If Elizabeth Warren does run, she would surprise skeptics

[n2doc]

By Robert Kuttner

TAKE Elizabeth Warren at her word that she doesn’t want to run for president in 2016 and is unlikely to become a candidate any time soon. But circumstances could propel her into the race. Hillary Clinton’s commanding lead in the polls conceals multiple vulnerabilities. If Clinton seriously stumbles, the pressure on Warren to run will grow intense.

Rather than generating the excitement of an epic breakthrough — the first woman president! — Clinton frequently comes across as yesterday’s news rather than tomorrow’s. She was off her game in her defense of a somewhat overblown scandal involving her e-mail accounts, and there will be more such slings and arrows.

Then there are the cross-promotions of the Clinton Foundation — which embody what novelist Tom Wolfe termed The Great Favor Bank — connect good works to the self-interest of sponsors to eventual campaign contributions. Even if no laws are broken, the contraption signals conflict-of-interest and will cause trouble. Not to mention the minefield that is Bill.

Also, Hillary Clinton is to the right of the Democratic Party base. Perhaps her hawkish stance on national security makes sense in this parlous era; but on pocketbook issues, the Clintons’ longstanding Wall Street connection alienates Democratic primary voters and denies her the populist role the times demand.

more

http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2015/03/21/elizabeth-warren-does-run-she-would-surprise-skeptics/zvX3UwmEQnz5Sml1fRl5XI/story.html#

[hopemountain]

1. i would love to see the two of them

debate for the primaries. such a debate will challenge hillary. this is what hillary needs to make the populist movement real to her and her 'personal' agenda for running for president.

at this point, hillary is only going for the vote from women - based upon generic women's rights alone - so many more additional and equally important issues for women AND their families, women & other people of color, the working class, seniors, young adults, education, wall street, the environment, immigration, etc. once hillary announces her candidacy she better include these issues in her appeals - or......

[beachbum bob]

2. comonsense and political strategy makes a Hillary-Warren ticket unbeatable

like I have been saying, one week after hillary announces her nomination bid she should offer forth Elizabeth Warren for her VP

let the democratic party make history once again with an all female ticket. This would let hillary attack conservatives thru out the primary season without having to fend over the idealistic malcontents and rise the billions in money for the general election so we can win back both senate and the house from the batshit crazy conservatives once and for all..........


get real people....

[Cryptoad]

10. Since it seems she

will not run for Prez ,,,, I agree that would be her best move and codlock the Win in the General.

[djean111]

11. Well, this "idealistic malcontent" is quite aware of how Hillary fans - and, I assume, Hillary -

feel about people like me. So Warren as a VP would leave me cold. As you have so helpfully pointed out, Hillary would just choose Warren as a ploy to pick up Progressive votes, and would likely just ignore Warren if she won.

Hillary helped write and shills for the TPP. Warren has seen the TPP and is aghast.
Warren wants to rein in Wall Street, the corporations, and the banks. Hillary is owned by them, and feels they are unfairly maligned, poor things.

Just how the fuck would that callous and cynical pairing work? It would not.
I am a woman, and a candidate's gender means diddly squat to me. Nothing. Not a good reason to vote for someone.

[jwirr]

13. I worry about taking a REAL leader out of congress and putting them in the VP spot. There is less

power in for the VP. I want someone as VP who has real skills like Biden has and can help but I do not want to take anyone out of a power spot for it.

[cascadiance]

17. Yeah Biden out of the senate where he could put in place another bankrtuptcy bill was a good thing..

... as the bankruptcy bill he put through was a pretty bad thing that shouldn't have been done earlier, and arguably he has done well as the VP and its responsibilities... Warren either needs to be at the top of a ticket with someone like Hillary or stay in the Senate. I wouldn't mind her being VP to Sanders or someone like him, but again, with Sanders as president, she'd be better off in the Senate too where she'd have more power to be someone to help someone like Sanders getting his legislation through.

[jwirr]

18. Warren also writes good bills. And speaks out when there is a need. There are only a few

congressional leaders who are as forceful as she and Bernie are for progressives. We need to be careful that we keep them in powerful positions.

[cascadiance]

19. We need someone like her as president...

... but absent that, she's best in the Senate.

[NYC_SKP]

3. Clinton is the wrong woman at the wrong time and she took a wrong turn some time ago. nt

[pscot]

4. The Clinton Foundation

feels like a ticking bomb. Whitewater on steroids.

[Cosmic Kitten]

5. tic tok tic tok lol couldn't agree more

[RiverLover]

16. I think I hear the ticking... /nt

[fbc]

6. Clinton wouldn't have a chance against Warren

Warren inspires Americans, even those outside her party.

Clinton annoys Americans, even those within her party.

[zeemike]

9. That is it short and sweet.

But I am not so sure that she annoys them as much is that they are just tired of recycled politicians...they want change and Hillary is not that...Warren would be in spades.

And welcome to DU.

[realFedUp]

7. She's not running. Keep brains open.

Nt

[Botany]

12. + 1

She has said she is not running and I take her out her word.

[whereisjustice]

8. We need a candidate who gives a fuck about their non-Wall Street constituents - Hillary

is afraid to leave her gated community.

[RBInMaine]

14. Warren's not running, won't run, doesn't want to run, says she isn't running, and so isn't running.

[djean111]

15. So, we should just disband this group and move to Hillaryville, right?

Why else come into this group and spout that stuff? You need to be posting this stuff in this group as much as I need to go into the Hillary group and post about why I do not like her policies. As in - not at all. Just don't click. You are not in charge of this stuff, you know.

[RiverLover]

20. Here's a clue, I believe, about how the centrists who've taken over the Democratic Party will try to

combat a Warren run, if she changes her mind~

BOSTON (CBS) – The Globe devoted a big chunk of its editorial pages Sunday to an assortment of exhortations to Sen. Elizabeth Warren to run for president.

If Sen. Warren is as smart as I think she is, she will ignore every one of them.

The common denominator of these arguments seems to be that capitalism’s excesses and the income inequality, wage stagnation and working-class anxiety they have created are the most important issues we face, and that Warren, who is a forceful critic of that status quo, must run to advance the cause of reform. As a Globe editorial puts it: “the big-picture debate on financial regulation and income inequality is what’s most at peril if the Democratic primaries come and go without top-notch opponents for [Hillary] Clinton,” who they argue lacks the “gumption” to take on those issues.

But none of that rings true.

The way things are going, it’s entirely possible that terrorism and foreign affairs will be the dominant issues of the 2016 presidential race. Those are not Sen. Warren’s issues, and if they dominate, a run would sidetrack her voice, not amplify it.

Meanwhile, “gumption” is defined as “shrewd or spirited initiative.” Secretary Clinton may not seem as spirited as Warren, but she easily wins the shrewdness derby.

As the Obama experience has demonstrated, electing Elizabeth Warren president is a great way to force her to moderate everything she stands for; she could never speak out as bluntly as she does now for fear of crashing the markets and alienating much of the broad coalition a winning national candidate needs.

And while one of the Globe’s Warren boosters describes her possible candidacy as a “win-win,” I beg to differ. Unless you think the election of a Republican president by swing voters uninterested in yet another liberal president from the Ivy League is somehow a win for the Warren agenda.

http://boston.cbslocal.com/2015/03/23/keller-large-why-warren-shouldnt-run-for-president/

And its also a clue into how the Presidential race is going to play out - FEAR. Now matter who wins. TPTB are revving us up for another unjustified illegal war in the Middle East.

My speculation only, of course.

If only the public weren't so easily manipulated by the press.