Why Warren could be a serious candidate.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

She's the best we can get, which is why she won't be allowed to win. Hillary has already been selected.

>implying hillary announced
>implying the last time hillary was expected to breezed against a challenge from her left she breezed
>implying the crowners aren't our equivalent of the paulbots

The last comparison doesn't quite work, since Ron Paul was never seen as the frontrunner. He also didn't come as close as Hillary did

In regard of a mindless hackery they are pretty much the same.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I like Warren a lot, but she is not a viable candidate. She barely won Massachusetts. We need somebody who can win Ohio, Virginia, and Florida. That's not her. A primary vote for Elizabeth Warren is a vote for a Republican President.

Look, we can discuss how blue Massachusetts is all you want, but Brown still was a very popular, strong incumbent. Granted, he was elected by a very special set of circumstances and him surviving a regular election, with full presidential turnout, was always problematic, but it was not an easy race and not because Warren was a "weak" candidate. I mean, we always knew this is going to be a close race.

Does the election in 2010 make her a strong presidential candidate per se? No. But she's definitively not a lightweight.