It was clear several months ago that Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Massachusetts) was planning a presidential run. She tried to get ahead of the “Native American DNA” controversy by taking a DNA test and putting together a long video about her family. I was surprised by the reaction to Warren’s attempt to negate this attack on her, that “she lied” about having Native American ancestry. It felt like people were MORE offended that Warren addressed the controversy directly by taking a DNA test rather than all of the racist attacks against her for years, with even Donald Trump calling her “Pocahontas” and saying he wouldn’t believe a DNA test until he gave her one himself. It’s like journalists and professional political operatives have completely lost the f–king thread of this dumbsh-ttery in the Trump Era. I could go on and on about this, but I won’t. Right now.
Anyway, Sen. Warren’s #ButHerDNA issue was largely seen, by the political class, as a red mark against her. I guess they thought she’d just walk away from a presidential run. She’s not walking away.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren jumped into the 2020 presidential campaign Monday, offering a message of economic populism as she became the best-known Democratic candidate yet to enter what is expected to be a crowded race. Warren’s announcement that she was establishing an exploratory committee — the legal precursor to a run — came as other candidates, including several of her fellow senators, made final preparations for their own announcements, some of which are expected in days.
“America’s middle class is under attack,” the Massachusetts Democrat said in a four-minute, 30-second video emailed to supporters Monday. “How did we get here? Billionaires and big corporations decided they wanted more of the pie. And they enlisted politicians to cut them a bigger slice.”
The video is part biographical, showing her hardscrabble Oklahoma upbringing; part economics lesson, replete with charts illustrating how the middle class is losing economic ground; and part red meat for the Democratic base, with images of President Trump and others disliked by liberals: presidential aides Kellyanne Conway and Stephen Miller and former adviser Stephen K. Bannon.
It made no mention of a recent Warren stumble: her October decision to release results of a DNA test that said she probably had a distant Native American ancestor. The move had been meant to stifle Trump’s criticism of her but only engendered more mockery from him while also angering Democrats, particularly minorities who objected to her defining ethnicity via a test. While the race for the Democratic nomination is only starting, even Warren’s supporters acknowledge that she has lost ground in the last few months, both by her own hand and because the November midterm elections redefined Democratic success with candidates who were in many cases a generation younger.
So, she’s running. And it’s very early – I expect that she’ll be the first person to plainly make these moves for another two months. Joe Biden will make some noise, and I’ve already seen that my former Virginia governor Terry McAuliffe is making some noise too (McAuliffe should not run – I voted for him and I thought he was a good governor, but I don’t want to see a presidential run from him). In lieu of big announcements from other people, Sen. Warren is going to take a lot of hits. Right now, I’ll support her. But if Kamala Harris gets in the race… lord, I don’t know.
Photos courtesy of Backgrid.
God, I’m not even American and it would be a wonderful day for me if Kamala Harris decides to run. So many fingers crossed.
Seriously.
This.
Agreed.
I absolutely would vote for Harris or Warren, but the abomination that is Trump had jaded me greatly.
Realistically, I think the only chance we’ll have is Biden if Democrats want to win. Possibly an older white guy may be less threatening to the deplorables. At least for now. Sadly.
I’m also deathly afraid we’ll have another Jill Stein situation.
To win, we need to back the most likely candidate.
Oh how wonderful it would be for a female to win the presidency. Despite what one may think of May and Merckel, one must admit that a triumvirate of women in the most powerful positions in the world would be beyond amazing!
I also get the feeling that next time a woman runs, her gender won’t be as much of an issue. Hillary may not have won, but she paved the way, and for that we can be grateful.
@Raina
Agree x1000!
I agree with you. I’d love to see a strong female candidate win. However, what I want more than anything is to see Republicans out of the White House. And that won’t happen with a female candidate. If we want to win, we need a non-threatening candidate. A man. Not even necessarily a white man, but someone more moderate. Is this the way it should be? Absolutely not. But it’s our current reality.
I must correct this article. Elizabeth Warren didn’t “try to prove ethnicity” AT ALL. Trump said he’d give a million dollars to prove she lied about ancestry. I hate hat we’ve given into trump’s false narrative She’s an accomplished defender of what’s now the working poor, once an hopeful working middle class.
She is my senator and I adore her and I see this as a huge mistake. Already a meme, already hated outside her base, and already showing Trump can brush her off AND make her make herself look bad.
Indeed. She can’t win, she can’t be competitive.
It’s insane the Democrats will manage another disastrous national campaign but it seems that way again.
Warren can’t win. Biden can’t and shouldn’t win. It shouldn’t even need to be said that Bernie shouldn’t even run.
There’s a reason Obama won, there’s a reason John Kerry lost, and very little of it has to do with their actual political skill. Why did Trump win? He energised a group of people. Warren will not do that. Biden will not so that. Bernie won’t do that enough.
Look to the younger politicians who energise voters. Hell, throw Beto on as VP.
I agree with all of this except the last sentence. People don’t vote for vice presidents. But I think you’re absolutely right about the Democrats needing someone to energize voters. Warren isn’t going to do that.
Jamie, I think you’re wrong about VP. McCain lost *specifically* because he had (an improperly vetted) Palin on his ticket. So yes, a VP choice can help/hurt a presidential candidate.
That said, personally, I’d LOVE a Harris/O’Rourke ticket, but I don’t think even that would be enough to get the young vote out, which is what is needed.
I’ve seen Warren speak at a number of fundraisers and at the ACLU annual meeting. She is an amazing public speaker who can get the crowd on their feet. The problem is she cannot sustain the energy beyond a speech.
Jan, you’re giving Sarah Palin way too much credit here. McCain lost because Barack Obama was an inspiring candidate whose policies and message resonated with more voters. McCain was trailing before his VP pick. She changed nothing.
Kristen, Yes. I’ll add that McCain was really phoning it in by the end of the campaign. He seemed to lose whatever real desire he had to be POTUS and I feel like people picked up on that.
agreed
the only, possibly, good thing about her throwing her hat in would be if it staved off Bernie from doing so.
If we’re going to have someone from the old brigade, it should be Sherrod Brown (who has a consistent proven track record) but he doesn’t have the name recognition so he’d probably have to pair off way early w/someone who could excite liberals across the boards.
I’d like to see Beto in the VP slot as Kamala Harris’ running mate (doubt we could see a Harris/Klobuchar ticket since this country stresses about 1 female running as it is)
She can’t win because America is sexist and ageist – even more so than racist. End of story.
Bernie did a pretty damn good job energizing younger people for his age. Following his lead, many other senators began to take note.
She is very qualified but unfortunately America is too shallow for a candidate like Warren. She doesn’t have a lot of charisma, the DNA and her personality (she is all brain rather than being emotional, something our sexist society hates in women), she has no chance.
Exactly, just like America turned out to be too shallow for a president like Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Elizabeth Warren is the most qualified by a landslide. She’s truly relatable but solid, like your favorite high school principal. Too bad we have a reality show American population- we are poisoned by the “tinder” style of preference, only to be kerflufferghasted when things turn ugly. We may style huge EW, but get loopy when Beto O Roarke just ain’t no long haul leader.
Yes. I love her, too, but reminiscent of Hillary the right wing smear machine has been in overdrive on her for too long. I don’t think it’s possible for her to ever get out from under that baggage.
Exactly. She won’t win. We need someone popular. We saw this with Hilary. People who don’t like you will vote third party or Republican. I’m holding my breath for Beto. Anyone who can narrowly lose Texas can take on Trump.
Warren has a long history of misusing stats to fit her narrative. Watch dog groups have given her so many half-thruths and almost- thruths that her own party is going to eat her alive.
This! Most notably the 6% Native American claim. It’s stuck in the right-wing craw (Pocahontas, anyone?) and it reeks of tokenism anyhow.
I’m down with Kamala Harris or Nina Turner. Just about any other of the buzznames on everyone’s tongues now (Beto, especially) are a disaster in the making.
Can’t wait for the buzz on Kampala when the nation learns how she let Steve Menuchin slither away unpunished for thousands of fraudulent bank foreclosures of working class homes in California in ’08 housing crash. As CA attorney general, Kamala had enough to charge him or at least open an investigation. She did NOTHING, and that was her freaking job. Next thing you know she’s securing a seat in US senate!
Kamala’s a player, and so far I do NOT trust Her. She’s a corporatist that will serve the financial class over progressive interests (i.e. Single payer healthcare). She may be very smart and talented but she’s got to do so much more to make up for her very questionable actions.
Maybe I’m in the minority but I’m not excited about this. Warren, Sanders, Clinton, and Biden need to sit this one out and let some new blood in.
Well said!!
I kind of agree with you..except she does have a tremendous amount of experience, and lots of common sense. She hit the nail on the head for me….corporations have hired politicians to do their dirty work so they can make more and more money on the backs of the rest of us. We really need to put a stop to that kind of politicking IMHO….maybe as Vice President?
Warren has only been in politics for six years. By just about any standard, she is new relatively new blood.
Agreed
Any of them would be better than Trump, but it’s time for some new, fresh, younger faces. I love Elizabeth, but I’m hoping for someone like Beto
Beto didn’t even win in his own state against creepy Ted Cruz. TED CRUZ. He needs to sit this one out, as well.
Totally agree. New blood/ideas is/are needed. Warren will do the most by staying in the Senate, where she is needed.
Totally agree. They should let a new generation run and use their experience to act as advisers. I’ve said it before, but it makes so sense that the people in Congress, SCOTUS and POTUS are way past retirement age, it can’t be healthy to be ruled by such a uniform group that’s so different from their constituents.
I don’t think you’re in the minority. I agree completely. I like Warren a lot, and think she does an excellent job in the Senate, but this is a bad idea.
Sigh. It’s going to be a long two years.
preach. Harris 2020 <3
And pull back towards the center. That’s the only way the Democrats can carry the majority.
Anyone other than Trump is good in my books. Hilary was not my first choice, but I didn’t sit back, pout my lip, and simply not vote. I wouldn’t let Republicans get that satisfaction.
Yes. +1000
I’m happy to have Elizabeth Warren out there giving her firebrand speeches and raising the important issues – but I don’t think she will be successful.
That’s about where I am. I just don’t think she’ll be the last one standing, either.
+1
Whoever the Democrat is and makes it to the finish line ,I am going to go out vote and vote for them.
Exactly. I’ll probably vote for Harris in the primary, but no matter who ends up on the ticket I will be voting for them, even if they aren’t the perfect candidate.
Yup. Warren isn’t my pick and I thought her Native American DNA performance was not good, playing right into the “I have a Cherokee grandmother” trope that Native Americans have been criticizing for decades. However, if Warren is the Dem nominee, I will vote for her, no hesitation, none at all. Still, I’m hoping for Harris or Booker.
How about no. If Warren is who the Dems plan to use to take down Trump then we might as well just take the L and move on. She’s already an easy target for Trump. Liberals don’t even like her that much. I think people like Warren, Biden, Clinton and Sanders need to sit this one out. They need to let someone new take the reigns. Ya know like Beto. But it seems the Dems never learn from their mistakes. Or the individuals within the party are just selfish and don’t want to take a backseat when they should.
Agree completely!!! The Democrats need to pick someone who will beat Trump, not help him win. I don’t care who runs as long as they beat Trump and believe me, they don’t have to have great qualifications to be President, (Trump didn’t have any) as long as they win. I like Warren but Trump has already made her a joke.
I think Beto is the perfect choice. Beto has the type of gumption and Charisma that Obama has. He will resonate with voters. Yeah, he lost to Cruz, probably through nefarious, fraudulent means. But Cruz could never win a POTUS race and I believe that Beto can. With the same messaging that Warren is espousing: Washington is currently owned by the rich and they are screwing everybody else.
I like Beto, but there are under 60 (and women, and POC) potential candidates that also managed to win their election that would probably do better… Beto could run for VP, or be a Secretary of something and then run later once he’s more established/shown results, it doesn’t have to be POTUS right away.
@Miles: OMFG I hope that you just happened to throw Clinton’s name in there and that she hasn’t actually gave any indication that she’s considering running again. Because PLEASE GOD NO!
Beto is Center-Right (despite his trying to campaign otherwise) who takes money from oil lobbyists, tends to vote conservative, and is married to a billionaire heiress. He is also political offspring, thus establishment himself. We can do so much better. I’m down with Kamala Harris or Nina Turner.
+1000 agree about Beto being center left – which is why establishment dems are salivating over him.
Harris is not to be trusted either. She’s center left too. Plus she has some very questionable actions to answer for as to why she didn’t even try to prosecute Steve Menuchin and the banks he was riunning that were responsible for thousands of fraudulent home foreclosures. Now Steve M. not only gets off scot free with millions, but also gets to continue screwing over our entire nation on the Orange overlord’s cabinet.
My politics mostly align with Warren and I like her a lot, but nope. It may be superficial, but an essential part of most successful presidential candidates is charisma—something she lacks. I’ve heard she can be very charming in small groups, but it doesn’t come across in interviews. Furthermore, it’s awful and hypocritical since the Republicans are the real elitists…but it will be very easy for them to paint Liz as one. We also need fresher faces, there is just so much vitriol left over from 2016, and even though Warren and Biden didn’t run back then they still are semi-associated with it (plus Biden has his own host of problems plus his age).
IMO the strongest candidates are Kamala Harris, Sherrod Brown, Amy Klobuchar, and John Hickenlooper. I go back and forth on Beto (I’m aware of his record as a congressman)—the amount of excitement and turnout he got compared to previous elections in TX of all places was tremendous, but I think he would be better as a VP as of now as would Stacey and Andrew Gillum.
Agree with the assessment of Harris, Brown, Klobuchar, etc. That’s where we’ll get some excitement going. It’s going to be interesting.
I also agree and would love nothing more than to have POTUS Harris, but do we realistically think America would elect a black woman? I would be thrilled to be wrong but sadly I don’t think enough people are there yet…
I’m with those who really like Elizabeth Warren, as a Senator. Don’t think she has a snowballs chance in…..to get the nomination much less elected. In this instance wish she put her ego aside and/or had better advisors because it seems clear she doesn’t have the support of the party nor the grassroots fervor that the Sanders folks have/had.
I like my Senator and want her to remain my Senator.
That said, can people PLEASE stop listing Sanders as a potential Democrat candidate? He is NOT a Democrat. He should not have been allowed on the Democratic primary ballot in 2016 and he should not be on it in 2020. If he wants to run, he should run as what he is, an Independent Third Party candidate. He latched onto the DNC in 2016 because he wanted the money and organization network. He should not be allowed to do that again. If forced to campaign as an Independent Third Party candidate from the start,he won’t get coverage in the news cycles for primary debates and primary results. He’ll be forced to raise his own money and generate news outside of the primary coverage and he’ll fade away very early.
Yes, yes, yes!!!
Sanders at this point just reminds me of Ross Perot or Ralph Nader. He just needs to take a seat already.
I would be happy to never hear Bernie’s name mentioned ever again in any context whatsoever. He needs to read the room and step aside.
We have a two party system. That’s it. It’s the only game in town. Serious independent candidates have to run in major party primaries. Unless you want a repeat of 2000 election where third party candidate splits the liberal vote.
What you suggest would only be fair if we had rank-voting elections where you can vote for your 1st, 2nd, 3rd etc. choices. Which I think would be better than our current system.
She’s my Senator and I love her. I see her around town and she’s always gracious and dignified. I have no idea how the GOP is able to smear people on such absurd grounds — her DNA, her emails, blah di blah blah — but for whatever reason, they’re able to make these stupid memes stick. Anyway, I think she’s an amazing Senator and is strong there where we need her. And sadly I think this is a mistake…
No. No and no. No, no and no.
The first doesn’t mean the only dem candidate. Warren is going get lit up in the primaries by Biden or Harris or Beto or Kennedy.
Warren is too emotional. Harris made Bart O’Kavanaugh squirm. Mic drop.
Dems can’t choose someone just because he/she knows how to give rousing speeches. We’ve already seen what a disaster it is to have someone in the White House with no political experience. Five minutes in politics does not qualify someone to be President.
I’m pragmatic, and my number one goal in this next election is to get a candidate that will beat Trump and the Republicans. That means someone who won’t divide the Democratic support. So, NOT Biden (too old, & already unsuccessful runs in his past), not Elizabeth Warren (for all the reasons y’all have stated here), not anyone from the Old Guard. Just nope, and I wish they wouldn’t even waste money running.
It seems a tad odd that no young or out there candidates seem to have appeared. But maybe there are works behind the scenes and think it’s still too early for try push new people. Hopefully it’s not because people don’t want to run against the sitting president.
@Kida I wish I had confidence in the DNC to believe that they’re on top of this behind the scenes, but they havent given us much reason to trust their competence…
Many of the younger potential candidates are currently preparing for the new Congress and it’s a lot of work on its own (especially for those in the House), they might not have the time right now to hustle for financial backup and staffing as much as the old guard does. They’ll have to start soon though, primaries are sadly expensive.
Hmm. A lot of Bad Takes happening in this thread.
I like Warren. She’s not my first pick, but it’s early.
Most people didn’t think Obama had a shot. Almost no one thought Trump could win. So let’s all put our predictions aside and admit we don’t know what’s going to happen.
Agree. Wow. I am surprised by the ageism and sexism on what is typically a pretty forward-thinking group of commenters. She’s too emotional and old? Really? Come on.
I understand the “let’s choose someone who has the best chance of winning” line of thinking and how that becomes more important than choosing the best person for the job (unfortunate as it may be, but stakes are high with Trump at the helm), but I am really not impressed by some of the other really bad reasons why she’s a hard nope already from so many democrats. Can we not do this? To a very qualified and competent woman? Please?
Yeah. It’s disappointing to see anyone call Warren “emotional.” That’s just shorthand for people who don’t think women are electable.
I think age does need to be discussed with these potential candidates. I am not saying only people in a certain age range should be leading our country. I’ve seen patients in their 90s who are sharp as a whistle. But are these candidates physically and mentally able to endure the stress/pressure of this job for at least the 4 years of their first term? Trump is 72 years old and clearly unable to mentally deal it, which has been demonstrated in his Twitter rants and inability to even keep up with his own promises/statements/basic facts. Warren is 69, Sanders is 77, and Biden is 76. It shouldn’t be a dis-qualifier, but if our candidates are getting older and older, it should be discussed.
Co-sign Melanie’s comment.
Age is important, and honestly, I think it should be a disqualifier, there’s a minimum age after all, why not a max? It’s not agism, it’s just being realistic: the current POTUS seems like he’s suffering from dementia, it’s likely that Reagan was too… The risks of becoming incapable, physically or mentally, of doing the job increases with older candidates. The experience of seasoned politicians is valuable and they could make for great counsellors and mentors, just not POTUS. I also think that having to live with the consequences of your decisions for another 20-40 years after you ran/won could possibly make you feel more accountable; right now, many of those elected don’t care: they’ll be dead before anything bad happens.
I understand what you are trying to say but that doesn’t make it any less ageist to say it. What you are trying to say is you want a candidate who is physically and mentally able to do the job, and that’s very different than focusing on the age of the candidate.
Trump is a bad president for a gazillion reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with his age, and middle-aged people can be in poor health too.
“But are these candidates physically and mentally able to endure the stress/pressure of this job for at least the 4 years of their first term?” This is it, no need to bring age into it at all.
Reagan was 100% already dealing with the early signs of Alzheimer’s while he was president. There are many people who picked up on it, including my own mother who said she was 100% convinced he was dealing with dementia while he was president (later to be diagnosed with Alzheimer’s which is not the same disease as dementia but has the same symptoms).
Trump also most likely has dementia.
I don’t think necessarily age should be a definitive factor while running for president. Obviously an older person’s health should be monitored but if they still have their mental capacities intact, I don’t see why it should be a hindrance. FDR hid his polio from the public for this very reason because he knew if the public got wind of it, his capacity to continue to be president would be questioned. He died while in office but he is consistently listed as one of the better US presidents, despite his physical ailment. Just because you’re in a wheelchair does not make you less of a person nor does it mean you can’t run for President of the USA. It really depends on what the health issues are. If you have full control of your mental capacities and you aren’t terminally ill, I say go for it.
. THANK YOU.
Plus the idea that Harris is somehow better and more electable than Warren in rust belt states. Give me a break. Everyone here just want a Hillary clone. The centrist dems want to convince everyone Beto’s “freshness” is a left of center, progressive record. Not.
Hard pass on 70-year-olds and older running.
Agree!
It’s weird to me that there is a minimum age but not a maximum. I get that with a minimum age so that someone has some experience but….Trump is in his 70s and had no political experience whatsoever. It’s amazing to me that basically anyone over 35 could become president. There should be a few prerequisites in place to avoid another clusterfudge like Trump like having at least a masters in political science and/or law and a minimum of 10 years in public office. Maybe throw in an IQ-test and a real physical test before voting starts.
Yeah. And only Democrats running as Democrats please.
Warren isn’t beating Trump. Neither is Kamala, Cory, Biden, Sanders, etc.
I understand that most on this board are idealistic and progressive but let’s be realistic here – this country isn’t ready for female President especially not an Indian/African American one; the country isn’t ready for another Black President period. The Dems need to nominate basically a unicorn candidate: progressive but not too progressive, great at coalition building, need the ability to both flip some Trump supporters and get voters motivated enough to actually get off their butts and vote. It’s practically a Herculean task; I’m not saying it can’t be done but I don’t think it can be done by any of the names being bandied about.
.
Hahahaha!! MOST on this board is progressive?? That’s rich..
None on this board is progressive.
+1000
Patty, I don’t disagree with some of your points, but what do you suggest as a solution? We need to start somewhere, and we need to work with what we’ve got.
Thank you, Patty, for letting some common sense into the room.
The Democrats need to flush the old guard, all of them. They need new blood or they will not win. We are desperate for younger leaders.
No. We are desperate for universal healthcare !!!!!
I don’t care how old a candidate is as long as he/she commits to fight for a single payer, national healthcare.
I’m surprised to see so many people here I agree with. Warren is a good politician and I’d vote for her (whoever runs I have to vote against the GOP), but she’s not the kind of candidate the Dems need now. It’ll go down the same way Hillary did.
The GOP has shown it’s true, hideous colors so hard, I even forgot all the things that were wrong with the Dems (I’m not equating them, just saying the Dems have their stuff too). Their biggest problems is they are just so out of the loop. In this era of social media and memes candidates like Clinton and Warren are such easy prey for the GOP’s smear campaign shenanigans.
Maybe dems should try and elect someone who isn’t bought and paid by AIPAC.
EW is more than qualified to be President. Hell, anyone of us CBers is more qualified than the worthless sack of shit currently defiling the office. But, she can’t win. It’s time for my generation(born in the 40s)to sit down. BTW, if you were born in the 50s have a seat, too. Surely someone from the 1965-1978 group could come forth. And when they do, we need to unite and not have a purity test war that will lead to 2016 all over again.
I see you celebitchies are here to give Warren the Hillary Clinton treatment. I remember how people on here tore Mrs Clinton down. Yes you did. I remember it clear as day. Then you got Trump and back-pedalled.
Warren is a good candidate. If this is all there is right now then get behind her.
The tearing down of Hillary by liberals gave Trump lots of ammunition for his propoganda campaign.
You remember incorrectly. The majority of posters here supported HRC, some grudgingly, but still supported. It was the Berniecrats who did the tearing down. Them and some obvious Russian trolls-never seen before and never seen since. So don’t bother trying to paint us as the reason Asshat won.
I’ve been a fan of Warren’s since she first came on the scene and was overjoyed when she was elected Senator: But, no, I’m not convinced she could win. VP, maybe; pres, no.
Donald Trump is President. If there were ever a time for Dems to stop trying to be noble, now is the time. It’s not about who is a good candidate, or who is qualified. It’s about winning. The Dems need to throw their weight behind a / the candidate that can win a General Election and Elizabeth Warren, as qualified as she may be, is not that candidate. Hilary was not that candidate either for a myriad of reasons but the Dems made the mistake of believing that because she was qualified she would win. Hilary was never going to win the General Election and had the Republicans actually put forth a candidate other than Donald Trump, she probably would have lost the EC by a larger margin than she actually did.
So true. The misogyny from “compassionate liberals is heinous. Factually speaking, EW is an egoless powerhouse for workers rights. She isn’t an old white man, ir a hot young white man either. She was proud of her Cherokee nation ancestry, we all are and say things like this constantly, it’s the right way to be American – to long for native roots.
I have attended several of her town meetings, which are quite informative and actually fun. They are well-attended and the support that she receives from workers in the construction trades and union members who attend is fantastic. They know she fights for them. More need to know that. Not just for a presidential run but people need to know who in Congress works for them and who works for the Trumps of this world.
I’m frustrated that people don’t understand the impact of her DNA test and subsequent video. For one, “racist attacks aimed at her” do not affect her. The only people hurt by them are Indigenous people so I think it’s important to make that distinction. Secondly, the DNA test did nothing but tokenize her faceless, nameless, and nationless Indigenous ancestor and while I know she didn’t use her ancestor to further her career, she did use that ancestor to play into a stupid game by the GOP and Trump with terrible side effects. She didn’t use her power and spotlight to shine a light on any Indigenous issues, or spend energy making a video highlighting the ways we can support Indigenous folks. Instead she chose to play that stupid game and which further targeted Indigenous people. I’m not saying it’s unforgivable, but I do think it shows a serious deficit on her relationship to Indigenous folks and it’s certainly not something to downplay.
Really good points, Anon, thanks for sharing this pov. Maybe she has others saying this to her but it might be worth writing her campaign… Seems there’d be a lot of synergies for her overall campaign too.
I did write to her campaign outlining all the calls to action Indigenous advocates and nation leaders have already worked on but got no response. The fact that the Cherokee Nation has publicly condemned her actions and explained so clearly and effectively how it was a poor choice makes it even more important for her to fix this.
Must echo previous sentiment around here that Warren is not likely to get too far. We need a candidate that motivates youth, moderate Republicans (they do exist) and independents. Warren is a lightning rod akin to HRC and not in a good way, sadly.
I am pinning my hopes on Biden/Klobuchar for 2020 .. Joe is amazing and Amy is young with a really bright future ahead of her. Of course, I am biased though. ; )
No thanks. I want someone that can win please.
Trump wishes she was the candidate, he’d have a field day with her. The DNA thing showed a huge miscalculation on her part and frankly made her look stupid. She should never have dignified his racism with a response.
I think whoever the nominee is, they need to take the high road and stay on message. They can’t win by just being “not Trump”. They have to create excitement and get people out. Beto ran like this against Ted Cruz and I think he will have broad appeal across the country.
As PodSaveAmerica said— find someone you like, support them, volunteer on their campaign, get out the vote. And when the general election comes around, support the Dem candidate, even if your favorite candidate didn’t win the nomination, and don’t bash the one that did online.
This comment thread is rife with sexism, ableism, and agism. I don’t give a crap if the best candidate is 35 or 80—if they are in line with my values on the issues, have shown they have what it takes to lead this country, they have my vote in the primary. I would like to add that they actually have a chance to win, but I think we are really terrible at knowing a candidate’s ability to win ahead of time. Whoever wins the Democratic nomination has my vote in the general election.
That’s all fine and dandy in writing, but it’s not reality – as seen in the previous election. Dems must band together this time and vote for who has the best chance to win against Trump.
Absolutely agree @ Unoriginal C
All these commenters seem to think it’s going to be decided based on charisma, personality and youth. They seem to forget there’s a movement happening in this country that’s based on real issues. Trump was able to fool enough people that he would champion these issues. They were stupid and naive to believe him, but that doesn’t negate the very real nation wide hostility against corporate/Wall Street and the politicians that do their bidding.
It’s all about likability, energy, inspiration, motivation. That’s the winner. All the intelligence and experience in the world can’t overcome a lack of good old-fashioned charisma.
No. It’s also about national healthcare for all Americans.
Another sacrificial sheep.
A sure win for 45.
Come on already. We cannot afford another four years of Trump.
We need a strong candidate and right now it cannot be a woman. Not with a whole country of deplorables voting. Not with Russian influence. A woman later. When this country’s mindset is balanced..
I wouldn’t back Warren. I’ve heard that Amy Klobuchar is strongly considering running. I would be more interested in backing her. I would definitely vote for Biden if he ran.
Warren or Harris or Duckworth would make me happy. Not Bernie or Biden.
According to the polls Sanders is the most popular politician in the country. So those who are saying ‘he can’t win’ are letting their bias cloud their judgment.
Yup. CB is an echo chamber of one view point.
I wish we lived in a world where having lots of experience and a progressive, fact-based, intelligent platform made a politician electable. But we don’t live in that world. Sorry!
I don’t see anything wrong with Warren as a candidate, but that doesn’t mean she can win.
Same goes for Sanders. Any platform that involves tax hikes is going to cost dearly at the polls. Americans do not traditionally vote for tax hikes.
Whatever candidate is chosen needs a simple platform with health care as the main issue. They need a catchy slogan, some memes and sounds bites and an active force of volunteers.
Remember that Trump won on “MAGA”, “Drain the swamp”, “Buttery males”, “Lock her up”, “Replace Obamacare”, “Build the wall” etc. He had/has zero accountability or credibility and no realistic platform. His policies are frequently countered by the courts. But he got elected.
It’s so sad that Warren even with her capabilities cannot win in America. The buffoon in office cannot even shake hands properly and he might be re-elected!
Thank u, next.
I am waiting for Klobuchar and Harris to enter. I will max out on donations to both. Yes, I will support whoever wins the nomination, but my heart and money will be with women.
I was robbed in 2016.
I want what is mine.
Now, if Warren wins the nomination, then I will max out on her too. After all she is a woman. I don’t dislike her. But let me make something really clear – no all white ticket, no all male ticket. Yeah, even your fav. No all white, no all male.
I respect Sen. Warren and would happily give her my vote. She makes me proud to be a member of the Democratic party. I wish the process of campaigning was not so gamed by this point–mainly with obscene amounts of money, but also with sexist propaganda and continued attacks on our system by hostile foreign powers. The problem isn’t whether she is “relatable” or “likeable” or not–the difficulty is that a narrative has already formed that clouds all attempts at discussions of her policy ideas, her qualifications for the job, and her experience.
I hate to be a Debbie Downer, but she’s not going to win. Unfortunately we need a moderate, likable male if we are going to have even a shot at beating Trump. And even then, I’m doubtful. He has a devoted fan base and republicans are 100% okay with the things he does/says – as seen by the mid-terms. I think Biden might be the only chance, but his age concerns me.
Yeah because Trump is such a moderate. Right
Why are there so many erroneous excuses to negate Warren winning the presidency?
i will echo what patty said earlier.
it will take more than *competence* to take out dump. much more.
someone who can easily give back to dump whatever he dishes out. regardless of gender.
someone with the common touch. and the courage of their convictions. that eliminates a lot of the “suits” listed above.
it could have been o’rourke if his track record in congress wasn’t so wishy washy. and he lost to lyin’ ted, of all people.
it’s hard to suss out who this could be. i would have hands down said someone like tulsi gabbard, previously, but she’s been tainted.
andrew gillum could’ve been it, but he didn’t even win his governorship race, *shrugs*. same with richard ojeda, who couldn’t win his congressional race.
and lmao lmao at that dullard mitt romney trying to primary dump. that 10% more polite tweet by andy richter couldn’t be more on point.
Why are there so many erroneous excuses to negate Warren winning the presidency?