RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

Galindez writes: "There is a larger campaign for Elizabeth Warren on the ground in Iowa and New Hampshire than there is for any other prospective candidate."

Elizabeth Warren. (photo: Joshua Roberts/Getty Images)
Elizabeth Warren. (photo: Joshua Roberts/Getty Images)


Will Elizabeth Warren Change Her Mind?

By Scott Galindez, Reader Supported News

13 March 15

 

keep wrestling with this question. Before Elizabeth Warren’s interview in January in Forbes Magazine, I thought the odds she would run were 50/50. While she kept saying she was not running for president, she stopped short of saying she wouldn’t. It was clear to me that she knew what reporters were trying to get her to say, but she refused. She has also been acting like a candidate for president, as she did when she joined Joe Biden, Jim Webb, Bernie Sanders, and Martin O’Malley at the International Association of Firefighters Legislative Conference & Presidential Forum on Monday, March 9th.

It is true, she has not done the traditional things a presidential candidate would have done by now. She has not formed a presidential exploratory committee she could use to start raising funds. She has not hired any staff yet. But does she have to? In 2015 the game has changed.

There is a larger campaign for her on the ground in Iowa and New Hampshire than there is for any other prospective candidate. In Iowa there is a staff of 8 that includes a state director, four regional field directors, and three campus organizers. There are two offices in Iowa, one in Cedar Rapids and one in Des Moines. The state field director, Blair Lawton, was a regional field director in Iowa for Obama in 2012. There is staff on the three major university campuses, Drake University, University of Iowa, and Iowa State. They are holding visibility events (even in zero-degree weather) and what they are calling “emergency caucus meetings.” Phone banking and outreach to past caucus-goers is under way.

In New Hampshire, the state director and veteran organizer Kurt Ehrenberg was most recently legislative and political director for the New Hampshire AFL-CIO, and previously served for seven years as the Sierra Club’s representative in New Hampshire and the other New England states.

Most prospective candidates are polling in single digits. Warren, despite saying she isn’t running, is polling at 19%. That is a strong number. Obama had already declared by this time in 2007 and had surged to 25% in the polls. Warren has not declared and is already close to 25%.

Nate Cohn of The New York Times wrote a thoughtful piece March 10th arguing that Warren could not build the kind of coalition that Obama built. He argued that she would not get beyond the traditional liberal/progressive base that supported past candidates that fell short.

I think he is dead wrong. None of the candidates he mentioned – Bill Bradley, Gary Heart, Paul Tsongas, or Jerry Brown – had the populist message of Elizabeth Warren. Only Brown had any outsider appeal.

Cohn said there is no hot-button issue like the war in Iraq for Warren to capitalize on. I believe there are issues that Warren champions that a candidate who people believe is genuine can ride to victory.

Income Inequality

Even the Republicans are talking about income inequality in their speeches. Their solution is the same old entitlement reform, meaning Social Security, Medicare, Welfare, and every other social program being cut. Elizabeth Warren has credibility on this issue. She has been talking about how the system is rigged for the wealthy since she emerged on the political scene. She is ready to fight, and only one other candidate has the credibility on the issue that she has: Bernie Sanders, who despite actively campaigning can’t get out of single digits in the polls. I always hear the same thing when talking to progressives here in Iowa, including “Run Warren Run” supporters: “Bernie is great but most people are not going to vote for a Socialist.” If Warren doesn’t run and Bernie does, he will do a fantastic job of raising the issues, and I would love to see a groundswell of support. Sanders may even be better than Warren on some issues, but Warren has struck a nerve with the American people that Bernie hasn’t.

Student Loan Debt

Elizabeth Warren: “Rising student-loan debt is an economic emergency. Forty million people are dealing with $1.2 trillion in outstanding student debt. It’s stopping young people from buying homes, from buying cars and from starting small businesses. We need to take action.”

In my opinion she has to go further than she has so far on this issue. I understand that she is trying to take action in the Senate that is achievable and knows the votes are not there for free college education for all. Her leadership on the issue has not gone unnoticed, and despite her age, I think young people would return to the polls for a Warren candidacy. She has fought to lower interest rates, to allow the current debt to be refinanced at lower interest rates. I would think that a candidate Warren would have bolder proposals and, because she has already fought so hard, would have credibility on the issue.

Bank Reform

Elizabeth Warren: “Today, if a Wall Street bank goes out and makes the wildest bet on earth, it will keep the profits if the bet pays off and you and I and millions of other American taxpayers could be on the hook if the bet falls short. But if a family gets into trouble, if a family loses a job, if they’ve been tricked into some crazy payment scheme or if someone in the household has gotten sick, the answer is that you are on your own. The same is true for small businesses – you are on your own. Those are the rules we’re operating under, and those rules are wrong.”

This is her appeal. She articulates better than any other politician what so many people in America are feeling. When Elizabeth Warren talks about injustice people believe her. When Jeb Bush talks about it people are skeptical.

Trade

There is a huge opening here for any candidate who is not Clinton. All of the Republicans are free-traders, and so is Hillary. Labor has got to be searching for a way to find someone who can win the White House who is not for more trade deals that will ship jobs overseas. O’Malley, Webb, and Sanders will try to fill this void, but would labor be wise to back a candidate who hasn’t shown that they have what it takes to win? The TPP will likely be signed by President Obama before he leaves office. If it isn’t, Hillary or any Republican would likely sign it. In a conference call with reporters on Wednesday, Elizabeth Warren blasted a provision in the deal called the investor-state dispute settlement mechanism, an independent, international court with the power to force the U.S. government and American corporations to abide by its rulings. “The name may sound a little wonky, but this is a powerful provision that would fundamentally tilt the playing field further in favor of multinational corporations. Worse yet, it would undermine U.S. sovereignty,” said Warren. On the same day, the AFL-CIO announced plans to freeze political contributions to Democratic lawmakers who support fast-track trade authority for Obama. Hillary Clinton supports the trade deal.

Nate Cohn is right: Elizabeth Warren can’t build Obama’s coalition, but she can build a different coalition, a coalition that is fed up with the rigged system. She won’t need 80% of the African American vote to win the nomination. There are plenty of white voters who are fed up with the different rules for those at the top.

Hillary Clinton leads the polls and is the favorite to become the next president of the United States. There is no doubt she would make a better president than anyone in the GOP field. Not being a career politician, I believe Warren needs convincing that she is up the task. The American people are looking for a champion who has not been a career politician, that is part of her appeal. I believe that every time Warren says no, it is because she doesn’t want to run for president. Hillary, Bernie, Jeb, and the rest want to be president. Elizabeth Warren may not want the job. When someone is appointed to direct a recovery project after a national disaster, it is a job they wish they didn’t have to do. If Elizabeth Warren realizes that her country needs her to lead, she might just just answer the call.



Scott Galindez attended Syracuse University, where he first became politically active. The writings of El Salvador's slain archbishop Oscar Romero and the on-campus South Africa divestment movement converted him from a Reagan supporter to an activist for Peace and Justice. Over the years he has been influenced by the likes of Philip Berrigan, William Thomas, Mitch Snyder, Don White, Lisa Fithian, and Paul Wellstone. Scott met Marc Ash while organizing counterinaugural events after George W. Bush's first stolen election. Scott will be spending a year covering the presidential election from Iowa.

Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 

Comments   

We are going to return to our original fully-moderated format in the comments section.

The abusive complaints in the comment sections are just too far out of control at this point and have become a significant burden on our staff. As a result, our moderators will review all comments prior to publication. Comments will no longer go live immediately. Please be patient and check back.

To improve your chances of seeing your comment published, avoid confrontational or antagonistic methods of communication. Really that is the problem we are confronting.

We encourage all views. We discourage ad hominem disparagement.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

 
+48 # politicfix 2015-03-13 13:25
Elizabeth Warren is smart and underestimated. Scott Brown could attest to that. She has a pulse on the people and she's more than aware, based on her own past, as to what is important to most Americans. To some politicians issues are parlayed into merely words with nothing behind them. To her, they carry substance and I for one, can tell the difference. The truth can be darn attractive. Everyone wants a "tip off" point where they can be the first to say...she's running. In the meantime, if she can stay on message, and drag a few people into a conversation about "equal rights", all the better. The only reason they have to fear her is that she bases her reason for running on a form of justice for everybody that harms nobody. Who can argue with that unless you have a history of being bought and paid for by lobbyists and corporations, at which point their hands are tied, and they can only construct shallow words to mimic the same message without really meaning what they're saying. Run Elizabeth Run!
 
 
+42 # Ken Halt 2015-03-13 17:42
EW is savvy enough and determined enough to do anything she sets her mind to, and I have supported her from the start, having lived in MA when her senatorial campaign started. That said, I don't think people should be trying to draft her into a presidential run. Presidential politics are ugly, down and dirty mud wrestling with pigs, Repubs will fling absurdities and ad hominem attacks and unfortunately Fox viewers can't tell the difference between fact and fiction. I think we should respect EW's choice not to run at this time, she is happy and effective in the Senate and my sense about her is that she would be uncomfortable and unhappy in a national campaign. If she herself ever decides to be a presidential candidate by her own unpressured free will, I will be the first one out there knocking on doors and mobilizing voters, but please don't force her into a bruising ordeal that she doesn't herself want to take on.
 
 
+27 # Texas Aggie 2015-03-13 19:23
Guys, please listen to Ken. Dr. Warren is positioned right where she wants to be and needs to be in the Senate making sure that economic issues are being addressed with the well-being of Americans in mind.

Having said that, what is happening is that people still buy into the "Great Man" theory of history. No single person is going to be able to save the country. It's going to have to be a movement involving everyone at the ground level. The Revolution didn't happen just because of a few people. It happened with the support of thousands. The same with Civil Rights, the end to Viet Nam, the institution of Social Security, everything that matters in our history. Even FDR couldn't save us. Remember, “You’ve convinced me. Now go out and make me do it.”?
 
 
+15 # cymricmorty 2015-03-13 20:12
I'm in complete agreement with Ken Halt and Texas Aggie.
 
 
+25 # Old4Poor 2015-03-13 21:15
Agreed. Like the late Ted Kennedy she is setting up to be a power in the Senate which will give her more power than she would have as a President fighting a lunatic GOP Congressiional Base. Who needs that?

I See her as a future Supreme Court Justice.
 
 
+7 # cybersleuth58 2015-03-14 08:22
I'd love to see Professor Warren on SCOTUS. She could return some credibility to a Court which has been so corrupted. It's hard to believe Earl Warren was a Republican; yet, he presided over some of the most important cases SCOTUS has heard in the past century. Too bad he was followed by an idiot (Warren Burger) and then a megalomaniac (William Rehnquist) in his technicolor robes.
 
 
+8 # Linda 2015-03-14 10:29
I totally agree with you Ken Halt .
If she wanted to run she would have said so by now .
Please get behind Bernie Sanders ,he is a good man his heart is in the right place.
Hillary was bought by Wall Street long ago and would never change the way things are done in Washington .
 
 
+1 # Buddha 2015-03-16 15:04
I would give my eye-teeth to have a nationally televised Warren vs Clinton debate, one with hard hitting questions on issues like TPP, bankruptcy reform, student loan forgiveness, etc. Clinton would come across like the corporatist Goldwater Girl that she is, shilling for the status quo. And I expect those poll numbers would change fast. Problem is the corporate main-stream media would be rigging it for Hillary.
 
 
+13 # Adoregon 2015-03-13 17:25
Warren/Sanders in 2016!!
 
 
-35 # Thomas0008 2015-03-13 19:35
warren/sanders, two supporters of the Genocide in Gaza this summer, are NOT people we need any where near our White House.
 
 
-12 # Thomas0008 2015-03-14 10:22
amazing how 22 people support the slaughter of children in Gaza
 
 
+1 # jon 2015-03-14 11:40
Do you have an alternative?
 
 
-8 # kalpal 2015-03-14 10:23
But you like Republican supporters of war? If you have a dictionary, I would suggest you look up the word genocide. Americans have not been proactive in stopping it not have they avoided in participating in it. In either event, look at 2000 people who dies because hamas demanded they become human shields. Israel informed gazans of when and when where they would be bombing next. Hamas forbid anyone from moving away and only hamas had bunkers to hide it because no citizens were allowed to build bomb shelters. Genocide is when you intentionally force people to die as hamas did. When did hamas inform Israeli citizens of their intention to bomb? You are in effect a seriously ignorant person with a position to defend that is not only indefensible, its is silly.
 
 
0 # ritawalpoleague 2015-03-16 10:11
Or Sanders/Warren in 2016. What a winner that would be (of course, with Bernie running as a Dem.).

SANDERS PANDERS NOT, TO THE 1% (and neither does Warren).
 
 
+4 # 47scooter 2015-03-13 17:33
I was thinking Warren/Kucinich in 2016 -- Elizabeth Kucinich !!
 
 
-30 # cybersleuth58 2015-03-13 18:09
Too bad Elizabeth's not qualified to run as VP.
 
 
-15 # Thomas0008 2015-03-13 19:36
Elizabeth Kucinich would probably make a more honest candidate... and do a better job than warren...
 
 
+8 # WestWinds 2015-03-13 21:07
Quoting cybersleuth58:
Too bad Elizabeth's not qualified to run as VP.


--- I don't know why people gave this so many negative votes. Elizabeth Kucinich can't run because she is a foreign national. The VP has to be ready to step into the presidency in the event the president is unable to fulfill his/her duties. Elizabeth K. doesn't qualify as a matter of our own laws prohibiting foreign nationals from getting into our government. (Now we need to tell this to our SCOTUS that gave us Citizens United allowing foreign national corporations (as people) to get into our government; evidently, the SCOTUS isn't familiar with American law on this point.)
 
 
+2 # cybersleuth58 2015-03-14 07:43
Exactly. I wasn't saying anything negative about Ms. Kucinich; as a person born in the UK she simply isn't qualified as matter of law. I'm very disappointed that Americans know so little about US history and even less about the law.

The LAW: To be VP, one must be 35 years of age, "a natural born citizen", be a current US citizen, and reside in a US state or territory.

Ipso facto, she cannot run for VP.
 
 
+1 # motamanx 2015-03-16 09:51
John McCain was born in Panama. Didn't stop him. Luckily, the voters did.
 
 
0 # reiverpacific 2015-03-16 18:15
Quoting cybersleuth58:
Exactly. I wasn't saying anything negative about Ms. Kucinich; as a person born in the UK she simply isn't qualified as matter of law. I'm very disappointed that Americans know so little about US history and even less about the law.

The LAW: To be VP, one must be 35 years of age, "a natural born citizen", be a current US citizen, and reside in a US state or territory.

Ipso facto, she cannot run for VP.


I didn't know that Mrs Kucinich wasn't a US citizen.
Maybe like me, she'd like to be a dual citizen but the US's attitude to this is like Dimwits Bush's "You're either with us or against us". As far as the UK is concerned it's OK to be a dual but NOT here, unless a UK citizen has children born in the US (unless one has a proven unique ability of value to the "Homeland" like the Nazi Scientists who were spirited over here post-WW11, escaping their true place on the Nuremberg gallows.
Another example of "Selective" filtering of worthiness and American exceptionalism.
 
 
-13 # Rain17 2015-03-13 18:17
Kucinich is unelectable--an d far out of the mainstream. But only at RSN could people be deluded enough to think that a ticket with Kucinich could come close to getting 270 electoral votes.
 
 
+9 # WestWinds 2015-03-13 21:09
Quoting Rain17:
Kucinich is unelectable--and far out of the mainstream. But only at RSN could people be deluded enough to think that a ticket with Kucinich could come close to getting 270 electoral votes.


--- If there are enough votes to get Elizabeth Warren elected, then this country is coming about and coming down off its Right-wing zombie zealot high.
 
 
-8 # Rain17 2015-03-14 01:37
No. I don't think a ticket with Kucinich on it would come even close to winning. It would probably lose in a landslide.
 
 
+2 # WestWinds 2015-03-15 10:51
Quoting Rain17:
No. I don't think a ticket with Kucinich on it would come even close to winning. It would probably lose in a landslide.


--- Rain, the Kucinich mentioned in the "Kucinich is unelectable" is not Dennis, we were talking about his English wife. She is unelectable because she is a foreign national and our laws prohibit this.

And the "Elizabeth" we were talking about running was Warren, not Elizabeth Kucinich. You are behind the curve here.
 
 
+1 # cybersleuth58 2015-03-14 07:45
Kucinich is only unelectable bc she wasn't born in the US. As a matter of law she can never be POTUS or VP. At least not without amending the Constitution.
 
 
+7 # Blackjack 2015-03-13 17:44
Or Sanders/Warren. . .I don't care which!
 
 
+13 # Stilldreamin1 2015-03-13 18:00
People might want to investigate her views on foreign policy before taking the plunge.
 
 
-13 # Thomas0008 2015-03-13 19:38
well said Still. She supported the slaughter in Gaza this past summer, as did sanders. They have no business near our White House after having done this. !!!
 
 
+4 # WestWinds 2015-03-13 21:10
Quoting Thomas0008:
well said Still. She supported the slaughter in Gaza this past summer, as did sanders. They have no business near our White House after having done this. !!!


--- Got any better candidate suggestions?
I guess you support Hillary Clinton, huh? Maybe Sanders or Warren aren't perfect, but they are a heckuva lot better than Jeb Bush or sHillary Clinton.
 
 
-1 # Thomas0008 2015-03-13 21:42
yes west I do have another candidate. Cynthia McKinney. Now go ahead and trash the suggestion with your inane useless BS. I have heard it all and treat it like the garbage part of the problem that it is.
 
 
+1 # jcdav 2015-03-14 07:23
Thomas- pot calling kettle black- after listening to Your "inane useless BS"
 
 
+2 # cybersleuth58 2015-03-14 08:26
Talk about unelectable. I like her politics, too, but hell will freeze over before she'd win. And I won't throw my vote away on someone who can't win. I may as well throw the lever for the GOP. And, say what you will about the lesser of the two evils, the other evil happens to be far more dangerous to this country. Unless, of course, you fancy living in a theocracy.
 
 
-4 # Thomas0008 2015-03-14 10:19
cyber ,obama was bush 3... he followed the PNAC war plan... read it and weep... he gave healthcare away to the insurance companies... he jailed more whistle blowers than bush 2, after bragging about being an open and honest president... he gave our food supply to monsanto... I could go on...
evil is evil, more or less. I am done with it. warren is obama 2 and bush 4 talk the sweet emotional lies then do what she wants and or is told...
 
 
+1 # jon 2015-03-14 11:43
I hope you enjoy having another Bush administration.
 
 
+1 # cybersleuth58 2015-03-16 11:00
Saying that Obama is Bush-3 is akin to claiming Obama is a Muslim socialist. Hyperbole doesn't bolster anybody's credibility. Without Obama, we'd have another Scalia & Thomas rather than Kagan and Sotomayor.

On her 1st deployment to Afghanistan, Staff Sergeant Charlie Morgan discovered she had breast cancer. She went into remission, but the cancer returned with a vengeance. Charlie's ONLY request was that upon her death her wife and small child receive Charlie's death benefits. Charlie died not knowing what would happen to them since DOMA was still law.

http://www.legacy.com/ns/charlie-morgan-obituary/163011201

Some of those in office want to supplant the constitution with biblical law. Had McCain/Palin been in the WH, Charlie's family wouldn't have had a prayer. Obama has disappointed me on many occasions, but he's also shown the courage of his convictions.

Folks just don't understand the danger of religious extremists bent on undermining the Constitution. Some conservatives believe the majority has the legal/moral authority to determine the rights of others. Fundamental rights are ours from birth; it's not up to anyone to decide who gets them and who does not.

Unless we recognize that, our way of life is lost.
 
 
+2 # Linda 2015-03-14 11:01
Actually cybersleuth58 you are throwing your vote away by voting for Elizabeth Warren a candidate who has never wanted to run for president and will refuse to run.
Who do you think that will leave us on the left as a Presidential candidate if you knock Bernie out of the race and Elizabeth isn't running ? Hillary, and she is a Republican in Democratic clothing .Better you back someone who wants to run who has the experience and is good for this country a real liberal Bernie Sanders !
 
 
+2 # cybersleuth58 2015-03-16 09:22
I support Bernie completely. If you asked the average American for a definition of a socialist, they'd say "a sworn enemy of the US". Plenty think socialism = communism. Hell will freeze over before US voters elect a self-proclaimed socialist.

Warren is committed to the people who elected her & has no desire to run for higher office. But she has an astute understanding of banking, the world economy, corporate hijinks and taxes. She is an advocate for consumers, the middle class and the poor. That makes her the capable candidate to get us out of this mess.

I'd love to vote for a progressive! But, if the options are Hillary vs. a theocrat like Cruz or a libertarian like Rand Paul, I won't hesitate to vote for Hillary.

Like it or not, she WILL support a woman's right to control her own reproductive system. That might not be important to you, but it's critical to our way of life. If we must go back to perennial pregnancies, kiss good-bye to every gain we've made over the past 100 years.

We are ONE SCOTUS vote away from losing Roe vs. Wade. Re-read Hobby Lobby while you're at it.

I left Fantasy Island in the 1980's. Since then, I have voted AGAINST the more dangerous of two candidates in every election. I don't think I've ever had the luxury of voting FOR someone. Anyone who doesn't fancy living in a theocracy should learn to hold his/her nose when they enter the voting booth.

Welcome to the real world of politics.
 
 
+2 # WestWinds 2015-03-15 11:01
Quoting Thomas0008:
yes west I do have another candidate. Cynthia McKinney. Now go ahead and trash the suggestion with your inane useless BS. I have heard it all and treat it like the garbage part of the problem that it is.


--- Au contraire. McKinney has guts and I think she is spot on with many of her positions. I say, have her run in the Democratic Primary. If she got the nomination, I'd vote for her.
 
 
0 # reiverpacific 2015-03-16 18:21
Quoting Thomas0008:
yes west I do have another candidate. Cynthia McKinney. Now go ahead and trash the suggestion with your inane useless BS. I have heard it all and treat it like the garbage part of the problem that it is.


I'd love to see Cynthia McKinney run also but she's even less acceptable than Kucinich or even Warren to the "electability" quotient or scale committee (my concept only), which gets a chosen few under their lens.
McKinney's biggest problem -she don't take shit from ANYBODY and is a true populist/even Socialist but with a lower (suppressed) profile than Sen' Sanders, who is (lets be honest) too old to run.
 
 
+6 # Linda 2015-03-14 10:51
Don't be too sure of yourself about Sanders support on Israel ,he sure didn't show any support for Netanyahu when he protested his coming to speak before Congress by not showing up .
I think Bernie and probably Warren also support Israel to but not its leadership which has become power hungry .
The majority of the people are not against Israels right to exist they are against the taking of Palestinian land and the genocide of the Palestinian people committed under Netanyahu leadership .
 
 
+1 # WestWinds 2015-03-15 10:56
Quoting Stilldreamin1:
People might want to investigate her views on foreign policy before taking the plunge.


--- It would be a good thing if Elizabeth Warren clarified her stance on Israel by writing an article on her reasons since this is such a hot button.

I read an article a while back that claimed an alleged triumvirate between Israel, the US and England for control of the world. I've not seen any follow-up articles on this, though. (Matt Taibbi would do a great job of unraveling this mystery for us; he's good at such things.)
 
 
+27 # cybersleuth58 2015-03-13 18:06
This country was on the edge of another Great Depression in 2008 when Obama took the WH. He averted the crisis but the reforms needed to keep it from happening again were never passed. From what the experts are saying, it's not a question of whether but when.

Out of our two-party system, one of those parties, the GOP, has been seized by far-right extremists. The other party, the Democrats, was seized by Wall Street Democrats, the Democratic Leadership Council, back in the late 1980's. Bill "Welfare Reform" Clinton was the first POTUS from that wing to be elected.

We've been stuck with trickle-down economics and a middle class in serious trouble since the 1980's. In 1992, the combined wealth of the Forbes Fortune 400 was about $300 billion. Since that time, it has QUINTUPLED while the resources middle class have simultaneously declined.

The TPP is poison. Scott's absolutely right; we all know Hillary WILL sign it. The TPP could be the straw that breaks the American worker's back. Neither the Democrats nor the Republicans are watching the back of the middle class anymore. There is only one person who can get us out of this mess, and it's not Hillary. It's Elizabeth Warren.

However, she is committed to the people of the Commonwealth of MA who elected her. Imagine having someone in the WH who actually HONORS promises made to those who elected her?
 
 
-9 # Thomas0008 2015-03-13 19:40
obama is pushing for fast track TPP and warren is bush 4 when it comes to Palestine. Elizabeth Mckinney is the only true candidate to support.
 
 
+4 # jcdav 2015-03-14 07:26
Do You have more than one issue you want to bitch about?...from your posts it would appear if the devil himself did what you think should happen in Palestine then they are qualified to be president....pl ease open your eyes.
 
 
-3 # Thomas0008 2015-03-14 10:13
looks like you can't read or count... plus sounds like u have a tummy ache...
 
 
+4 # cybersleuth58 2015-03-14 07:50
Last I heard, Warren boycotted BiBi's speech. She isn't as much of a tool regarding Gaza as you believe. I'll assume you are not from MA and not even a New Englander, bc, from your statements, you know next to nothing about her.
 
 
-4 # Thomas0008 2015-03-14 10:25
she boycotted it because she supported another war criminal, obama,and the republicans snubbing him in their invite. NOT because she thought bibi was a war criminal.
 
 
+1 # jon 2015-03-14 11:44
You Republicans are scared to death of Warren.
 
 
+1 # cybersleuth58 2015-03-16 11:15
And you know this how???

Admittedly, I don't know Warren personally, but close friends do. Our little legal community, while it is changing, is still a pretty small world where everyone knows everyone.

Either Warren's lied all of her adult life, or someone's had one too many trips to the Blarney stone.

I hate to be impolitic, but some people sound like a broken record.
 
 
+5 # Linda 2015-03-14 11:13
Wrong ! Elizabeth is not the only person who will fight for the middle class and poor. Bernie Sanders has been the peoples champion for years before Elizabeth was elected Senator . He has always fought for the middle class ,poor, elderly disabled ,children and the veterans in our country . I love Elizabeth but she doesn't have the experience Bernie has and she does not want to be President she is helpful in the Senate and she likes where she is.
 
 
+1 # cybersleuth58 2015-03-16 11:20
Warren will accomplish far more in Congress. As another post suggested, she'd be superb on SCOTUS. She knows the legal system, she's honest to a fault, and smart enough to understand how devastating bad law is.

Higher office would require that she compromise her principles to an extent that she might be unwilling. It would be disastrous to her personally and perhaps even ruinous to her professionally.

The Kochroaches would stop at nothing to crush someone like Warren, as they tried with Obama.
 
 
+4 # Farafalla 2015-03-13 18:16
I like both Warren and Sanders. Though I don't understand how Bernie, who I have heard more from than Liz, is being sidetracked by the media for someone who says she's not running.

That said, I have to take issue with the following: "She won’t need 80% of the African American vote to win the nomination. There are plenty of white voters who are fed up with the different rules for those at the top.

Hillary Clinton leads the polls and is the favorite to become the next president of the United States. There is no doubt she would make a better president than anyone in the GOP field."

I don't agree with any of that.
 
 
+8 # foxfilm 2015-03-13 20:53
Yep,Bernie's the answer, but Liz is the media darling.
 
 
+6 # jcdav 2015-03-14 07:31
Bernie has the broad knowledge/exper ience base, the track record and sincerity to be a good president, Warren would be a good VP left to handling economic issues and grooming for top slot next go around. At any rate Hillary is Repub lite and her loyalties are to Wall st. just like the majority of our "leadership"...
 
 
+4 # cybersleuth58 2015-03-14 07:59
"There is no doubt she would make a better president than anyone in the GOP field."

I don't agree..."

I'm going to assume you are a man. There is one thing we can count on from Hillary, it is her support for a woman's control over her reproductive system.

There isn't anyone in the current GOP lineup who is brave enough to make that claim.

If unwanted pregnancy was never a concern for you, I can understand why that would seem like no big deal to you. I assure you, however, that it resounds not only with middle-class white women, but also poor women and women of color.

I don't consider myself a one-issue voter. But, it's no longer just access to safe and legal abortion at stake, which is serious enough, but now it also includes birth control and the consistent minimization of sexual assault by far right conservatives.

I don't know if you have kids or plan to, but if you ever consider the possibility of having female offsping, you ought to think very hard about the position you take on these issues.
 
 
-2 # Linda 2015-03-14 11:45
I am a woman and I think your reasoning lacks common sense . We have other important issue she would never touch or she would vote with Republicans on ,so we would be back to Roe V Wade and made no ground on anything else . This is not a good thing by a long shot !
Other left wing candidates also champion womens rights including Bernie Sanders and he would have a very good chance of winning should everyone get onboard and stop wasting time and money on candidates that won't run or won't change the status quo.
This is why this country is going to hell in a handbasket . When Democrats are handed a candidate that is good for this country we don't vote for them because we say we are throwing away our vote,he is not electable . Well we wouldn't be throwing away our vote and he would be electable if everyone were onboard ! So why aren't we together on this instead of insisting on voting for the candidate who says she doesn't want to run or the one whose Republican lite ?
This really frustrates me to no end !
 
 
+1 # cybersleuth58 2015-03-16 12:57
Bernie and I share the SAME political positions. I supported Kucinich and voted for Obama. Voting for a self-proclaimed socialist is voting for the GOP.

Now, here's an anecdote. It's a true story!

My client had emergency stomach surgery. As you can imagine, post-op, tubes were everywhere!!! The incision extended from breast bone to the pubic symphysis.

Day 1 post-op, the MD discovers his patient is gay. He was the ONLY GI specialist for miles. ALL pain medication was discontinued bc her lifestyle jeopardized her immortal soul. The only way to "save" her soul was "suffering".

The heroes (RN's) call Hospital Admin, who called the patient's PCC, who ordered a morphine pump. (This was the 90's).

He routinely opined (in public) that AIDS was "god's punishment", & AIDS patients should be rounded up, placed in camps, & "humanely" exterminated.

Among his patients were nuns, an archbishop, priests, & "good Christians" who shared his beliefs. The medical board pulled his license here, but he still practices surgery down South. (Bible belt) and posts his poison on FB.

WADR, if it keeps nuts like HIM out of office, I'll vote for the Hillarys & Obamas every time. if I don't agree with them 90% of the time, it's better than the Christian Taliban.

I won't vote for someone who won't run (Warren). I refuse to hand the election to theocrats "wishing" Bernie could win. As a lawyer in politics for > 30 years, I'm realistic, not stupid.
 
 
+2 # Rain17 2015-03-13 18:31
Well, if she is going to run, she's going to have to start raising money and get staffers onboard. However, as she has said repeatedly she is not running, I take her at face value.

Again, as I've said before, the best I think she can do is how Kerry did in 2004. I just don't see her winning states like FL, OH, VA, CO, NC, IA, NM, and NV. I see her winning everything Kerry did in 2004, but not much more.

MA presidential candidates since JFK have not done well. But I know most people at RSN think she can even win in red states. I just don't see that happening.
 
 
0 # WestWinds 2015-03-13 21:17
Quoting Rain17:
Well, if she is going to run, she's going to have to start raising money and get staffers onboard. ..."


--- How many times does this have to be said? Elizabeth Warren is financed and backed by PCCC (Progressive Change Campaign Committee). They have been raising money for her all along.

I also believe if Elizabeth Warren stepped in at the eleventh hour, she'd still win in a landslide that would make Obama's first term support look like a hiccup.
 
 
+2 # Rain17 2015-03-14 01:37
I think you're honestly wrong. Just because she's popular here doesn't mean that she's popular everywhere else. I think you all overestimate the support for Warren.
 
 
+3 # WestWinds 2015-03-15 11:13
Quoting Rain17:
I think you're honestly wrong. Just because she's popular here doesn't mean that she's popular everywhere else. I think you all overestimate the support for Warren.


--- Look at the turn out for Obama when everyone believed he was a Progressive Liberal candidate. Look how disappointed people were (and angry, too) when they found out he was a "Moderate" "Centrist" a Republican in Democratic clothing. Look at how lousy Obama's approval ratings are (46%). I still think Elizabeth Warren would win in a landslide especially if the alternative is some yahoo RWNJ like Scott Walker or a Rick Santorum.

In this last Florida Mid-term election, the vast majority of the Democratic voters didn't go to the poles. Thus the Conservative RWNJ all got into office. But we are talking about the presidential elections and I think people will turn out and vote far more liberal than they have been doing with these so-called "Moderates" and "Centrists" who are actually just Republicans because they support war all over the place and a supply-side economy (plus things like TPP) all of which are totally toxic for America and Americans.
 
 
+2 # Linda 2015-03-14 11:53
If Elizabeth stepped in at the 11th hour that would split the Democratic vote between three candidates Bernie ,Hillary and Elizabeth that could cause a problem for all three .
 
 
+1 # cybersleuth58 2015-03-16 12:58
Absolutely. And, people who know Warren personally say she won't do that. Unlike Nader, whom I also favored, Warren doesn't have the ego to do that.
 
 
-4 # Thomas0008 2015-03-13 19:33
You left out one VERY IMPORTANT issue Scott. Warren supported the slaughter in Gaza this past summer. We need no more supporters of this Genocide any where near our White House !!!
 
 
-1 # WestWinds 2015-03-13 21:19
Quoting Thomas0008:
You left out one VERY IMPORTANT issue Scott. Warren supported the slaughter in Gaza this past summer. We need no more supporters of this Genocide any where near our White House !!!


--- You aren't going to get perfection with any candidate. Why Warren supported this is anybody's guess (personally, I think she must know something from being on the banking committee that has her supporting Israel,) but she would bring stability to this country first and we could worry about the rest later. Obama has been all about foreign policy and look what that's gotten us.
 
 
-5 # Thomas0008 2015-03-13 21:44
sorry west, but settling for the lessor of evil has got us where we are right now. Time to be done with that bad solution.
 
 
+3 # jcdav 2015-03-14 07:34
SO, Tom, just who (an electable candidate please) would YOU approve for pres?
 
 
-2 # jon 2015-03-14 11:46
Yes, enough Republican trolling.

Give us a viable, electable alternative to vote for, or shut up about what choices we do have.
 
 
+2 # WestWinds 2015-03-15 11:21
Quoting Thomas0008:
sorry west, but settling for the lessor of evil has got us where we are right now. Time to be done with that bad solution.


--- I agree with you here, too, Thomas0008.
And if we get someone (like your Cynthia McKinney) who has the guts to stand up to the insanity going on in the Congress and the SCOTUS, then I say, bring it on.
But so far, I don't see Cynthia McKinney making a run. I didn't even know she existed until you started talking about her. I don't see the White Right voting for her, but whose to say she couldn't win as a surprise candidate? Obama did it. So, why not McKinney. But she's going to have to get into the game first.
 
 
+1 # cybersleuth58 2015-03-16 13:03
How many times will you keep repeating that? We all know that. On balance, however, Warren is GREAT on many issues, not the least of which is the way predatory lenders enslave the poor. She has NO desire whatsoever to run.

Unless that changes, you can stop obsessing about Warren's position on Israel.

I loathe the Zionists... The way that the Palestinians are treated sickens me.

But I have to tell you, you've done something I didn't think possible. When you repeat the same point over and over and over, you manage to alienate even the folks who support your position.

Congrats. That's a rare talent.
 
 
+3 # lfeuille 2015-03-13 22:20
Quoting Thomas0008:
You left out one VERY IMPORTANT issue Scott. Warren supported the slaughter in Gaza this past summer. We need no more supporters of this Genocide any wh. ere near our White House !!!


Warren had bad advisors on Gaza. She does not know enough about it to formulate a policy on her own. That is her real weakness. She just does not know enough about things outside her area of expertise.
 
 
+2 # WestWinds 2015-03-15 11:24
Quoting lfeuille:
Quoting Thomas0008:
You left out one VERY IMPORTANT issue Scott. Warren supported the slaughter in Gaza this past summer. We need no more supporters of this Genocide any wh. ere near our White House !!!


Warren had bad advisors on Gaza. She does not know enough about it to formulate a policy on her own. That is her real weakness. She just does not know enough about things outside her area of expertise.


--- If this is the real reason, then Warren should have abstained from voting altogether. What the Israeli state has been doing to the Palestinians is as unforgivable as what Hitler did to the Jews.
 
 
+1 # cybersleuth58 2015-03-16 13:33
We don't know the context in which her vote was cast. It's one vote out of many. We just don't know and speculation is a usually a bad idea, right? Much better to confront her about it, when she's on a radio call-in show, or ask her in an email.

I don't think it is helpful to determine a person's ideological position on the basis of a vote or two, esp. votes out of context.

Congresspeople often agree to support certain issue(s) in exchange for votes/support on some other issue(s).

Perhaps Warren voted this way to gain an ally for some program or bill that we don't know about. And, as is usually true, positions OFTEN evolve!!

If she supports a specific position now, that does NOT mean she will next year. I've had back and forth discussions with politicians, watching them change their ideas about things that are important to me when I've put meat on bare bones. Putting real faces on these issues makes a world of difference.

Like anything else. Warren is a human being. Unlike a lot of the dead wood in Congress, her heart is usually in the right place. Start from THERE!

She's a real person with her heart in the right place. and go from there. As I have said, I don't know her personally, but friends of mine so. They tell me she's a genuinely caring person.

It works! (At least it does with juries).
 
 
+11 # Shorey13 2015-03-13 20:01
Neither Warren nor Sanders should still be identifying as Democrats. As noted above, Wall Street Centrists hijacked the Democratic Party in the 90's. Wait, what is Hillary's last name? Clinton? Is she any relation to the guy that sold the country down the river with NAFTA, welfare "reform" and the repeal of Glass Steagel (sp?) and eliminating regulation of derivatives on the advise of Larry Summers? How (except for the satyriasis) is she any different from her husband? Give me a break.

Even if a third party (Progressive!!! ) couldn't win, it could deny either of the mainstream candidates an electoral college majority, throwing the election to the House of Representatives . Chaos!!! Our only hope for real change is utter chaos, leading to a market crash and another Great Depression. Students of history know that the only time we every acted like a real civilization was during the last GD. Writers were paid to write. Artists to create art. Plenty of well paid work restoring our decrepit infrastructure. Bring it on!
 
 
-2 # Thomas0008 2015-03-13 21:47
warren is doing just what obama did. Say all the right things to play to emotions, then do just what she did when it comes to action. Support the Genocide in Gaza. Time to be Rid of lying deceiving wolves in sheep's clothing once and for all. Wake up folks. Don't fall for it again.
 
 
+1 # jcdav 2015-03-14 07:37
I've yet to hear who (might be electable) you would BE FOR (you could even go with an unkonown , listing qualifications) , we have been exposed to your ISSUE (singular) for this entire thread hows about putting forth someone for consideration instead of your broken record bitchin?
 
 
+1 # WestWinds 2015-03-15 11:28
Quoting Thomas0008:
warren is doing just what obama did. Say all the right things to play to emotions, then do just what she did when it comes to action. Support the Genocide in Gaza. Time to be Rid of lying deceiving wolves in sheep's clothing once and for all. Wake up folks. Don't fall for it again.



--- I think you're being a little hard on Warren here, Thomas. In the first place, she hasn't said she would run, yet. And if she did make a run, I'm sure this would have to be addressed. ALL politicians have to be held accountable for their voting records to We the People. This is what a democratic republic is all about and We the People are rejecting this rogue Fascist regime that got in through a coup d'etat; we want our republic back, so all of these people have to be held accountable; no more f(r)ee lunches.
 
 
+1 # motamanx 2015-03-16 09:56
I believe Sen warren was misinformed about Gaza by AIPAC, as were so many Congresssmen.
 
 
+9 # Bruce Gruber 2015-03-13 20:09
For me, Elizabeth Warren talks straight. She addresses real issues and talks policy as priorities and answers. There is no question what 'side' she is on .. it's the side of the Middle Class, the people who WORK, the people who NEED government assistance, the people who WANT honest leadership that has NOT sold out to big money. There is no partisan appeal or blame in her presence. She supports other politicians who demonstrate principles consistent with hers - the kind ALL Americans espouse. She is the kind of politician ALL voters could honestly vote for. Except for Wall Street and the Koch Crowd, nobody has an automatic negative attitude toward her.

Remember, Hillary lost many people who claimed to be Democrats and had supported Bill - even with Monica and impeachment ... to a candidate who sold 'hope'. Bill sold us triangulation and free trade... one of the best "politicians" in living memory. BUT!!! Hillary (and Bill) have been sold to Republicans FOR YEARS by the Rove, Corporate Crowd, money machine. They haven't provided much successful bang for their bucks, but they have antagonized their base AGAINST Clintons - both of them. Turning on a dime to make Elizabeth Warren into Republican Enemy Number ONE does not demonstrate honesty or cultivate angry activism within their base. They've already 'screwed the pooch' by heaping their bonfire of anger against Benghazi, e-mails and such.

I visualize Senator Warren as the Eisenhower of 2016.
 
 
+7 # Bruce Gruber 2015-03-13 20:24
Both Republicans AND Democrats wanted him as their candidate. Today only Koch types and Gordon Gekko hate her for her policies.

Even the military, multinational corporations and plutocrats know the WORLD and HUMANITY face serious challenges in the immediate future with economies, population, the environment, war and extremism, health, education, and climate. Serious efforts to maximize our potential as human beings deserve serious competent LEADERS ... not careful, clever, divisive panderers. Screw the "focus group". I want a leader who can tell ME something. I don't want somebody who needs to ask me WHAT I THINK before they can make a decision.
 
 
+15 # sharag 2015-03-13 20:13
Senator Warren should stay where she is and keep doing what does best.
 
 
+4 # Tazio 2015-03-13 20:34
Which is what Senator Warren said she wishes to keep on doing.

I will support her when she decides to run but in the meantime I suspect that many people touting her are just trying to make Hillary look bad.
 
 
+8 # WestWinds 2015-03-13 21:23
Quoting Tazio:
Which is what Senator Warren said she wishes to keep on doing.

I will support her when she decides to run but in the meantime I suspect that many people touting her are just trying to make Hillary look bad.


--- Other people don't have to "make" sHillary look bad. She did that all by herself. She's just another George W. Bush that will keep imperialism and fascism going. She's a nightmare.
 
 
+5 # Tazio 2015-03-14 08:13
I think nightmare is a little strong. She's far better than any Republican available.

Scott Walker? Refuses to say whether he believes in evolution.

Jeb? He's like W. Bush but without the personality.

Perry? Oops.

Kris Krispie? I donut think so.
 
 
-1 # WestWinds 2015-03-15 11:47
Quoting Tazio:
I think nightmare is a little strong. She's far better than any Republican available.


--- sHillary Clinton is no better than these Republicans in her own way. She is a self-proclaimed "fiscal conservative" and that says "supply side economics Republican" to me.

Then she belongs to some group called "The Family" that wants to turn America into a Theocracy; and she has left her Methodist roots to join the orthodox Presbyterian church (the preferred church of the RWNJ Teabaggers.) (She'll have this country in burquas if she gets the chance.)

She married her daughter off to a Wall Street Bankster and has voted in the best interests of Wall Street all along.

If this isn't enough, she is married to the man who single-handedly undid three of the last prongs of FDR's Second New Deal; killing off welfare with his brand of Right-wing "reform", and the repeal of Glass Steagall. He was also responsible for putting into place NAFTA, GATT, CAFTA, which effectively shafted American workers.

And if all of this wasn't enough, when she was Sec. of State, foreign dignitaries said dealing with her was like dealing with "a little girl." Oh, great! This is REALLY what we want in the WH.

Are you kidding me??? Like I said, she's a nightmare. We can do WAAAAAYYYY better than sHillary Clinton.
 
 
+2 # Tazio 2015-03-15 13:42
We can do way better...but we won't.

It will be a choice between Hillary and someone from the GOP Clown Car.
And, believe it or not, she's still the better pick.
Deal with it.
 
 
+3 # grandma lynn 2015-03-16 09:21
GOP Clown Car - this past Saturday Gov. Scott Walker joined the crowd at our local Winter Farmers' Market in Tilton, NH. He walked through with two aides, all wearing the tell-tale long, black wool coat. No one paid any attention to him. No one knew he was there, anti-labor union guy, anti-public education. I just realized who he was after he was gone.
 
 
-1 # WestWinds 2015-03-16 15:35
Quoting Tazio:
We can do way better...but we won't.

It will be a choice between Hillary and someone from the GOP Clown Car.
And, believe it or not, she's still the better pick.
Deal with it.


--- No way in hooping Hades, Tazio. sHillary Clinton is a nightmare and I'll NEVER vote for her. Sanders, Warren or Stein will get my vote. Period. (And THAT'S how I'm going to "deal with it".) She suxs; Wall Street hooker.
 
 
+1 # cybersleuth58 2015-03-16 13:36
Nightmare?? Some believe hyperbole bolsters their position. In reality, it makes the poster sound like a right crackpot.

Maybe you're just a Conservative trolling for fun?

"She married her daughter off to a Wall Street Bankster"...

Someone's got a 16th-century notion of the "little woman", huh?
These days, in the West, anyway, parents don't "marry their daughters off".

American women are no longer chattel. Perhaps you're aware, but the 19th Amendment to the Constitution prohibits a US citizen from being denied the right to vote on the basis of gender. That was ratified in 1920, on August 18th. Up until 1910, most states denied women the right to vote. It took 41 years, having been introduced to Congress in 1878!!
see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nineteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

0r hadn't you heard? Mid 20th century in the US, a woman's movement sprung up. But conservatives, mainly Evangelicals, poured lots of money into assuring it to assure its defeat.

Women today decide who they will marry. The days of a girl's parents "marrying them off" are hopefully gone for good!

:D
 
 
+7 # foxfilm 2015-03-13 20:51
Run Bernie Run
 
 
-8 # foxfilm 2015-03-13 20:55
Bernie is as much of a Socialist as FDR was. You know, the guy they re-wrote the constitution for to limit presidential terms because he could have been elected king?
 
 
+13 # WestWinds 2015-03-13 21:26
Quoting foxfilm:
Bernie is as much of a Socialist as FDR was. You know, the guy they re-wrote the constitution for to limit presidential terms because he could have been elected king?


--- Who spearheaded the rewrite? Pro FDR-ites? Why did the people want FDR to stay on? MAYBE because he was doing such a good job people wanted him to stay on, but the industrialists wanted him out so they could do exactly what happened; a military industrial police surveillance neo Nazi fascist F(r)EE Market state.

What does it take for you guys to wake up???
 
 
+1 # Linda 2015-03-14 12:02
I would give you a million thumbs up if I could . I totally agree with every point .
 
 
0 # WestWinds 2015-03-14 20:49
Quoting Linda:
I would give you a million thumbs up if I could . I totally agree with every point .


--- Thank you, Linda. Very nice of you to say.
 
 
+2 # DaveHOz 2015-03-13 21:27
"I think he is dead wrong. None of the candidates he mentioned... had the populist message of Elizabeth Warren."

Just to break it down:

Bill Bradley -- As the author said, no strong populist message.

Paul Tsongas -- Was a DLC-style deficit hawk. Also, when he talked he always sounded like he was lecturing everybody, and voters don't like that.

Jerry Brown –- Could never shake his "Moonbeam" image. His support in '92 for a flat tax didn't help.

Gary Hart -- Actually, he probably *would* have got the nomination, had it not been for the Good Ship _Monkey Business_.
 
 
-5 # Thomas0008 2015-03-13 21:49
and warren is a supporter of psycho Zionist war criminals, not Jews mind you, Zionist psycho War Criminals. THAT IS FACT! Wake up folks.
 
 
+6 # cybersleuth58 2015-03-14 08:37
Anyone who implies that Warren is a Zionist war criminal is a crackpot.

By the way: no point is made more convincing by being repeated ad nauseum.
 
 
+8 # lfeuille 2015-03-13 22:25
Quoting DaveHOz:
"I think he is dead wrong. None of the candidates he mentioned... had the populist message of Elizabeth Warren."

Just to break it down:

Bill Bradley -- As the author said, no strong populist message.

Paul Tsongas -- Was a DLC-style deficit hawk. Also, when he talked he always sounded like he was lecturing everybody, and voters don't like that.

Jerry Brown –- Could never shake his "Moonbeam" image. His support in '92 for a flat tax didn't help.

Gary Hart -- Actually, he probably *would* have got the nomination, had it not been for the Good Ship _Monkey Business_.


Bradley had a populist message, but unlike Warren he wasn't very effective in communicating it. Also, the horrors of neo-liberalism were not as apparent at the time as they are now.
 
 
+3 # Linda 2015-03-14 12:03
Except Bernie who has fought longer for the people than anyone else and has more experience .
 
 
+6 # curmudgeon 2015-03-13 23:02
For a REAL progressive candite who is already a Democrat and ready to run and deserves much respect, check out Martin O'Malley, ex-gov of Maryland:.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/mar/12/martin-omalley-profile-2016-presidential-nomination-clinton
 
 
+9 # FDRva 2015-03-13 23:57
Md Gov. Martin O'Malley has called for a new FDR-style Glass-Steagall firewall against Wall Street scams.

I expect Liz Warren loves that.

I sure do.

And I have a suspicion that Hillary would rather be a doting grandmother than a GOP punching bag next year.
 
 
+2 # Linda 2015-03-14 10:15
I said it before and I will saying it again . You're wasting time and money on a campaign for Elizabeth because she will not run. Best you put that time and money behind Bernie Sanders who will run if you show him you will back him !Bernie also has more experience . Forget what the stupid polls say about where Bernie Sanders is in the polls, they are never right . Where did the polls say Obama was this early before the primaries ? Forget that Bernie is a self proclaimed Socialist ,his ideology is no different from any liberal. He also will not run on the Independent ticket he will run as a Democrat so there are no excuses not to back this good man.
 
 
+3 # jon 2015-03-14 12:04
As for Hillary Clinton, the Republicans have been working on smearing her for many years now, and we have not seen anything yet.

Just wait until the conventions are over. It will be like a major new industry throwing unimaginable amounts of dirt at the undecideds. She might be ahead in the polls now, but I can't imagine her surviving the onslaught that will follow.

They are going to turn the word "Hillary" into a dirty word, much like they did with the word "Liberal".
 
 
+3 # WestWinds 2015-03-14 20:52
Quoting jon:
As for Hillary Clinton, the Republicans have been working on smearing her for many years now, and we have not seen anything yet.

Just wait until the conventions are over. It will be like a major new industry throwing unimaginable amounts of dirt at the undecideds. She might be ahead in the polls now, but I can't imagine her surviving the onslaught that will follow.

They are going to turn the word "Hillary" into a dirty word, much like they did with the word "Liberal".


--- They are just hedging their bets. She is in Wall Street's pocket just as much as they are. They will make a show of it; lots of political theater, but if she ends up as president, they will own her every bit as much as a Jeb Bush.
 
 
+2 # intheEPZ 2015-03-14 15:41
Here she is, in her own words, on the subject of Israeli apartheid:
"Thank you for contacting me about Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's speech to Congress.

I strongly support Israel, and I remain deeply concerned about the prospect of an Iranian nuclear weapon, which I discussed in detail with Prime Minister Netanyahu when we met in Jerusalem last November. It is unfortunate that Speaker Boehner's actions on the eve of a national election in Israel have made Tuesday's event more political and less helpful for addressing the critical issue of nuclear nonproliferatio n and the safety of our most important ally in the Middle East.

I appreciate your reaching out to me about this issue, and please do not hesitate to contact me again about issues of importance to you.

Sincerely,"
 
 
0 # Bruce Gruber 2015-03-15 08:11
If ANY Republican wins, Wall Street wins. American Empire wins. The military/indust rial complex wins. Working people get to hang on by their fingernails.

If Hillary wins, Wall Street wins and the MIC plus most of the neo-cons can live with it. Working people will hear less "hope" than they got from Obama ... non-whites even less, women MAYBE a little more. But if her current virtual silence as a political strategy on most issues correlates with her presumed Presidency, TRIANGULATION will be noted in all CAPS. If a little of the Woodstock/Unive rsal Health Care Hillary still showed signs of life I would be less sanguine.

Repeating myself from earlier, "leadership" is not being a symbol or a poll satisfying compromise ... or a carefully constructed image of non-confrontati onal and generalized, 'averaged' positions of "focus group" tested mediocrity.

Elizabeth Warren lives and breathes principle, determination and commitment plus technical competence and prowess. I can visualize her staff and Cabinet facing demand for facts and alternatives contemplated on a framework like FDR ... building a future on goals rather than limitations.

Hillary? Not so much. The image of this 'almost' campaign is of backroom assessment of costuming and 'tone' of the campaign rather than the policies and improvements she and her team want to offer the American people. Following the 'averaged' and, I believe, media misinformed opinions of the electorate is hardly leadership.
 
 
+2 # Bruce Gruber 2015-03-15 08:19
Notwithstanding my cynicism, EVERY POTENTIAL Democratic candidate is a superior "leader" to ANY prospective Republican wannabe

That billions of dollar will be "invested" by Wall Street and 'Multinationali zed', off-shore Corporate America to insure that Elizabeth Warren does NOT get to be President is almost enough for me, in itself.

That the Rabid Right has been dog whistled into foaming, snarling rage at the Clinton's for more than a decade makes her investment only that much more expensive to counteract.
 
 
+2 # Nick Reynolds 2015-03-15 08:18
No hot button issues? How about the war in Ukraine? That could be serious. Is any major politician standing up against it. If not, isn't war with Russia, on its doorstep, practically inevitable? It's easy to get into war, difficult to get out.
 
 
+4 # dbrize 2015-03-15 18:35
Unless a candidate is elected who will change our insane foreign policies based on protecting the crony capitalists, investment bankers and MIC/CIA shadow government (the real power), nothing will change. Not social programs, not taxation, healthcare, civil liberties or anything else.

It is our acceptance of the national security state and the fear mongering apparatus it generates that destroys our Constitution, our rights as citizens and our economy.

This why LOTE is doomed to fail. The above IS the evil. Until it goes we are doomed.

To date, the only announced candidate who gets any of this is Jim Webb. That he is virtually ignored tells much about the sorry state of our political awareness of what must be done on both left and right.
 
 
+1 # motamanx 2015-03-16 10:02
This whole list is disquieting. Is this the best America can muster? What about Robert Redford/Bernie Sanders? I could vote for that ticket. We elected abad actor once. What about a good actor?
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN