Elizabeth Warren 2020 campaign megathread

[Heebie Jeebie]

This has to terrify Biden's team....

https://twitter.com/ryanstruyk/status/1176806140333740032

[Dr. Arch]

This has to terrify Biden's team....

https://twitter.com/ryanstruyk/status/1176806140333740032

This would explain how Biden's margins already appear to be much narrower than Clinton 2016's.

[OneJ]

This has to terrify Biden's team....

https://twitter.com/ryanstruyk/status/1176806140333740032

But, but Biden is locking it up with AA vote am I right?

[dunceDude]

https://twitter.com/gelliottmorris/status/1176855337481191424

After three great polls this morning, Warren has become the first person this primary to break 50% in betting odds on Predictit. Those numbers currently:



Warren is being considered by the highest percentage of voters—54%—and her nomination would disappoint only 7%, the lowest in the field. She has the highest enthusiasm, the most level support among different ages, and draws nearly equally from '16 Sanders and Hillary voters. She also just purchased at least 10 million dollars worth of ads in the first 4 states.

Per 538, she leads the Iowa polling average by 2 points and the New Hampshire by 11 points. She is down 5 in Nevada and 22 in South Carolina. She could lead in Nevada within a month or so. The conventional wisdom has written South Carolina off for Warren, but it may become at least competitive. Predict gives her a 25% chance of winning there.

I think we should expect a lot more heat from the Biden and Sanders camps because this is looking very real. It is very auspicious that no one has any great idea how to slow her down.

[Warren 4 Secretary of Everything]

This is great but I fear she might’ve peaked too early. Up to now Warren’s gotten pretty positive media coverage. Her competitors and the media might train more fire on her now.

But then the question becomes, what actual vulnerabilities does she have to be exploited? Their best bet might be on M4A, but even that is tenuous.

[Rookie Yinzer]

This is great but I fear she might’ve peaked too early. Up to now Warren’s gotten pretty positive media coverage. Her competitors and the media might train more fire on her now.

But then the question becomes, what actual vulnerabilities does she have to be exploited? Their best bet might be on M4A, but even that is tenuous.

Medicare for All and her wealth tax being unconstitutional is all I can think of. The rest of her plans are focused on rooting our corruption. Not a strong line of attack.

[JG]

I feel like Warren is really hard to attack from a democratic point of view, with the exception of her opposition to private insurances and trying to paint her as too extreme for the general. I have a hard time seeing Biden trying to call her a socialist, when the exact same attack has been used against the person thanks to whom he is the frontrunner right now.

[GeneralMacArthur]

One Warren weakness that I think will get exploited later is her lack of experience.

She has, what, 7 years in the Senate?  With few accomplishments (not her fault).  And then a few years with the CFPB and her time as a Harvard professor.

She doesn't have any foreign policy experience.  She doesn't have any background on racial issues.  Really she just has economic background, and repeats the Democratic platform on everything else with a sprinkling of strategically extreme policy positions, like supporting reparations.

You can definitely make an argument that she's not the complete package and would be better suited as a cabinet member or VP.

To really take advantage of this, we would need some non-economic issue to matter in the primary, which hasn't happened yet.  Gun control never had much impact.  But that would have been one thing where, Biden wrote and passed the 1994 assault weapons ban, what has Warren done?

[Landslide Lyndon]

One Warren weakness that I think will get exploited later is her lack of experience.

She has, what, 7 years in the Senate?  With few accomplishments (not her fault).  And then a few years with the CFPB and her time as a Harvard professor.

She doesn't have any foreign policy experience.  She doesn't have any background on racial issues.  Really she just has economic background, and repeats the Democratic platform on everything else with a sprinkling of strategically extreme policy positions, like supporting reparations.

You can definitely make an argument that she's not the complete package and would be better suited as a cabinet member or VP.

To really take advantage of this, we would need some non-economic issue to matter in the primary, which hasn't happened yet.  Gun control never had much impact.  But that would have been one thing where, Biden wrote and passed the 1994 assault weapons ban, what has Warren done?

You see Bernie bros? That's how you criticize another candidate without coming off as a hysterical troll.

[Xing]

This has to terrify Biden's team....

https://twitter.com/ryanstruyk/status/1176806140333740032

These are the kinds of margins that make me think Warren really could go all the way. She can withstand losing Southern states if Biden's margins are in the 15-20 range, rather than the 40-50 range. Also, I'm not sure we can conclude that Warren has "peaked." She's been steadily rising for months, as opposed to just getting a momentary surge.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

One Warren weakness that I think will get exploited later is her lack of experience.

She has, what, 7 years in the Senate?  With few accomplishments (not her fault).  And then a few years with the CFPB and her time as a Harvard professor.

She doesn't have any foreign policy experience.  She doesn't have any background on racial issues.  Really she just has economic background, and repeats the Democratic platform on everything else with a sprinkling of strategically extreme policy positions, like supporting reparations.

You can definitely make an argument that she's not the complete package and would be better suited as a cabinet member or VP.

To really take advantage of this, we would need some non-economic issue to matter in the primary, which hasn't happened yet.  Gun control never had much impact.  But that would have been one thing where, Biden wrote and passed the 1994 assault weapons ban, what has Warren done?

If only she had Biden's decades of experience being wrong on almost every major post-Cold War foreign policy issue.

[Rookie Yinzer]

https://twitter.com/daveweigel/status/1176916896689659904

Like I said time and time again, Warren would be no different than any other White Democrat getting the nomination. Her advantage over folks like Kerry and Gore is that black voters make up more of the electorate in some key swing states than they did in 2000 and 2004 not to mention Asian and Latino populations booming in some of these same states plus others.

Biden being the preferred choice for old black super voters in the primary does not make him the stronger choice in the general.

And look at her advantage with whites w/o college degrees. Looks to me like Warren is the strongest bet for MI/WI/PA while holding her own in AZ/NC/GA/FL

[Dr. Arch]

This is great but I fear she might’ve peaked too early. Up to now Warren’s gotten pretty positive media coverage. Her competitors and the media might train more fire on her now.

But then the question becomes, what actual vulnerabilities does she have to be exploited? Their best bet might be on M4A, but even that is tenuous.

You assume that this is her peak, and I believe that it isn't. She has a lot of room to grow still, and she's not a flavor of the month candidate. She's been building a coalition slowly over months, and now the dam is about to burst on Biden.

[The Mikado]

This is great but I fear she might’ve peaked too early. Up to now Warren’s gotten pretty positive media coverage. Her competitors and the media might train more fire on her now.

But then the question becomes, what actual vulnerabilities does she have to be exploited? Their best bet might be on M4A, but even that is tenuous.

What makes you think she's peaking? She's only in the low 20s. Plenty of room to grow.

[McNukes™ #NYCMMWasAHero]

This is a great video showing why real leftists shouldn't support Warren--though I of course oppose all Democrats, I'm more opposed to her than to Sanders, Biden, or Gabbard after watching this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3LeFbqK2Pf8

[AngryBudgie]

This is a great video showing why real leftists shouldn't support Warren--though I of course oppose all Democrats, I'm more opposed to her than to Sanders, Biden, or Gabbard after watching this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3LeFbqK2Pf8

Its Jimmy Dore just so everybody can save themselves a click.

[GP270watch]

https://twitter.com/daveweigel/status/1176916896689659904

Like I said time and time again, Warren would be no different than any other White Democrat getting the nomination. Her advantage over folks like Kerry and Gore is that black voters make up more of the electorate in some key swing states than they did in 2000 and 2004 not to mention Asian and Latino populations booming in some of these same states plus others.

Biden being the preferred choice for old black super voters in the primary does not make him the stronger choice in the general.

And look at her advantage with whites w/o college degrees. Looks to me like Warren is the strongest bet for MI/WI/PA while holding her own in AZ/NC/GA/FL

 That poll on white voters w/o college degree slays the whole Biden narrative that he will bring back the working class. It never made sense either as Biden has been in government for decades and whites w/o a college degree is the group that seems to be most hostile to government and the status quo.

[Anti Democrat Democrat Club]

Like I said, we don't need a fifth posts saying "POCAHONTAS BAD" or "GOP TALKING POINTS STUPID". Me posting it would add nothing to the discussion and change no minds.


I'll call out racism any time I see it on here, whether it be from the right or the center. You want me to be blunt? Keep your bigotry to your goddamn self if you don't want to be called a bigot.

 You are a liar. You don't call out obvious racism as you yourself stated because it's just too much for you, so you say nothing. But let somebody use the term Bernie Bro and you infer all kinds of gibberish about racism and sexism when nobody said anything racist or sexist. This is completely pathetic, especially when the attacks by the Bernie Bros always seem to be loaded with extra vitriol against our Democratic women candidates. Your line of thinking seems very dubious to me.

And you're a charlatan exploiting marginalized people for your own personal gain. Want to be an ally? Don't ostracize and paternalize women and POC who disagree with you.

[GP270watch]

Like I said, we don't need a fifth posts saying "POCAHONTAS BAD" or "GOP TALKING POINTS STUPID". Me posting it would add nothing to the discussion and change no minds.


I'll call out racism any time I see it on here, whether it be from the right or the center. You want me to be blunt? Keep your bigotry to your goddamn self if you don't want to be called a bigot.

 You are a liar. You don't call out obvious racism as you yourself stated because it's just too much for you, so you say nothing. But let somebody use the term Bernie Bro and you infer all kinds of gibberish about racism and sexism when nobody said anything racist or sexist. This is completely pathetic, especially when the attacks by the Bernie Bros always seem to be loaded with extra vitriol against our Democratic women candidates. Your line of thinking seems very dubious to me.

And you're a charlatan exploiting marginalized people for your own personal gain. Want to be an ally? Don't ostracize and paternalize women and POC who disagree with you.

 You don't know anything about me and your post is completely pathetic. I'm not sorry I exposed your complete double standard of ignoring blatant racism all while trying to use others to excuse boorish and harassing behavior online.

[John Dule]

It's true that a majority of Americans like their private health insurance. However, it's also true that almost all of those people aren't chronically ill. Of course healthy people will say they like their health care; they haven't had to worry about it. The problem is that the current system isn't working for the people who actually need it.

Warren needs to just come out and say this instead of pussyfooting around the subject all the time-- avoiding saying whether she'll raise taxes or abolish private insurance or whatever. She gains nothing by being vague right now, especially when her main appeal is that she's a policy wonk. I'm a libertarian, but even Adam Smith said the government needed to provide certain services, and given the number of perverse incentives in our current health care system I'm somewhat open to the discussion of single-payer health care. But that requires an actual discussion in which the progressive left clearly states what it wants to do.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

It's true that a majority of Americans like their private health insurance. However, it's also true that almost all of those people aren't chronically ill. Of course healthy people will say they like their health care; they haven't had to worry about it. The problem is that the current system isn't working for the people who actually need it.

Warren needs to just come out and say this instead of pussyfooting around the subject all the time-- avoiding saying whether she'll raise taxes or abolish private insurance or whatever. She gains nothing by being vague right now, especially when her main appeal is that she's a policy wonk. I'm a libertarian, but even Adam Smith said the government needed to provide certain services, and given the number of perverse incentives in our current health care system I'm somewhat open to the discussion of single-payer health care. But that requires an actual discussion in which the progressive left clearly states what it wants to do.

She literally raised her hand to say she’d abolish private insurance in the first debate.

[Warren 4 Secretary of Everything]

This is great but I fear she might’ve peaked too early. Up to now Warren’s gotten pretty positive media coverage. Her competitors and the media might train more fire on her now.

But then the question becomes, what actual vulnerabilities does she have to be exploited? Their best bet might be on M4A, but even that is tenuous.

What makes you think she's peaking? She's only in the low 20s. Plenty of room to grow.

I’m just worried how her numbers will hold up once the media turns on her and she starts facing more scrutiny. She’s done well so far, and I hope she can keep it up.

[John Dule]

It's true that a majority of Americans like their private health insurance. However, it's also true that almost all of those people aren't chronically ill. Of course healthy people will say they like their health care; they haven't had to worry about it. The problem is that the current system isn't working for the people who actually need it.

Warren needs to just come out and say this instead of pussyfooting around the subject all the time-- avoiding saying whether she'll raise taxes or abolish private insurance or whatever. She gains nothing by being vague right now, especially when her main appeal is that she's a policy wonk. I'm a libertarian, but even Adam Smith said the government needed to provide certain services, and given the number of perverse incentives in our current health care system I'm somewhat open to the discussion of single-payer health care. But that requires an actual discussion in which the progressive left clearly states what it wants to do.

She literally raised her hand to say she’d abolish private insurance in the first debate.

She's been far less candid lately, especially as it relates to taxes. If some doofus like Colbert can stump you on policy, then you probably need to straighten a few things out.

I’m just worried how her numbers will hold up once the media turns on her and she starts facing more scrutiny. She’s done well so far, and I hope she can keep it up.

Still sticking with that name, eh?

[GoTfan]

This gets back tomy favourite point: Warren I think is smart enough to know she won't get a full abolition of private insurance, but starting from an extreme negotiating position means you get more of what you want in the final bill.

People say this over and over and over but can you provide a single historical example of this working?

Any example, just one, where a party took an absurd, extremist position and forced the other side to negotiate them down to reason?

Unless the other side is forced to negotiate, it doesn't work.  They just won't come to the negotiating table at all.  It's like going to a Porsche dealership and saying "my starting offer is $10,000" you'll just get laughed at and nobody will talk to you.

Also, by making this point you admit that the public option is the true goal and single payer is absurd and extreme.  Yet you guys hate on Biden and moderate Dems every day and twice on Sunday for supporting the public option.  Which is it?

Republican Party on Obamacare. Next please.

[Gass3268]

https://twitter.com/lauralitvan/status/1177207547444506624?s=21