The organization’s recognition that the Massachusetts senator truly won’t run is a significant shift in the Democratic presidential contest, in which Warren has been a shadow candidate even as she has repeatedly insisted she would not pursue the White House. But the prime driver of pro-Warren enthusiasm is acknowledging that its time and resources would be better spent influencing the national discussion in another way entirely, while Sanders builds grassroots momentum and O’Malley ratchets up his campaign by targeting liberals.Meanwhile, hearts go out to Joe Biden: "In Biden's tragedy, Americans see their own/The vice president’s humanity has intensified an outpouring of public grief over the death of his son."
June 2, 2015
"Top pro-Elizabeth Warren group says she’s out."
Run Warren Run stops running.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
36 comments:
Warren was pretty explicit from the beginning--she's backing Hillary. Find another candidate, as the song goes it ain't me babe!
Sad about Biden's son.
Somewhere (WSJ, I think) someone recently wrote that Warren is actually a very shrewd politician. She has managed to achieve an outsized voice in the national debate for a junior senator and she understands where her strengths and opportunities lie. He predicted that she would not run. Politically it is a good decision, she could not win.
My condolences to the Biden family for their loss.
That does not change the fact that Joe Biden is wholly unqualified for his current job, a job that takes no qualifications whatsoever.
Yes, Warren will do better by not imitating Rand Paul who is destroying himself by trying to run when he is not ready. When Hillary or Joe or even Kerry lose next year, she will be the salvation of the Democrats.
SNAFU, the headline and article are saying opposite things. Article quotes those saying Warren is going to run, and Sanders is the stalking horse for her.
Remember when the saying was "Democrats fall in love, Republicans fall in line."
Well now the Democrats have their own Bob Dole, except instead of a disfiguring war wound, honorably gained fighting Nazis, we have a candidate with a disturbing rictus, that can only be explained by guilty disbelief at her good fortune.
Michael K said...
Yes, Warren will do better by not imitating Rand Paul who is destroying himself by trying to run when he is not ready. When Hillary or Joe or even Kerry lose next year, she will be the salvation of the Democrats.
LOL. Michael will think that Paul is "ready" when he stops believing the things that Paul believes and starts acting like a Republican Inc. Neocon. Face it, he's not your guy, you disagree with him on policy.
==================================================
Great Waters World on O'Reilly last night. Waters tracked Warren to a Community College Graduation Speech where the graduates obviously did not know who she was or listen to what she said. Waters World is now the best part of that show. I need an app to tell me when to tune in.
--Somewhere (WSJ, I think) someone recently wrote that Warren is actually a very shrewd politician. She has managed to achieve an outsized voice in the national debate for a junior senator and she understands where her strengths and opportunities lie. He predicted that she would not run. Politically it is a good decision, she could not win.
Obama did. Against the same person. From the same starting point.
AReasonableMan - That was The Economist, just read it yesterday. Pretty perceptive; she's far to the left of Hillary and even Obama, so she can't win, but she CAN build up a large power base among progressives.
I actually like Joe Biden a lot. He seems a lot more spontaneous than most politicians. He's not afraid to be himself. And his son sounds like a good man, who by the way was the same age as I am. A real tragedy.
The Clintons are the best at op research and the use of it to skewer their opponents. With what little we already know, Warren would not have survived the onslaught.
10,000 (round numbers) Americans die every day. Biden is just a celebrity bereaved, and so is entertainment for women.
"Face it, he's not your guy, you disagree with him on policy."
Oh, I agree that I don't like his policy on NSA and on foreign policy generally. If you think he is advancing his candidacy with mainstream GOP, you might be in your own bubble.
When he said Cheney supported the Iraq invasion because it would make money for Halliburton, he lost me. The "neocon" thing mostly is about Jews. Cheney isn't. He's also the most experienced conservative around.
I'm no fan of Liz Warren, but there is something that would have been so incredibly beautiful about her running, energizing the Dem grassroots, pushing Hillary back on her heels, and actually snaking the nomination from her just as Obama did eight years ago. It would have been such great theater to watch the Clintons AGAIN get confounded by some newbie out of nowhere, and put an inglorious end to their scam.
Barring that, we can only hope the GOP doesn't botch it as they so often do.
Any woman who would lie about her cultural heritage to get a diversity appointment at Havahd is a survivor. Of course she's not running.
I don't understand the juxtaposition.
Meanwhile, hearts go out to Joe Biden . . .
While my guitar gently weeps.
As for Biden, losing a child to a terrible disease is a tragedy, and my prayers are with father, son, and family.
Politico went full bore lugubrious, though. The article is a bit icky. You would think that Beau was a Nelson Mandela or something.
dang.
Re: Warren: There is no down-side to her waiting right now. It's not like Bernie Sanders has a credible shot. MO'M may or may not take off. Clinton is in a long, slow decline (Doesn't she look tired?)
Implosion of Candidates is I think inevitable, and she can, regrettably, still assume the mantle (Heh, I misspelled that as mental first) at a later date.
Re: Biden. The Political Establishment in DC has a history of throwing bouquets of flowers at the Families of politician's dead children. I guess that is laudable, they are all acquaintances after all. But I don't see how it merits all the Press it gets, unless it's affecting the Government, and I don't see that it is.
"Re: Warren: There is no down-side to her waiting right now."
I don't know about that--sometimes you have to strike while the iron's hot. Had Obama waited back in 2008, several more years in the Senate wouldn't have done him much good and he'd likely be following an unpoplar Democrat. He'd also be facing perhaps stiffer competition.
Warren (if she actually wants to be president, this is assuming that's the case) is right now very popular among the Democratic grassroots--much as Obama was in 2008 and as Hillary never will be (they'll back her out of default, and if the GOP isn't scary enough they may even stay home or go third party). Who knows whether she'll still be the flavor of the month in 2020 or 2024? The fact that she isn't running makes me wonder if she just decided she's better off in the Senate making her grandstanding speeches than to have to actually be president and have real responsibility and make real compromises.
@Brando, don't forget that Warren is 65 -- and I'm sure the rigors of campaigning are exhausting for her (despite her stout "Cherokee" heritage). Sitting out now means resting :)
The one thing OMalley has going is relative youth. The rest of the Democratic Pack look like fossils compared to him.
But the Press Corps is now super old too, and they aren't likely to note the extreme age of the Democrats running because Old Yuppies/Children of the 60s/Boomers all stick together in their Extreme-age Denialism. (the REAL "ED").
Graham Powell said...
That was The Economist
Yes you are right. I have a subscription and should have remembered. It is the best magazine on the market at the moment. The writer made no attempt to hide his dislike of Warren but still made a reasonable fist of outlining her strategy, strengths and weaknesses.
I have a young daughter who I have inculcated with articles from the Economist, so much so that she often asks 'what's in the Economist today Dad', when we sit down to dinner. For an eight year old she can give a decent definition of GDP and has a basic understanding of Putin's character - he's a bad man.
"From where the polls now stand I will spend no more forever" - Spouting Bull
My heart does go out to Joe Biden. Not a huge political fan of his, but I don't think political disagreements should escalate into mortal combat. I don't view him as an enemy or a foe, but simply wrong on some important issues.
What a series of tragedies this man has endured. I wish him well.
"@Brando, don't forget that Warren is 65 -- and I'm sure the rigors of campaigning are exhausting for her (despite her stout "Cherokee" heritage). Sitting out now means resting :)"
All the more reason she would have to run now or never (I'm guessing never). Even a healthy septagenarian has limits for the rigors of the campaign trail.
Maybe Warren saw what Obama went through, going from idealistic crowd-pleaser to the ugly slog of trying to get an agenda enacted, and how so many of his supporters are down in the dumps. By staying in the Senate, Warren can avoid the nasty wake-up call of having to govern.
"I don't know about that--sometimes you have to strike while the iron's hot."
There is an interesting school of speculation about what would've happened if Gore had won in 2000. Lots of material to ponder. 9/11 was really Clinton's chicken coming home to roost. All the ignored attacks including the Cole right before the election.
Gore probably made a bad decision to keep Clinton at arms length. Rove almost threw the election away by keeping Bush's DUI quiet until,the Democrat lawyer in Maine blew the whistle and scared off so many religious voters.
History may have turned on that election more than we know now.
I don't think her past could stand the scrutiny it would get if she actually became a candidate.
"Gore probably made a bad decision to keep Clinton at arms length. Rove almost threw the election away by keeping Bush's DUI quiet until,the Democrat lawyer in Maine blew the whistle and scared off so many religious voters."
Certainly--Gore ran as a populist in a year where that made the least sense--economy humming along, and he was in the "in" party for crying out loud! He easily could have run as a moderate (that was his image, at least) and plausibly could have offered Clintonism without the scandals. A few nods to the middle and the upper South would have been in play, plus all the Western states, leaving Bush in deep defense.
The DUI thing was stupid--always assume everything will come out! Air it early, spin it, and innoculate yourself from it. That Bush's team made such an amateurish move just demonstrates how terrible the Gore campaign was to lose to them.
If Gore had won though I think the 9/11 attacks still would have benefitted him--people do rally around the leaders when our country is attacked, as in Pearl Harbor. Gore definitely would have had a military response, and the people would have supported it. How that would have gone a few years in though is hard to guess.
Warren is no substitute for Obama.
Obama had advantages that Warren and Hilary don't.
He was physically much more prepossessing and attractive to women.
Youth, height, and good looks count for a lot.
Obama is also black. As a symbol that trumps everything.
He is also a better actor than Hilary. He did well in seeming dignified and responsible.
And then there is his name.
He was, in appearance, name and person, very memorable. It didn't take much to market such an easily packaged brand. Where other politicians would pass in a blur, he stood out.
In 2008 he had most things going for him, as a candidate.
That would still not have trumped Clintons money and connections, except that he seems to have been adopted by a cabal of financial-political interests that successfully countered Clintons own financing. He was an excellent frontman for them, and it seems, a good investment.
Warren, in herself, is not very impressive or memorable, at least in the superficial world of political marketing. No more so than Hilary. Yet another who would pass in a blur.
A lot of liberals conveniently forget that it was Fox News that broke the DUI story. With the primaries well over by then, it could only hurt the GOP and Bush, and they still broke it. Maybe it was all so they could spin it first, but it's tough to predict what spin will affect when the election is weeks (days?) away.
I feel sorry for Joe Biden. Losing a child is terrible. Politics aside, he has my sincere condolences.
I just wonder what the media reaction would be if GW lost one of his children. Would they even care?
"A lot of liberals conveniently forget that it was Fox News that broke the DUI story. With the primaries well over by then, it could only hurt the GOP and Bush, and they still broke it. Maybe it was all so they could spin it first, but it's tough to predict what spin will affect when the election is weeks (days?) away."
I recall it broke at the end of the week before the election--an 11th hour surprise just like the Laurance Walsh indictments on the eve of the '92 election.
I'm not surprised about Fox breaking it--news is news and they are a business. You don't want to be scooped. While I think Fox caters to a more conservative audience (and this will affect its reporting to some extent, just as the more liberal appeal of CNN and especially MSNBC will do the same) I think in the media getting a career-boosting story always trumps personal politics. Political bias is usually more unconscious (as in, the reporter's decision over what is news and how to report it may be slanted, though they think they're just reporting the facts as they were trained). This makes political bias in the media much harder to address than if it were simply a matter of hacks consciously trying to push their side (as is the case in a lot of European outlets).
I had an idea that Elizabeth Warren had too much baggage, and didn't want to have to deal with attacks in a campaign. We sort of liked her for being a bomb-throwing radical of sorts, although I disagreed with much of what she seems to believe. I would like to see someone who is opposed to Obama's buddies on Wall Street, and she had a reputation for just that.
So the dems got what? Some old lady who may or may not have dementia and some kid what run delaware into the ground.
Oh. Almost forgot. Some old commie gent what likes to rape wimmen.
That about it?
Post a Comment