Elizabeth Warren 2020 campaign megathread

[Progressive Pessimist]

Of all the potential nominees, she'd probably be the best president.  Unfortunately, I don't think she's the best candidate.  It's a shame that the ability to govern and the ability to politic so often diverge. 

This is one of the things I always say and sound like a broken record with. And it's always true to the detriment of Democrats and the country as a whole. Gore, Clinton, and possibly Warren all exemplify this.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Well, we all said that Beto's delay with his record breaking numbers meant that they were disappointing. But at the same time, it is possible that her's were in fact a disappointment, especially considering that she lost her finance director.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Warren would be an amazing president. Too bad that a lot of Americans hate her because "Pocahontas" or she's "shrill" or something like that.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Warren unveils new legislation that would make it easier to jail top executives for white collar crime
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/437128-warren-introduces-legislation-making-it-easier-to-jail-top-business

Has anyone else proposed this yet? Not that sure.

Well done, Warren.

Warren is far and away the leader on policy in this race.

You're right.

That policy is a minor consideration on getting the nomination is a damning indictment of our nation.

It's even worse in the general election.

[Progressive Pessimist]

The media focused on Clinton’s emails, false stories about the Clinton Foundation, and perpetuating the narrative that she was dying because she caught pneumonia.

Meanwhile, whether good or bad focusing on Trump’s comments on Mexicans and Muslims was literally elevating his policy positions and reinforcing them over and over again.

Exactly. Maybe it's anecdotal but all I remember out of Clinton's campaign events when she wasn't forced to address Trump's latest controversy or her emails; was her discussing immigration reform, green energy, paid family leave, health care, and addressing student loan debt, among other things. Her campaign absolutely had policy ideas. I distinctly remember these, even in her ads. Was I watching a different election?

Trump talked about policy but not in any coherent way where it actually sounded like he knew what he was talking about. His policies were (and still are) basically just applause lines for his audience. Now, maybe one can assert that this was shrewd branding or marketing which maybe made them stick out better than Clinton *gasp* just talking about the specifics of her ideas. For example, I remember a tool on her website which displayed how one can refinance their student loan debt more easily. She discussed that during an event with Bernie Sanders. You think that would have attracted more attention. But really what I am trying to say here is that whenever anyone suggests that Trump is some kind of wonk, it's beyond laughable.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Warren has the best policy of any candidate and a track record of expertise and getting things done. It's a shame that elections can never be about substance.

[Progressive Pessimist]

I didn't want Sanders or Warren, but if any of the socialist candidates, would win, I wanted it to be her.

She really blew it and should of ran in 2016

Like most potential candidates, I don't think she wanted to run against Clinton. Though had Clinton not sought the nomination in 2016, Warren definitely would have been one of the candidates. It probably would have been a Booker vs. Warren primary.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Watched part of her town hall. I think she has moved up on my choices. I think she really does care average Joe. I still have concerns about her electability.

I'm in this boat too. I have always liked her, especially more than Sanders. She is the most policy focused candidate, and would probably make a great President. The problem though, is that the GOP have already been laser focused on dragging her reputation through the mud since she got elected which hampers her electability. And my criteria for supporting a candidate this time around is whether they can beat Trump or not. It sucks how that has become the most important aspect of electing a politician these days. But one cannot govern without winning, unfortunately, and I am skeptical as to whether Warren is in a position to do that.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Lol Grassley's nephew is caucusing for Warren:

https://twitter.com/Los_ANGELes2/status/1121243031582257152

There will be an intresting family dinner.

Good for Warren and for him, but what the s***!?

[Progressive Pessimist]

On this episode of Atlas Forum Hates Fun: we're calling people childish and juvenile because their dogs have twitter accounts

Does it really matter, like at all?

It doesn't. Though it is certainly an odd development due to the fact that so many candidates seem to be doing this.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Harris and Warren probably noticed that Buttigieg's and Sanders' polling has dwindled even in spite of them supposedly reaching that crossover audience. I don't think they're necessarily correlated, but I don't blame them for not wanting to hold a town hall there, just as much as I don't blame Buttigieg or Sanders for wanting to hold one.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Harris and Warren probably noticed that Buttigieg's and Sanders' polling has dwindled even in spite of them supposedly reaching that crossover audience. I don't think they're necessarily correlated, but I don't blame them for not wanting to hold a town hall there, just as much as I don't blame Buttigieg or Sanders for wanting to hold one.

I really don't think anyone is really going on FOX News expecting to win over votes, they go on there to prove they can go into the lion's den and face tough questioning.

Right, that too. It still doesn't look like it matters much though.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Looks like Warren might not be such a weak general election candidate after all.

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/06/15/donald-trump-elizabeth-warren-2020-election-1365816

Trump aides and their allies at the Republican National Committee, who initially believed their money and manpower were better focused elsewhere, are digging up opposition research, deploying camera-wielding trackers, and preparing to brand Warren as a liberal extremist. The reassessment of Warren, confirmed in conversations with more than a half-dozen Trump advisers, reflects the volatility of the massive Democratic primary and how the reelection campaign is reacting to it.

The Trump team — including the president himself — had been focused almost exclusively on Joe Biden to this point. But Warren’s rise now has them thinking she could pose a serious threat in a general election. Warren’s disciplined style, populist-infused speeches, and perceived ability to win over suburban female voters, Trump advisers concede, has raised concerns.

Campaign pollster John McLaughlin has sounded the alarm internally, stressing that Warren’s attacks on Trump threaten to undercut his support from the working-class voters who propelled him to the presidency.

I hope this is the case. It's the one thing keeping me from being full-on in her camp. I'm almost there, but I just need some reassurance about her in the general election.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Also, lol @ the notion that college is somehow an anti-indoctrination system.

It absolutely is if done properly, and for many top-tier colleges remains so. The problem is that standards of liberal education in America have slipped now that costs are so high and college is being sold as an 'experience' rather than an education - like any business, modern colleges which challenge students to think as they should tend to do poorly compared to those willing to cater to preexisting notions.

A shame that college is now just a way for liberals to indoctrinate students

It isn't and never has been. It's just seen that way since education about society is anathema to conservative dominion.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Also, lol @ the notion that college is somehow an anti-indoctrination system.

It absolutely is if done properly, and for many top-tier colleges remains so. The problem is that standards of liberal education in America have slipped now that costs are so high and college is being sold as an 'experience' rather than an education - like any business, modern colleges which challenge students to think as they should tend to do poorly compared to those willing to cater to preexisting notions.

A shame that college is now just a way for liberals to indoctrinate students

It isn't and never has been. It's just seen that way since education about society is anathema to conservative dominion.

The overwhelming majority of college professors are leftists, and it'll be hard for you to keep a straight face while arguing that they don't let their beliefs bleed into their teaching.

I won't deny that. But it's not like those beliefs aren't informed by their education in turn. That's just what happens when one is better educated, they tend to become more left wing. The more you learn about the world, the more you want to address its problems.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Can we make this about Elizabeth Warren's campaign again and take the pissing and moaning about college to general discussion?

Thank you! I'm overwhelmed with responses from something that I didn't think warranted it.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Honestly, her use of "Latinx" in the first debate was much more ridiculous than this.

How and why does that bother you? LOL.

Because no words in Spanish end in two consonants, and the word is grammatical nonsense in Spanish.

This is true. Projecting sexism onto -o/-a endings is the whitest thing ever and wildly misunderstands the Spanish language. Even if you really wanted to get rid of language genders, one could always use the already existent -e ending. -x is linguistically absurd, blatantly disregards Hispanic worldviews, and has a distinctly Anglo orgin.

Fair, but I know plenty of Hispanic people who refer to themselves as Latinx

Yeah, this semantic issue is one that I am neutral on, I don't really care one way or the other. But what matters is what the Latin American community thinks and in my experience most are pretty neutral on it too, with some favoring it, and a few more who are probably the loudest detesting it. So the entire spectrum exists and overall indicates to me that arguing about it isn't worth expending the mental energy.

[Progressive Pessimist]

https://twitter.com/ewarren/status/1153273559395000322?s=20

Emphasizing this as part of her campaign could be a really good tactic. I am of the belief that the Democrats should utilize fear also where appropriate and in ways they can get away with it. This is one such example.

[Progressive Pessimist]

The Sanders camp has Susan Sarandon out campaigning at rallies saying Bernie is “not someone who used to be a Republican”.

Why? I know Bernie doesn’t look at the other candidates the way his aides do. But why does he keep bringing toxic people like Sarandon and Sirota into his campaign? This was an obvious dig at Warren, who Bernie has defended at nearly every turn.

Susan Sarandon is a great actress, but she is a very clear example of a counterproductive political actor. It's incredibly frustrating.

[Progressive Pessimist]

So I finally checked out her website because she has all this momentum and whatnot....and it is ummm...pretty terrible....maybe it is better if you give her your email, but if you do not, a 3rd grader could have done a better site for her bio

The crazy thing about Warren's online presence is that her much-touted plans ("I have a plan for that") aren't even on her website.  Her website just has blurbs.  Her actual plans are published on Medium.

On top of that, 95% of the content in her actual plans is her explaining what the problem is and why it's important to solve it and reiterating just how much we need to solve it.  For instance, a Warren plan for making my bed may go like

I Have A Plan For That:  Making Your Bed

A neatly-made bed is an important part of American life.  From the time when I was a little girl being tucked in by my mother, to tucking my grandkids in at night, made beds have been an important part of my life.

Statistics show that nearly 70% of Americans do not make their beds.  I understand the value of a neatly-made bed.  When I travel around this country I talk to everyday Americans and hear their concerns about not being able to make their own beds.

Why is this important?  Studies show that people get 20% better sleep when they make their beds.  Making your bed makes your room look tidier, which give you a better sense of order, mental ease, and self-esteem.  Your romantic partner may also think of you as childish if you can't even make your own bed in the morning.

It is especially important to call out that people of color (POC) are disproportionately affected by unmade beds as they get, on average, 11% less sleep at night than white people.  Women are also disproportionately affected by this because they are more likely than men to make the beds of their children.

This is a serious problem in America and we need a solution.  For this reason, I am proposing that we spend $250 million on a task force to teach Americans how to make their beds, with a particular focus on disadvantaged groups such as POC and women.  I will pay for this by asking the wealthiest 1% of millionaires and billionaires to pay their fair share.

We should have done this a long time ago, but big-moneyed interests and corporate lobbyists in Washington don't want you to make your own bed.  They pay your elected politicians off to keep them from solving this problem.  Enough is enough.

If you support Elizabeth Warren standing up against a rigged political and economic system, click here to chip in $50.

Making your bed traps in heat and sweat though which makes it a thriving habitat for dust mites. The better thing to do is to still make your bed, but to not fold it all the way up to or past your pillow. Leaving the blanket folded maybe halfway away from your pillow allows it to air out and make it a more sanitary place to sleep.

I am 100% serious about this by the way. Take it from an obsessive-compulsive germaphobe like myself. I couldn't resist.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Making your bed traps in heat and sweat though which makes it a thriving habitat for dust mites. The better thing to do is to still make your bed, but to not fold it all the way up to or past your pillow. Leaving the blanket folded maybe halfway away from your pillow allows it to air out and make it a more sanitary place to sleep.

I am 100% serious about this by the way. Take it from an obsessive-compulsive germaphobe like myself. I couldn't resist.

Who covers up their pillow when they make their bed?  Weird.  I always fold it back on itself.

I'm not saying I do, but I have seen it.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Warren and Clinton share a lot of great qualities. Warren is the natural choice to succeed Hillary Clinton as our nominee. She has a lot of her strengths with none of her weaknesses.

She shares at least a couple weaknesses. Being a woman is the obvious one, along with being "shrill."

And amostly nothingburger "scandal" that will be exaggerated and willed into existence as a mishap that is bigger than Watergate.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Trumpworld Anxiety Grows Over a Rising Elizabeth Warren

They once thought they’d delivered the political kill shot. But now GOP operatives are complaining that nothing sticks to Warren.

I really hope this is true. If she has a teflon coating to go against Trump's, she has a better shot than it seems against him.

[Progressive Pessimist]

She would lose against Trump.

She might be able to get Michigan back but that’s it, and Arizona wouldn’t turn blue.  Pennsylvania and Wisconsin would stay Trump.  Florida certainly.

She would lose worse than Hillary.

Any credible challenger to Trump will win WI, MI and PA

The fact that you're saying this now makes me think we're doomed no matter what...

[Progressive Pessimist]

This from Kevin Drum is correct:

For starters, to put her plan in place we’d need to win the presidency and the Senate, and that’s a tough task. Then we’d need to eliminate the filibuster, which is very, very unlikely since a few Democrats have already said they wouldn’t join in.

But suppose we miraculously do all that. Actual legislation depends mostly on the Senate, not on President Warren or Speaker Pelosi. This means that health care legislation can’t be more progressive than the 50th most liberal senator, which is likely to be someone like Joe Manchin or Doug Jones. So even in the best case we won’t get the M4A plan that Warren is campaigning on. Not even close.

What this means is that these M4A plans shouldn’t be treated like real legislation to be scored by the Congressional Budget Office. Rather, they should be treated like Republican tax cut proposals. Nobody bothers to analyze them (except for liberal think tanks, natch) because no one takes them seriously. They are meant merely as markers to show where your heart is. A weak plan shows that you’re a RINO. A big tax cut shows you’re a strong conservative. And a ridiculous plan shows that you’re a lunatic—which might or might not be a good thing depending on the mood of the electorate.

https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2019/11/when-is-medicare-4-all-not-really-medicare-4-all/

Candidate plans are rough drafts designed to show where their hearts are at. It's foolish to obsess on the minutiae.

I agree with that, and it's why I'm not obsessing over the details of this plan, or any other Democrats' plans (though I still wish Warren would abandon the abolition of private insurance aspect). Something this ambitious will not happen anyway, even if the Democrats do take the Senate back in 2020 by some miracle. But it does additionally show that Democrats are held, and also hold themselves, to a different standard from Republicans.

Anyone remember Trump's health care plan? "We're going to have the best health care, and everyone will be covered. It will be better than Obamacare!" Three years later, he hasn't done s*** with health care other than trying to take it away from millions of Americans back in 2017, yet people still don't care.