Elizabeth Warren 2020

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

 

[Bama Chick 28,596]

Yes Elizabeth!!!

[bad_teammate 13,557]

Elizabeth Warren is a great storyteller with a touching, human, and relatable story.

She's awesome.

 

[Hank Kingsley 21,790]

13 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

Excellent. Buttigieg was talking about this a while ago as well. Glad it's being amplified.  I think they'd be an amazing ticket. 

 

Edited April 6, 2019 by Hank Kingsley

[bad_teammate 13,557]

Warren is great with crowds. I think her entire campaign is going to be a slow build and I really hope she becomes a force to be reckoned with.

 

[Bruh Man 3,160]

What the hell kind of people fret over the Indian stuff during the age of Trump???

I hope you're right about her campaign being a slow build. She needs a smaller field and more media coverage.

 

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

She keeps pumping out the policy.

 

[Js1 87,194]

I have such a policy boner for EW 

[wildcat09 29,594]

Warren is great and a shitload of Dems need to get out of the "I'd definitely support her if I thought she was electable" bullshit mindframe. She'd be polling much better if so many Dems didn't assume she can't play to working class whites. Anyone who listens to her talk to working class whites for more than five minutes knows that's bullshit.

[bad_teammate 13,557]

Pundits are killing us. It's pathetic.

[BradInATX 9,208]

2 hours ago, wildcat09 said:

Warren is great and a shitload of Dems need to get out of the "I'd definitely support her if I thought she was electable" bullshit mindframe. She'd be polling much better if so many Dems didn't assume she can't play to working class whites. Anyone who listens to her talk to working class whites for more than five minutes knows that's bullshit.

She'll have her chance to prove you right in Iowa, Nevada, Ohio, etc.

[bad_teammate 13,557]

Only trust candidates who will fight for the workers.

 

[Patrick Bateman 3,981]

This is an interesting read.  Frankly, I think it's a mistake to try and bury it or walk around it.  I'd counsel she should embrace it and talk about her intellectual evolution and the accounts, experiences and stories which had her rethink her political stances.  I think showing the evolution and why she fights so hard could be extremely compelling and a strength.  She needs something because her campaign is sort of stalling.  Also a bit surprised nobody on this site talks about her time in Austin.

[Biff Tannen 46,173]

 

3 minutes ago, Patrick Bateman said:

I'd counsel she should embrace it and talk about her intellectual evolution and the accounts, experiences and stories which had her rethink her political stances.  I think showing the evolution and why she fights so hard could be extremely compelling and a strength

It could also show some people of other parties that they too can change.  Lol, I almost kept a straight face while typing that.

[TwiceHorn 32,084]

I like this from that:

Quote

Some friends and colleagues say Warren became radicalized, equating her change to a religious experience, to being born again. “She really did have a ‘Road to Damascus’ conversion when she saw the bankrupt consumers really were suffering—forced into bankruptcy by illness, firing or divorce—and not predators,” Johnson says. Other friends argue Warren’s shift has been more gradual, and that she is not the extremist her opponents have sought to portray her as. “It drives me crazy when she’s described as a radical left-winger. She moved from being moderately conservative to being moderately liberal,” says Warren’s co-author and longtime collaborator Jay Westbrook. “When you look at consumer debt and what happens to consumers in America, you begin to think the capitalist machine is out of line.”

Her solutions are concrete and drive right at the heart of problems.  They seem radical because, like Westbrook says, she knows exactly where capitalism buries the bodies.

[bad_teammate 13,557]

She's good, folks.

[Patrick Bateman 3,981]

She certainly has become good at identifying charlatans....

 

[Onboard 2.0 9,083]

She is the only candidate on the democrat side that does anything for me currently because she does seem to have an actual plan for doing something that's for the middle class folks.  She isn't far left of the political spectrum, I think she recognizes capitalism is one of our strengths, and doesn't want to dramatically alter that basic foundation of the country.  Leveling the playing field seems to be her objective.  Makjing Wall Street accountable would make a shit load of people happy.

The problem is her message will go right over the heads of less educated folks.  She still has the Indian issue, and it is because she doubled down on something that was pretty clearly debunked, unless she now says it's South American Indian blood coursing thru her little pinky toe.

 

OBSTACLES FOR HER IN THE DEMOCRAT PARTY:

White

Part of the inside the beltway good old Boy network perception 

North eastern upper class (certainly perception)

Not in the pockets of big donors

 

She should take a page out of the Margaret Thatcher book of how to win elections, and influence enemies.

[Hank Scorpio 17,924]

27 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

 

 

She should take a page out of the Margaret Thatcher book 

You should take a page out of the fuck-back-off-to-whatever-hole-you-crawled-out-of book. 

[Patrick Bateman 3,981]

4 minutes ago, Hank Scorpio said:

You should take a page out of the fuck-back-off-to-whatever-hole-you-crawled-out-of book. 

Is that available on Amazon?

[Onboard 2.0 9,083]

26 minutes ago, Hank Scorpio said:

You should take a page out of the fuck-back-off-to-whatever-hole-you-crawled-out-of book. 

Gosh yer quite the penis head aren't you (he said knowingly).

[GSU&UT 1,799]

Holy shit at comparing Warren to Thatcher, good god.

[Bama Chick 28,596]

An old person with a vagina who wears “frumpy” suits in primary colors; they’re all the same.

[XYZ 2,154]

22 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

Pundits are killing us. It's pathetic.

“us”?

[Onboard 2.0 9,083]

1 hour ago, GSU&UT said:

Holy shit at comparing Warren to Thatcher, good god.

Where did I make a comparison ?  I said she needs to take a page out of her book. Warren doesn't come across as very assertive, or strong.  She needs some backbone, a strong speaking voice, presence.  All things Mrs.Thatcher cultivated to her benefit, and things Mrs.Warren at present is lacking.  Hillary had a strong presence, it was one of her only legal skills.

[Bama Chick 28,596]

lol THIS is a “strong speaking voice”?

I’m an Anglophile, so I get it - everything sounds better in a British accent.

But that is not a woman with a strong speaking voice.

Elizabeth Warren has an objectively stronger speaking voice and the same “presence” - whatever the fuck that even means - as Ole Maggie.

Your criticisms are just the sort of nebulous garbage that get heaped on women candidates.

Presence, strong speaking voice, likability = vague put downs that boil down too “I think she has too much vagina to hold all that power”.

[Onboard 2.0 9,083]

6 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

lol THIS is a “strong speaking voice”?
 

 

I’m an Anglophile, so I get it - everything sounds better in a British accent.

But that is not a woman with a strong speaking voice.

 

 

 

 

 

Elizabeth Warren has an objectively stronger speaking voice and the same “presence” - whatever the fuck that even means - as Ole Maggie.

Your criticisms are just the sort of nebulous garbage that get heaped on women candidates.

Presence, strong speaking voice, likability = vague put downs that boil down too “I think she has too much vagina to hold all that power”.

 

You don't know much about Thatcher. She used to have a high pitched voice.  She hired a voice coach to help her modify her speech patterns and timber, this was all before she become MP.  60 MINUTES did a story on her several years ago and covered that very issue.

 

And I am not the first to talk about Mrs. warrens voice. It's been a topic on many news outlets from CNN, NPR, etc.

Edited April 12, 2019 by Onboard 2.0

[Bama Chick 28,596]

Yeah exactly proving my point about the bullshittery heaped on women candidates.

And when speaking of voices, it’s timbre.

And let’s not pretend if word leaked Elizabeth Warren hired a voice coach, Trump and his merry gang of fools would be all over the place having a fucking hootenanny about her fakery and other assorted bullshit.

I know plenty about Margaret Thatcher. I also know when the substance of what someone says is more agreeable to your personal beliefs it’s a whole lot easier to project positive attributes on their style and manner.

[David Dennison 19,556]

Let's all remember the incontrovertible fact that Margaret Thatcher was a horrible cunt. 

[Onboard 2.0 9,083]

1 minute ago, Bama Chick said:

Yeah exactly proving my point about the bullshittery heaped on women candidates.

And when speaking of voices, it’s timbre.

And let’s not pretend if word leaked Elizabeth Warren hired a voice coach, Trump and his merry gang of fools would be all over the place having a fucking hootenanny about her fakery and other assorted bullshit.

I know plenty about Margaret Thatcher. I also know when the substance of what someone says is more agreeable to your personal beliefs it’s a whole lot easier to project positive attributes on their style and manner.

Voice and timbre (excuse me) affect men and women. A male candidate with a high pitched voice would suffer from the same issue.  It's what TV has done to campaigning and politics.

[Fudge Nuggets 19,459]

On 4/4/2019 at 8:11 PM, kevwun said:

She needs to be talking about breaking up AT&T.  It really needs to be done, it would be easier than any of the companies she has mentioned and there would be less push back.

Didn't we do that already back in the early 80's?  Not saying it shouldn't be done again (it should), but it's proof at how ineffective everything is.

[Fudge Nuggets 19,459]

Elizabeth Warren is the President we need which is exactly why she won't win.  Still, she's got my vote as of today.

[Fudge Nuggets 19,459]

On 4/5/2019 at 3:55 PM, Bama Chick said:

Yes Elizabeth!!!

I would like to see her bow up and finally do something about all this shit other than just talk about it.  She's my favorite by a long margin but I think she needs to just go toe to toe with dotard right fucking now.  He can call her Pocahontas or whatever for the next six months and it will be out of the system by the time crunch time comes.

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

The very reason why the voice shit gets heaped on female candidates, and affects votes, is sexism.   And the notion of saying a woman doesn't have a "strong speaking voice" because of pitch, as if it is an objective fact rather than a social onstruct, is itself sexist.

And how did the two highest-pitched male voices fare in the primary and general? 

I remember a brief election news cycle about a study of the female-style words Trump used, but he was never harangued about it for an extended period of time, and I had to search around even to find this story about his relatively high-pitched voice. 

The bottom line is that we all know that Warren will be running into the headwinds of sexism.  That doesn't mean there is any actual problem with her voice.  The problem is with a segment of voters that she'll have to win in spite of.   Game on. 

[Bama Chick 28,596]

Voice and timbre (excuse me) affect men and women. A male candidate with a high pitched voice would suffer from the same issue.  It's what TV has done to campaigning and politics.

What’s wrong with a high pitched voice coming from a man?

OH RIGHT - IT SOUNDS LIKE A WOMAN!

Don’t even pretend the garbage about what female candidates wear and their hair styles and their likability and vague nonsense about their voices is something applied to male candidates.

Fuck, Sarah Palin shares none of my values and beliefs and she’s a stone cold idiot but the media absolutely went overboard about her hair and glasses and her hiring of a stylist.

The media absolutely applies dumb and different standards and coverage to female candidates. And the voters follow along.

And don’t even with the “it’s because of television” - if a woman showed up to rallies and speeches and interviews as disheveled and rumpled as Bernie Sanders and looking like they hadn’t combed their hair in days, there would be story upon story about it. Asking if she’s fit to hold office and questioning her competency.

And not one peep about the one with a dick who always looks like he just rolled out of bed after a three day bender.

Deflect and deny it all you want. I get that it doesn’t feel good to realize you and the media are applying a sexist standard but I’m not going to continue to read these kinds of comments and not call it out for what it is.

Nebulous statements based on how a candidate makes you feel disguised as actual criticism to mask the fact that the reason that candidate makes you feel that way is based on what’s in between her legs and not what’s in between her ears.

[Onboard 2.0 9,083]

Just now, Bama Chick said:

 

What’s wrong with a high pitched voice coming from a man?

OH RIGHT - IT SOUNDS LIKE A WOMAN!

Don’t even pretend the garbage about what female candidates wear and their hair styles and their likability and vague nonsense about their voices is something applied to male candidates.

Fuck, Sarah Palin shares none of my values and beliefs and she’s a stone cold idiot but the media absolutely went overboard about her hair and glasses and her hiring of a stylist.

The media absolutely applies dumb and different standards and coverage to female candidates. And the voters follow along.

And don’t even with the “it’s because of television” - if a woman showed up to rallies and speeches and interviews as disheveled and rumpled as Bernie Sanders and looking like they hadn’t combed their hair in days, there would be story upon story about it. Asking if she’s fit to hold office and questioning her competency.

And not one peep about the one with a dick who always looks like he just rolled out of bed after a three day bender.

Deflect and deny it all you want. I get that it doesn’t feel good to realize you and the media are applying a sexist standard but I’m not going to continue to read these kinds of comments and not call it out for what it is.

Nebulous statements based on how a candidate makes you feel disguised as actual criticism to mask the fact that the reason that candidate makes you feel that way is based on what’s in between her legs and not what’s in between her ears.

 

 

[Fudge Nuggets 19,459]

6 hours ago, Patrick Bateman said:

This is an interesting read.  Frankly, I think it's a mistake to try and bury it or walk around it.  I'd counsel she should embrace it and talk about her intellectual evolution and the accounts, experiences and stories which had her rethink her political stances.  I think showing the evolution and why she fights so hard could be extremely compelling and a strength.  She needs something because her campaign is sort of stalling.  Also a bit surprised nobody on this site talks about her time in Austin.

There are a shit ton of us that were "conservative" back in the late 80's to mid 90's that have long ago besmirched that failed ideology.

[Fudge Nuggets 19,459]

4 hours ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

OBSTACLES FOR HER IN THE DEMOCRAT PARTY:

White

Part of the inside the beltway good old Boy network perception 

North eastern upper class (certainly perception)

Not in the pockets of big donors

 

She should take a page out of the Margaret Thatcher book of how to win elections, and influence enemies.

And she has a vagina.  You left that out of your obstacles list.

[Fudge Nuggets 19,459]

1 hour ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

You don't know much about Thatcher. She used to have a high pitched voice.  She hired a voice coach to help her modify her speech patterns and timber, this was all before she become MP.  60 MINUTES did a story on her several years ago and covered that very issue.

 

And I am not the first to talk about Mrs. warrens voice. It's been a topic on many news outlets from CNN, NPR, etc.

So she was a fraud.  OK, got it.  Makes sense that you also support dotard.

[Onboard 2.0 9,083]

2 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

And she has a vagina.  You left that out of your obstacles list.

That's not an issue in the democrat party, as I stated clearly. 

[Fudge Nuggets 19,459]

4 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

That's not an issue in the democrat party, as I stated clearly. 

Point taken, my bad on that one.

You're still a cunt though.  But no hard feelings.

[Onboard 2.0 9,083]

Just now, Fudge Nuggets said:

Point taken, my bad on that one.

You're still a cunt though.  But no hard feelings.

Nah I'm a dick, but yer a raging cunt.

[bolverk 30,349]

20 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

 

What’s wrong with a high pitched voice coming from a man?

OH RIGHT - IT SOUNDS LIKE A WOMAN!

Don’t even pretend the garbage about what female candidates wear and their hair styles and their likability and vague nonsense about their voices is something applied to male candidates.

Fuck, Sarah Palin shares none of my values and beliefs and she’s a stone cold idiot but the media absolutely went overboard about her hair and glasses and her hiring of a stylist.

The media absolutely applies dumb and different standards and coverage to female candidates. And the voters follow along.

And don’t even with the “it’s because of television” - if a woman showed up to rallies and speeches and interviews as disheveled and rumpled as Bernie Sanders and looking like they hadn’t combed their hair in days, there would be story upon story about it. Asking if she’s fit to hold office and questioning her competency.

And not one peep about the one with a dick who always looks like he just rolled out of bed after a three day bender.

Deflect and deny it all you want. I get that it doesn’t feel good to realize you and the media are applying a sexist standard but I’m not going to continue to read these kinds of comments and not call it out for what it is.

Nebulous statements based on how a candidate makes you feel disguised as actual criticism to mask the fact that the reason that candidate makes you feel that way is based on what’s in between her legs and not what’s in between her ears.

 

It takes a whole lot of effort to retrain yourself after being raised with the indoctrination of certain cultural standards. I know, it sucks and I often have to catch myself. I'll also freely admit that I cringe a bit when she raises her voice but I don't think it's the pitch. It's the nasality that bothers me, which bothers me with both genders.

All that said, she's still my number one at this point. I like her, like, a lot.

Edited April 12, 2019 by bolverk

[Fudge Nuggets 19,459]

11 minutes ago, bolverk said:

It's the nasality that bothers me

Too bad the 40% staunch dotard supporters don't share this same feeling.  Good grief, I can't listen to that guy for more than 30 seconds so I resort to reading a transcript... and well let's just say that doesn't do him any favors either.

[bolverk 30,349]

1 minute ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

Too bad the 40% staunch dotard supporters don't share this same feeling.  Good grief, I can't listen to that guy for more than 30 seconds so I resort to reading a transcript... and well let's just say that doesn't do him any favors either.

Gagreed. It's fucking hard to listen to him. Not only is it nasal but he also speaks off-key in B flat.

[Bama Chick 28,596]

Listen, we’re all petty and flawed beings.

I - and just about every other woman in this country - have had the same conditioning and women can be THE WORST when it comes to other women.

And my number one choice is not one of the plenty qualified women running. So this is not me white knighting for Warren. It’s me white knighting for all women candidates - democrats and republicans.

(Except Tulsi, she’s too nutty)

I’m just going be bitchily bleating away about this because it’s SO internalized in most people and it’s just flat out unfair.

Either run dumb shitty stories about Cory Booker’s clothes or Bernie’s unwashed shirts or Beto’s ever present blue button down or stop doing it to only the women.

And I only get riled up and point it out like 1/10th of the time that I see that kind of coverage reflected in the words used and conversation here about the women candidates.

All I’m saying is, check yourself.

I do think some men that post here are just sexist shitbags in general - it’s easy to see that reflected in the threads they post on outside of this board.

(If you’ve ever posted a sneaky picture of a stranger minding her own business at the airport or grocery store just to show you happened to be in the proximity of an attractive woman, I think you’re a creep.)

But I don’t think most men on here are sexist or would discriminate or harass, much less assault a woman. But (and there’s always a but) even the most feminist of men apply sexist double standards to women, especially women with or seeking power in a traditionally male arena.

Ya know how I know that?

Because women do it to other women too.

[Fudge Nuggets 19,459]

8 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

I do think some men that post here are just sexist shitbags in general - it’s easy to see that reflected in the threads they post on outside of this board.

You should have said this part first.

Edited April 13, 2019 by Fudge Nuggets

[bolverk 30,349]

To be clear, I don't have a problem with you pointing it out. There's absolutely a double standard. I was only pointing out that it's difficult to resist your social conditioning, but I should've continued with my thought by also stating the obvious that it puts her and other female candidates at an immediate disadvantage because few are willing to resist those cultural norms.

It requires effort and many Americans, not only won't make it, but also won't admit it.

[bad_teammate 13,557]

I'm not reading any of this but I get the impression that some people don't like her in which case I will fight you in a Spec's parking lot.

DM me 4 details

[bolverk 30,349]

1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

I'm not reading any of this but I get the impression that some people don't like her in which case I will fight you in a Spec's parking lot.

DM me 4 details

The impression you blithely intuit by use of prejudicial assumptions is the polar opposite of what is going on here. You really should read before commenting. Otherwise, you risk coming across as an arrogant ass.