Discussion for article #230939
“Liberal Orgs Go Apocalyptic…”
Apoplectic? Or are they calling for the Rapture?
7 Likes
TPM goes hyperbolic?
7 Likes
TPM obviously hasn’t had a good FireBagger vs. Obamabot fight in a while.
11 Likes
Apocalypticlickbait.
8 Likes
… except in the comments section.
4 Likes
Gotta love Elizabeth!
2 Likes
End of Times baby!! Come in at ya!
1 Like
I know Randy, say it - leave it to the adults. LOL!
“Who Do You Hate?” vs. Liberal Heroine Elizabeth Warren. Here’s the thing: I hope you get your wish, TPM, and Sen. Warren wins the nomination and the general (seems doubtful but we’re hoping) because then I’ll get to read every last article bemoaning how President Warren: a) lost all stamina when faced with consequential opposition; and b) unaccountably moved to the middle when she actually had to run the country. That would be better than this steady stream of tarted up “MORE problems with Hillary while once again Elizabeth Warren is awesome.”
2 Likes
“Warren and one or two liberal Senators…”
Sigh. Why are there not dozens of Dem Senators opposing another Wall Streeter to the administration. Why do she and Bernie have to do all the heavy lifting?
14 Likes
A certain segment of the Democratic party is quite pleased that Warren isn’t running because they get to parade her around as The Perfect In Every Way Candidate. She will be like a living breathing projection screen. Whatever you have issue with Hilary about…Elizabeth will totally get it.
This is however going to be a crucial juncture for her political career, however. She either runs for President or she stays in the Senate until she retires or dies. There will be no “Just wait till 4 (or 8, even worse) more years” for Elizabeth. Her age pretty much makes this a now or never decision.
4 Likes
You know, I’d be much more interested in an article that discusses the policy fight being fought between Warren and The Third Way than internecine warfare that seems more in keeping with politico.
Since Josh recently suggested that there’s no reasonable hope for any economic improvement for the masses, I’d think it would be even more critical for those of us who identify as Democrats to fight like heck to preserve the only institutions that keep a vast majority of our seniors out of abject poverty. In the WSJ Article, the Third Way clearly disagrees.
Once upon a time, when a Republican was President, TPM fought like hell to preserve Social Security by doing exactly what these Progressive organizations are doing, calling up Democratic members of the House and Senate and forcing them to go on record to preserve social security. It’s the only hope we seem to have. Shame them into doing the right thing rather than catering to their monied over lords.
7 Likes
I don’t know a single Warren supporter that feels this way. We like Elizabeth because of things like this:
There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own. Nobody. … You moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for; you hired workers the rest of us paid to educate; you were safe in your factory because of police forces and fire forces that the rest of us paid for. You didn’t have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory, and hire someone to protect against this, because of the work the rest of us did. Now look, you built a factory and it turned into something terrific, or a great idea. God bless. Keep a big hunk of it. But part of the underlying social contract is, you take a hunk of that and pay forward for the next kid who comes along.
You tell them, Elizabeth!
8 Likes
Indeedy. Am I misreading the headline, or is it deliberately misleading? It sounds like liberal groups are against Warren and not against the nominee. That’s not what the article reports.
How about “Warren explodes treasury nominee”? It has the drama of explosion and the clickbait with the suggestion that she has murdered him. Maybe add the word “creamy” also.
6 Likes
First, Elizabeth Warren’s rhetoric and voting record are pretty standard for a liberal Democratic in 2014. How different is that quote from “You didn’t build that”? She’s from a liberal state and her seat is safe. Second, it’s easy to breathe only fire when you aren’t responsible for running the entire country. When heroes become presidents, they have to do things like soften their rhetoric and compromise with their foes and take half a loaf. (See President Obama and every other president.) Right now, whether you love Elizabeth Warren and think she should be president or love her but think she should stay in the Senate, it’s easy to imagine or pretend to imagine that she’ll only say things like the above quote and always act accordingly. I guarantee if she actually became president, she would either become more moderate or serve a single term. The only way for her to stay “pure” is to remain in the Senate.
I am sure that the writers and editors at TPM are fully aware of this, unless they’ve somehow wiped the last eight years from their memory banks. And I’m so tired of reading TPM pretend (I assume) that Elizabeth Warren would be the ideal liberal president that I actually hope she’ll win – because their incessant silliness is hard to tolerate.
I admire the enthusiasm Martin-- and respect Sen Warren immensely.
But from all I’ve read and heard the good Senator has no interest in running for POTUS.
I would imagine that if she changes her mind-- she needs to do so soon and assemble an exploratory committee.
One of your recent posts describes HRC as a poor campaigner.
I respectfully disagree.
The only major campaign she’s been in-- and lost-- is to possibly the greatest campaigner and political orator to run in the last half-century.
Wiki distills the campaign down to:
Following the final primaries on June 3, 2008, Obama had gained enough delegates to become the presumptive nominee.[282] In a speech before her supporters on June 7, Clinton ended her campaign and endorsed Obama.[283] By campaign’s end, Clinton had won 1,640 pledged delegates to Obama’s 1,763;[284] at the time of the clinching, Clinton had 286 superdelegates to Obama’s 395,[285] with those numbers widening to 256 versus 438 once Obama was acknowledged the winner.[284] Clinton and Obama each received over 17 million votes during the nomination process[nb 11] with both breaking the previous record.[286] Clinton was the first woman to run in the primary or caucus of every state, and she eclipsed, by a very wide margin, Congresswoman Shirley Chisholm’s 1972 marks for most votes garnered and delegates won by a woman.
I do not see a campaigner of BHO’s strata on either the left or right entering the equation.
I don’t see the RWNJs staying complacent during the ® primaries–
with the outcome being the eventual winner bloodied beyond repair.
Not spouting any kind of conventional wisdom here-- just my opinion.
I could be wrong.
jw1
1 Like
She has said , repeatedly, “I am not running.”
But it is looking more and more that she is talking about the moment, not the future:
“No, I am not running for president,” she said. "It is absolutely critical right now that we focus on the 2014 elections."Couric interview with Warren
Then there was the People interview just before the election when she was asked if she is running:
“I don’t think so…If there’s any lesson I’ve learned in the last five years, it’s don’t be so sure about what lies ahead. There are amazing doors that could open. Right now I’m focused on figuring out what else I can do from this spot.”
She looks like she’s got all of her feelers out and many of her actions -including the recent heavy campaigning and fund raising- indicate she is already running.
I do have my fears about her age. Of course Hillary is two years older still.
I like what Eugene Robinson says:
She’s not running for president apparently because everyone assumes the nomination is Clinton’s. But everyone was making that same assumption eight years ago, and we know what happened. If the choice is between inspiration and inevitability, Warren may be forced to change her plans.
5 Likes
OMG. No. We’re not going with a newbie again.
1 Like
Let’s see: Elizabeth Warren does the right things and says the right things, but none of that counts because… um, … because she’s from Massachusettes? … because she’s a Senator?.. because she’s Elizabeth Warren?
Why doesn’t it count? Why doesn’t it matter? Just because.
1 Like