2020 Democratic candidate Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) confirmed on Monday night that she and progressive rival Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) had disagreed on whether a female candidate could win the presidency in 2020.
This is why we can’t have nice things, like the Presidency.
I believe her.
“It’s sad that, three weeks before the Iowa caucus and a year after that private conversation, staff who weren’t in the room are lying about what happened.”
So now will he be calling Warren a liar? That seems to be where this is headed.
We are in a little bit of worse shape than that.
Last night, on both Maddow and O’Donnell’s shows, extensive conversations were engaged in by (1) Maddow and O’Donnnell, (2) panelists and (3) United States members of both chambers of Congress…
on the topic of ongoing efforts by Russia to award the 2020 election to Donald Trump.
I urge those who have not seen those programs last night to access them.
There are many facets to this story, but one thing stood out: cheating creates confidence.
The woman who goes into a beauty contest who has been told, “You will win this…it’s already been arranged” has a different mind set and set of actions than a contestant in an honest contest.
And Bernie or Warren share the same target on their backs for Russian arrows (along with Biden, Pete, and each and every Democrat running for President).
The idiotic thing about all this is they don’t contradict each other. Also this is a stupid topic to highlight before a debate and the primary. No possible upside.
If discobot wants to do something better with its time, it might focus on Susan Collins’ handwringing or why Cory Gardner remains in hiding.
Well Bernie won’t have that target on his back unless he is the nominee, currently Russia normally helps him out since he divides the Dems.
The bigger issue here, isn’t what was said or not said about the chances of a woman winning in 2020.
Its about why was she having this meeting with Sanders in the first place. It was a strategy meeting, where they were planning on how to run in some sort of alliance in the same primary. And once you come to that conclusion, that colors a whole lot of her behavior on the campaign trail in the debates in a very different light. “I’m with Bernie” takes on a very different meaning.
Now certainly, campaigns can and do make alliance during the course of a long primary. We will see it play out in numerous ways particularly in caucus states on election nights. But its a look that doesn’t jive with Warren’s “authenticity/populist” play. And I am extremely skeptical at this point, that she has the political chops to shrug it off and make it go away. Quite the contrary, I suspect she will turn it into an even bigger mess.
The only thing Bernie can do is call Warren a liar, because if he admits he said this or something close to it, he’s admitting he’s a misogynist. Hillary Clinton beat him in 2016. She got 3 mill more votes then Trump. She should be POTUS today. Bernie’s inability to acknowledge that is a clear sign that he is a misogynist. It’s not that Bernie doesn’t think a woman can win the Presidency. It’s that he doesn’t believe a woman SHOULD be POTUS. For all those folks who bought the ‘rigged primary’ theme, that was Bernie being both a sexist and a racist. He couldn’t handle losing to a woman and was particularly aggrieved that black voters made the difference for HRC.
However, this also looks bad for Warren. How could she say “I’m with Bernie” so many times when he revealed who he was to her in that meeting? She made a tacit non-aggression pact with him so that his bros would take out the competition and she would benefit as the unity candidate. That’s not being an ally. She made a mistake ethically and it didn’t help her politically. She probably can’t get much traction out of this as she’s already on the bubble in IA and can’t ever seem to focus on Trump (even when she was riding high in the polls).
Sometimes the first reaction is the best one. When, many months ago, the TPM audience was treated to the news that Sanders was gearing up for a 2020 run, hundreds of posters exploded in their own version of consternation…an overwhelming majority of them, myself included.
To your point:
“The Burisma hack is a cookie-cutter G.R.U. campaign,” Mr. Falkowitz said. “Russian hackers, as sophisticated as they are, also tend to be lazy. They use what works. And in this, they were successful.”
Meanwhile Joe Biden is just sitting in the corner laughing.
It seems worthwhile to note in this space that Elizabeth Warren ran decidedly behind Barack Obama in Massachusetts in 2012 (60.7% vs. 53.7%)
Shut up. Shut up NOW. Who CARES who said what? It doesn’t mean he ‘hates’ women. It’s doesn’t mean he doesn’t ‘support’ you. Let’s be BETTER than Trump and talk SUBSTANCE!
Politicians need to work with as many individuals as possible, and to entertain as many viewpoints as possible. I don’t see this as ‘unbecoming’ of a politician to want to forge an alliance of some sort.
It’s what successful politicians do.
Warren tried to not comment on this, but Sanders forced her hand.
This is ridiculous. Russia isn’t looking for evidence. They’re looking to plant evidence.
You know, I hadn’t thought about that, but it sure is plausible. Gulp.
Politicians. Alliances. It’s not hard to understand.
All this makes me want to cry. There are too many people building cults of personality rather than focusing on winning. This only serves trump. Sorry work all around.