on the ticket in 2020 I fully expect several of you people to have lost your minds

 

I think warren would have a pretty good chance against any of the foreseeable republican candidates. 

[6th Street 6413]

8 hours ago, berlinerbaer said:

In 2016, sure. But Trump will have muddled through 3+ years of Oval office buffoonery by 2020. His populist message will not be what it once was. 

LOL, Jesus, no.

Liz Warren fires up the base. Her base is Bernie's base PLUS a fair portion of the center-left. Among the two, only one openly calls himself a democratic socialist, and that ain't Warren.

She would pull more support from rank-and-file Dems in a general election against Trump than Bernie would. Nobody would sit that one out. The only question mark would be the D to R crossovers, but that would apply with any Dem candidate.

This right here. A centrist would make a great VP candidate, but they aren't likely to win the nomination. Instead, aside from Biden, who can run on name recognition, the 2020 Dem nominee will meet one of two criteria:

1) Be a political shape-shifter, someone who is less tied to policy positions and able to change them as need be, ala Kirsten Gilibrand.

2) Be a bona-fide lefty with some crossover appeal. Warren and Sanders both fit this.

Warren is not likeable, nor does she identify with the Midwest. 

[troph 24851]

Sanders, Warren & Trump are either all populists or speak populism in their speeches. That got trump elected and almost got sanders the nomination. I think populism and a backlash against white supremacy and sexism is what will bring the dems out to vote. Warren has it. A old white guy centrist dem doesn’t.

 

 

 

[atomheartbevo 89727]

16 minutes ago, 6th Street said:

Warren is not likeable, nor does she identify with the Midwest. 

She’s not Hillary so she doesn’t fire up the right as much. That’s important, because Trump is going to fire up the left even more than 2016  

Trump needed Hillary to win, and she still won the popular vote. 

[6th Street 6413]

47 minutes ago, troph said:

Sanders, Warren & Trump are either all populists or speak populism in their speeches. That got trump elected and almost got sanders the nomination. I think populism and a backlash against white supremacy and sexism is what will bring the dems out to vote. Warren has it. A old white guy centrist dem doesn’t.

 

 

 

Great, then find someone younger that brings the blue collar union vote. Warren will not get it due to her age and general distaste for Mass senators. Could potentially be Dukakis 2.0

[thrillhammer 684]

1 hour ago, 6th Street said:

Warren is not likeable, nor does she identify with the Midwest. 

maybe not to you, but she is likable.  i will give you that she will have problems in the midwest.  she has a stuffy, east coast air about her and will need to put some flannel on.

in your opinion, is trump likable?

 

[troph 24851]

Warren comes across as tough and consumer and ordinary folk friendly. I think the people that typically vote dem but switched will like her. She’s basically a female version of Bernie.

[6th Street 6413]

12 minutes ago, thrillhammer said:

maybe not to you, but she is likable.  i will give you that she will have problems in the midwest.  she has a stuffy, east coast air about her and will need to put some flannel on.

in your opinion, is trump likable?

 

I mean I live in the Midwest, and Trump filled these simpletons with hopes and dreams of manufacturing jobs coming back, reneging on NAFTA, etc. So pretty obvious why he cleaned up in MI, WI, OH, and PA. 

A pro union southern Democrat or Midwest guy would swing these voters back to D. Warren is viewed as an out of touch east coast establishment liberal that doesn't care for the working class.

[burntorangebongos 10747]

17 hours ago, Biff Tannen said:

Because our dumbfuck country isn't ready for it yet.  She's too female and too left, even if she's more than qualified and competent.  The Dems run her and the trumpkins come out to vote and I fear we are in this same dumbfuck situation again.  If they run someone more centrist and more white and more male who can get us back to the status quo, that's what they should do.  Biden would fit this bill.

He is too old! The youth came out for Bernie but that was because he was offering free college education and college loan debt forgiveness. And other socialist BS. Is there a Govenor not tied to the Clintons who will be no older than 65 during the primaries? I don't think a non-socialist old is going to attract and motivate the young people. 

[RPM 26322]

57 minutes ago, 6th Street said:

I mean I live in the Midwest, and Trump filled these simpletons with hopes and dreams of manufacturing jobs coming back, reneging on NAFTA, etc. So pretty obvious why he cleaned up in MI, WI, OH, and PA. 

A pro union southern Democrat or Midwest guy would swing these voters back to D. Warren is viewed as an out of touch east coast establishment liberal that doesn't care for the working class.

I live in Texas. That's about as blue collar east coast elitist hating as it gets. I view Warren as more in touch with working class people than anyone in the republican leadership. I've seen her throw down with big financial criminals and demand stiffer penalties for their crimes. I've seen her fight for consumer rights. You know who that supports? The working class.

Out of touch? Not at all.

[F250 28777]

55 minutes ago, RPM said:

I live in Texas. That's about as blue collar east coast elitist hating as it gets. I view Warren as more in touch with working class people than anyone in the republican leadership. I've seen her throw down with big financial criminals and demand stiffer penalties for their crimes. I've seen her fight for consumer rights. You know who that supports? The working class.

Out of touch? Not at all.

Living in Texas is about as comparable to the rust belt as living in San Diego is to living in Uzbekistan. People in Ohio, PA, MI, do not think like us at all. The mindset is so fucking different up there. I got stuck working in Canton for a while, the people reminded me of citizens of some Soviet bloc country.

 

 

[RPM 26322]

I have walked among them. It's an entirely different kind of planet, altogether. Doesn't changer Warren's support for the working class.

Edited April 4, 2018 by RPM

[RPM 26322]

East coast elitist! 

[6th Street 6413]

11 minutes ago, longhornmatt said:

Donald Trump is the hero of half the working class voters in the country because he “talks like them”.  Donald Trump.  I would humbly suggest actual policy isn’t what makes the working class support a populist.

Elizabeth Warren is a radical populist who would naturally appeal to the proletariat if you ask a bunch of lawyers who took her bankruptcy law class or tracked her opinions on Dodd Frank.  To many in the actual working class, she’s Ms. Harvard Professor who can’t say anything simple without (a) phrasing it in slimy lawyer/politician legalese, and (b) acting like she’s better and smarter than you.

Populism is about emotions and impulse, not digesting the snooty Harvard egghead’s campaign themes that are derived from her secured transactions and consumer law thesis.

This is what I was getting it - it is very much an "us" versus "them" issue for Midwest swing state voters.

Warren falls in the latter camp - East Coast liberal, Harvard educated lawyer, who shares nothing in common with the base. Compare that to a Bill "I feel your pain" Clinton - average guy from Arkansas who bootstrapped himself up.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

21 minutes ago, 6th Street said:

This is what I was getting it - it is very much an "us" versus "them" issue for Midwest swing state voters.

Warren falls in the latter camp - East Coast liberal, Harvard educated lawyer, who shares nothing in common with the base. Compare that to a Bill "I feel your pain" Clinton - average guy from Arkansas who bootstrapped himself up.

She got her undergraduate degree from the University of Houston and her law degree from Rutgers.  She was never part of the east coast elite establishment.

[bad_teammate 13215]

Warren/Bryce 2020

[Buzzrock 14922]

Warren comes across as tough and consumer and ordinary folk friendly. I think the people that typically vote dem but switched will like her. She’s basically a female version of Bernie.

I disagree with this. I like Bernie and would have voted for him, but I don’t feel the same about EW. At least with Bernie I believed that he believed all his crazy ideas. EW seems like much more of a standard issue political animal.

It would go a long way if she would just come out and say “My grandma used to tell me we were part Native American and I believed her. I have no idea if it’s true.” Instead she does that non-answer thing that politicians do and it’s a turn off.

[EuroHorn 3265]

Read her smoke signals. “No new taxes “

[RPM 26322]

21 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

She got her undergraduate degree from the University of Houston and her law degree from Rutgers.  She was never part of the east coast elite establishment.

Cougar High elitist!

[F250 28777]

50 minutes ago, longhornmatt said:

Donald Trump is the hero of half the working class voters in the country because he “talks like them”.  Donald Trump.  I would humbly suggest actual policy isn’t what makes the working class support a populist.

Elizabeth Warren is a radical populist who would naturally appeal to the proletariat if you ask a bunch of lawyers who took her bankruptcy law class or tracked her opinions on Dodd Frank.  To many in the actual working class, she’s Ms. Harvard Professor who can’t say anything simple without (a) phrasing it in slimy lawyer/politician legalese, and (b) acting like she’s better and smarter than you.

Populism is about emotions and impulse, not digesting the snooty Harvard egghead’s campaign themes that are derived from her secured transactions and consumer law thesis.

There is something to this comment. These people don't seem to live in reality, at least not the reality we live in. I am not sure if they actually believe their jobs are coming back but they do live their lives as if the manufacturing plants will light back up one day. They want to believe, someone just needs to give them a reason.

On a side note, the saddest thing I ever saw in Ohio was a real life lock-out. It seemed so anachronistic for people to sit outside a factory that was shutdown so that they could get partial payments from the union until their employer decided to open up the gates. In Texas we would just move on to another job.

[Pig Bellmont 8719]

The right seems desperate for a new boogeyman 

[77horn 216]

4 minutes ago, Buzzrock said:

It would go a long way if she would just come out and say “My grandma used to tell me we were part Native American and I believed her. I have no idea if it’s true.” Instead she does that non-answer thing that politicians do and it’s a turn off.

Out of curiosity, I did a little genealogy research on this a few weeks ago.  From what I understand, the claim is based upon the second wife of her Xth great-grandfather being Native American.  However, EW descends from the first wife of the Xth great-grandfather.  There is no hard evidence about the 2nd wife, but even if the story is true, EW has zero Native American ancestry.   She can't bring herself to tell the whole story, so she's been sticking to the defending her "family story", while refusing to take a DNA test.