February 10, 2019

"Warren uses vivid speech that's fascinatingly similar to Trump's."

That's something I wrote on August 10, 2016, and I'm reading it again after writing about Elizabeth Warren's speech yesterday. In 2016, I was addressing Warren's tweet, "@realDonaldTrump makes death threats because he's a pathetic coward who can’t handle the fact that he’s losing to a girl." I want to add my new "Warren is like Trump" tag to that. And I want to find the transcript from yesterday's speech so I can pull quotes that made me feel it was Trumpish. But let me give you some of this 2016 material for its present-day worth. I had 4 things to say, but I'm only going to highlight ##3 and 4:
3. ... Is this some female privilege — she can say "girl" but a man can't? I think that what's going on is that Warren is purporting to read Trump's mind, so it's not her saying "girl." That's what's in there in his mind. He's the one denigrating Hillary, thinking of her as a girl. Or: He's reliving a childhood psychodrama, in which boys feel humiliated if they can't even beat a girl. Warren uses vivid speech that's fascinatingly similar to Trump's. She blurts out the language of a childhood taunt: Hah! You're losing to a girl! And she seems to think she can talk like the playground bully because it's not really her speaking, it's just her doing the voice of somebody else, somebody who hurt little Donald many years ago and who still lives inside his head, taunting him after all these decades.

4. I think Trump believes he's doing damned well. He had to fight through 16 Republicans to get the nomination. He had to defeat his party's establishment, just like Bernie Sanders tried to fight his party's establishment. Does Bernie feel humiliated for "losing to a girl"? That "girl" had her party's whole establishment pushing her along. She's promoted and held aloft by a former President of the United States. I think Trump feels he's in a valiant battle and it's still going on, not that he's losing.... But even if he were upset about losing, I doubt if it would be about the fact that Hillary is female, that any decent man should be able to beat any female. Why does Warren think she can ascribe such thoughts to him? I don't think she's correctly reading Trump's mind, but I also don't think she believes she is. I think she's trying to stir up excitement for Hillary, and the most exciting thing about this candidate few voters actually like as an individual, is that she's a woman... Think of voting for a woman. And think of voting against that terrible man, Donald Trump, who is fighting a woman — not because she's his political opponent in the election — but because he's a man, with screwed up man-thoughts, and she's a woman, so he needs to destroy her. Plunge into the psychodrama, people!
And we've been swimming in the psychodrama ever since. That's where Trump likes it, and that's where Warren likes it, and — prove me wrong, America! — that's where America likes it.

66 comments:

wendybar said...

YOU were mentioned in this article Ann! https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/02/and_speaking_of_rigging__elizabeth_warren_launches_her_presidential_campaign.html

rehajm said...

How the science of politics is like the NFL: Copy the winning team's playbook? Put words in the mouth of your opponents? Bleh...

I must not be the target audience Liz Warren is trying to reach and I expect it won't matter. But good on Liz for having a strategy I guess...

Amadeus 48 said...

Wow. Amy Klobuchar. Elizabeth Warren. Kamala Harris. AOC. Beto. Booker. Biden. Hillary! That guy from South Bend. Gov. JB (Make that a Jumbo) Pritzker. Buzz Hickenlooper. The Virginia minstrels. Donald Trump.

I think it's time to put away the internet and start those piano lessons.

rehajm said...

She even had winning signs in her crowd, "Win With Warren" which certainly is a borrowing from Trump

Also Charlie Sheen.

Darrell said...

Her slogan should be "Ask Me How."
Own your own lies.

mccullough said...

Warren isn’t a worthy adversary for Trump. That Indian DNA thing made Warren look stupid. Then she grovels to The Cherokee. Pathetic.

She’s popular at Harvard Law with the female students. They look up to her as a strong woman.

Elizabeth Warren. Race: American Indian.

Diogenes of Sinope said...

You know your ideas are powerful when your political opponents adopt them. I listened to her speech. Immediately thought she was parroting Trump.

Diogenes of Sinope said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Dave Begley said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Eleanor said...

Folks on the left like to think they know how the right thinks, but 99% of it is projection. The left is convinced the right is racist, and yet it's the left that's race-obsessed. The left thinks the right is misogynist, and yet it's the left who treats women like they need special care and protections. Here Warren thinks it would bother Trump to lose to a woman. Why? Because the woman is an inferior adversary so there's shame involved? No, Trump doesn't want to lose anyone- period. Male or female. Warren is a jerk. A non-binary insult.

Dave Begley said...

The Dems - in their epic stupidity - are advancing the insane GND. Trump will walk all over them; male, female, black, white, multiracial and gay.

At one time I thought Trump might lose re-election, but this GND guarantees their defeat.

Given the Dems' attitude on the Wall (and socialism) Trump needs to rebrand the Democrat Party: The Anti-America Party. What over party would let MS-13 run wild here and let killer drugs to be brought in with ease?

The Dems also love investigations. I say DOJ needs to investigate THEM. I want to know if any of these Dems take bribes from the Zetas, MS-13, etc. I also want to know if Putin pays off the anti-KXL people with diamonds. I looking right at Jane Kleeb, the extreme chair of the Nebraska DNC. Reduced American oil and gas production only helps Russia and the House of Saud.

Dems to America: We hate you.

Ken B said...

What you mean is Warren is like the worst of Trump. We have yet to see if she is like the best of Trump.

Paco Wové said...

"At one time I thought Trump might lose re-election, but this GND guarantees their defeat."

We'll see. If continues to go over like a lead balloon, they will quietly memory-hole it (with assistance from their allies in the press). Then it will be, "What? Green New Deal? What is that? The only people talking about that are those crazy right-wingers. Nobody takes that seriously."

cubanbob said...

Warren is going to learn nobody out Trumps Trump. If the Democrats are rebranding themselves as the latest iteration of the Communist Party then Trump not only has been assured of reelection but possibly he will have to spend the least amount of money on the campaign in the last few decades.

Wilbur said...

It'll be interesting to see how the other Democrat candidates deal with Warren's Indian issue. Will they ignore it on the campaign trail and in debates, like Bernie did with Hillary's email crimes, or will they wait and see how much traction she gets?


It's a very touchy issue for them, because it strikes at the very heart of affirmative action.

Sebastian said...

"Hah! You're losing to a girl!"

Boy, that's almost as painful as a boy saying, "No one will every marry you." We know that one stings forever. But how will Trump ever get over the painful, painful taunt?

By the way, what girl did he ever lose to?

tim in vermont said...

I am waiting for her "Why am I not 50 points ahead?" speech.

Fernandistein said...

An old Cherokee politician was teaching her son about life. "A fight is going on," she said to the boy. "It is a terrible fight and it is between two politicians."

"One is EVIL. HE is anger, envy, sorrow, regret, greed, arrogance, self-pity, guilt, resentment, inferiority, lies, false pride, superiority, self-doubt, and ego."

"The other is GOOD. SHE is joy, peace, love, hope, serenity, humility, kindness, benevolence, empathy, generosity, truth, compassion, and faith.

The same fight is going on inside you – and inside every other person, too."

The son thought about it for a minute and then asked his mother, "Which politician will win?"

The old politician sniffed the air for a moment and then replied, "Hey, I thought you were potty-trained!"

Josephbleau said...

The upcoming new shutdown intrigues me. The Democrats are used to instant total victory, I don’t know if they will survive a sustained assault over time.

Bob Boyd said...

Before she switched to M&M's, Warren started the potty training with a Baby Ruth bar, but there was an unfortunate turn of events.

rhhardin said...

It's racist to call Warren a rigger.

buwaya said...

Democratic politics, like tribalism generally, is largely psychodrama.
The manipulation of psychodrama is the subject of the rhetorical arts, which ancient politicians were taught to sway the Athenians on the Pnyx.

Big Mike said...

it's just her doing the voice of somebody else, somebody who hurt little Donald many years ago and who still lives inside his head, taunting him after all these decades.

@Alhouse, Meade needs to do a better job explaining how alpha males think to the superannuated hippie chick he loves so much. A taunt only works if it actually touches a sore spot. Where is your evidence that “little Donald” is afraid to lose to a “girl”? Remember that when Trump entered the battle for the nomination the conventional wisdom was that Hillary was invincible in the primaries and the general election. In-effing-vincible! The possibility — probability! — that he would lose to a girl doesn’t seem to have dismayed him.

Conversely, taunts can counter-productive! We don’t know to what degree Obama’s taunting of Donald Trump at the 2011 White House correspondents’ dinner played a role in enticing him to run five years later. And if the “lose to a girl” taunts spurred Trump into his insanely vigorous campaign schedule then it seriously backfired, didn’t it?

I think a lot of men get this, I think relatively few women do. (Freeman, mocker, and DBQ, I suspect you’re among the exceptions.). @Althouse, let your husband mansplain to you.

cronus titan said...

THe fact that Warren (and other Democratic media candidates) is embracing populism show Trump is framing the debate and prevailing. There was less daylight between Trump, Warren, and Sanders than any of them care to acknowledge. They just choose different issues to express it. Trump uses illegal immigration as responsible for working class problems; Warren and Sander claim it is successful people who are responsible for working class ills.

Achilles said...

Wilbur said...
It'll be interesting to see how the other Democrat candidates deal with Warren's Indian issue.

They won’t have to say a thing.

The media will finish her off.

Harris has been chosen.

What will be more interesting are the investigations into Schultz by various government agencies.

Achilles said...

“Think of voting for a woman. And think of voting against that terrible man, Donald Trump, who is fighting a woman — not because she's his political opponent in the election — but because he's a man, with screwed up man-thoughts, and she's a woman, so he needs to destroy her. “

This could work.

Democrats assume their voters are stupid.

Everyone does at this point.

cronus titan said...

@Big Mike, you are correct. A taunt has to sting for it to be effective. "Crooked Hillary," "Low Energy Jeb," "Crazy Bernie," and "Pocohantas" are effective taunts because there is truth behind them. "Losing to a girl" is just stupid and the kind of thing those who have no idea how to taunt say.

I have long thought that Obama's taunts in 2011 were more effective because it ridiculed Trump and was designed to get him to jump into the GOP race. It contributed to Trump's decision to run, and did not work out like Obama thought. The lesson there is to make sure your target cannot do anything to respond to the taunt

Jim said...

The Dem candidates all seem to be looking for a good way to present themselves. Without saying what they really believe. Warren gave a good speech? So what, so did obama. Have we forgotten it is deeds, not words, that matter? Warren has already proven that her gift is to game the system, for her own personal gain. She gives nothing back, has no record of real accomplishments.
She is willing to twist herself into what ever shape will get her the most votes(not garner). A typical politician.
Trump is who he is-no filter and he always tells you what he is planning to do, and the results, as he sees them.

Big Mike said...

Shame on all Americans who are willing to listen to her. She stole from someone who could have used a little help to further themselves.

AllenS wrote that towards the end of yesterday’s Warren thread, and it bears repeating. Those racial and ethnic setasides and preferences are there to help someone who needs a hand. What contributions might have been made by someone who could have used a hand up, but he or she got no such assistance because it went instead to the articulate white woman?

Sebastian said...

"A taunt only works if it actually touches a sore spot."

You're asking Althouse to understand how actual men think, alpha males no less?

Robert Cook said...

If Warren sounds like Trump in some of what she's saying it's because Trump, in his campaign, and occasionally now (but less so), appropriated the populist talk and concerns with working people that was traditionally the bailiwick of the Democrats. In other words, Trump used the rhetoric of Democrats like Warren.

Robert Cook said...

"THe fact that Warren (and other Democratic media candidates) is embracing populism show Trump is framing the debate and prevailing."

See my previous comment.

EDH said...

Althouse said...
And I want to find the transcript from yesterday's speech so I can pull quotes that made me feel it was Trumpish.

As I said, Althouse yesterday identified the crux of Warren's speech and candidacy.

EDH said...
Ann Althouse said...
"I thought the part about having to toilet train her daughter over the weekend (to get her into the only childcare she could fin[d]) was well done. A very relatable situation."

But how did Warren say she did it?

"All I can say is I stand before you today courtesy of three bags of M&Ms and a cooperative toddler."

A revealing story, actually, to sum up [Warren's] candidacy.

Listen to each element of her speech: isn't it clear Warren believes she can apply that same Pavlovian strategy to voters?

If you vote for me, I have this bag of M&Ms. If you "toddlers" cooperate, and you are a member of the right group, I will give you one of those M&Ms (and make someone else pay for it).

Clearly, Warren believes she can train voters and win by putting the "candy" in her candidacy.


Maybe you can say the "make someone else pay for it" is Trumpian, but I'd make the following distinctions between Warren's M&Ms and "the wall".

- Warren is offering "free" M&Ms to "cooperative toddlers".

- Trump is proposing a "vending machine" that makes sure everyone pays for their M&Ms.

- Trump's wall is a public good (e.g., both non-excludable and non-rivalrous in that individuals cannot be effectively excluded from use and where use by one individual does not reduce availability to others) for the benefit of Americans (at the cost of non-Americans and their exploiters).

- Warren is proposing income transfer-subsidies to take from one American to give to another group, not even necessarily comprised of Americans.

Mountain Maven said...

We voted for Trump to fight for us. The drama is an unwanted side effect.
Trump's agenda and accomplishments are very mainstream except his desire to end US involvement in foreign wars. Voters want that but not the Uniparty.
Warren et al want to go hard left. The socialist neighborhood organizer model is now a feature of the dems.

Skeptical Voter said...

Well Trump is not like Warren in one way. He'd never swig a beer in the kitchen because he doesn't drink alcohol. He might swig a Diet Coke.

Mountain Maven said...

The fix is in for Harris. She announces and there is no critical analysis of her platform. Warren announces and she is dissected immediately. Now that she's another white person she gets no respect.

johnhenry100 said...

He had to defeat his party's establishment, just like Bernie Sanders tried to fight his party's establishment.

Which party would that be, Ann? Anyone?

Bernie, since his days as mayor, has always made much of the fact that he was an independent not affiliated with any party

He was still claiming to be an independent on his Wiki page, his Senate page and other places up until December 2015. His campaign page, but nothing else, changed to show him as a Democrat but nothing else did. In July, this changed back to "independent"

Here is what his official Senate page says right now, 1st paragraph:

Bernie Sanders is serving his second term in the U.S. Senate after winning re-election in 2012 with 71 percent of the vote. His previous 16 years in the House of Representatives make him the longest serving independent member of Congress in American history Emph added

https://www.sanders.senate.gov/about

Sanders has never been a Democrat. More importantly, he has never fund raised for the Democrat Party.

Saying that it is "his" party is either mistaken or a lie.

Feeling bad about the way he was mistreated (if you do, Ann. Many others do)is disingenuous at best. Why should he have been treated as anything other than an interloper in the 2016 election?

What obligations does the Democrat Party have to a non-party member? I don't see that they have any at all. I am amazed that they took him as seriously as they did. The proper approach would have been for the party to issue a statement to the effect:

"Bernie Sanders is an Independent who has adopted the Democrat label for convenience. There is nothing we can do about this. He is not a Democrat, no true Democrat should support him, and we will ignore him."

One can question how deeply Donald Trump has felt his ties to the Republican Party over the years. But, unlike Sanders, he has always been, at least nominally, a Republican. Enough that in 88 he was under consideration by Bush for his VP. He has never, even nominally, been a Democrat, though I believe he has supported some Democrat candidates.

Let's have no more about how Sanders is a Democrat. He is no more a Democrat than I am/was. Anyone can run as a Dem. Even me. I ran for President in 2016 as a Democrat. That doesn't mean that the party has to pay any attention to non-Dems adopting the party label as a flag of convenience.

Like Sanders and me.

John Henry

cronus titan said...

Why the Democrat media complex is all in on Harris this early is a mystery. Harrris has her own issues like the Willie Brown history, full throated embrace of the Green New Deal, anti-Catholic rhetoric, etc. She may skate in the primaries on most of this stuff but will be vulnerable during a general campaign. It's way too early for the media to be throwing in on a candidate. They did that with Clinton in 2015-16 -- one would think the media learned a lesson but maybe the lesson they learned was to double down on it.

wholelottasplainin' said...

cronus titan said...
@Big Mike, you are correct. A taunt has to sting for it to be effective. "Crooked Hillary," "Low Energy Jeb," "Crazy Bernie," and "Pocohantas" are effective taunts because there is truth behind them. "Losing to a girl" is just stupid and the kind of thing those who have no idea how to taunt say.

*********************

I wonder if it hurts for women wrestlers and weightlifters to "lose to a boy pretending to be a girl"?

Otto said...

"prove me wrong, America! — that's where America likes it." No , no Ann. Clever liberals like you would love to make it a food fight , since you have no viable platform . That is the only way you have a chance of beating him since your earlier narrative of him being hitler and non-presidential has gone up in smoke.
Nice try.

Robert Cook said...

"Why should (Sanders) have been treated as anything other than an interloper in the 2016 election?"

Why an "interloper?" Do the two major parties have some sort of "dibs" on elections? Do "mainstream" politicians in either of the two major parties have similar "dibs" on the nomination? If we are a representative republic, anyone who wishes to run and who can appeal to enough of the electorate to be a contender has the right do so. To call someone a "spoiler" is simply an insult cast by those who feel they have sole right to participate (or by their supporters). After all, if the "Interloper" has insignificant support, his or her presence in the election will have minimal effect. If their minimal effect is sufficient to derail what might otherwise have been, this simply indicates the major party candidates were each unpopular enough to lose voters to third party candidates or to "no one."

daskol said...

She reads a mean speech. And she’s not bad looking. That should keep her in the race, even if the Native American issue ultimately dooms her.

chickenlittle said...

cronus titan said...Why the Democrat media complex is all in on Harris this early is a mystery.

Why is it a mystery? Harris is the clear favorite of the Obama/Holder/Jarrett axis. Harris has the same wealthy CA donors behind her that Obama had. The fact that Harris is a prosecutor probably threatens the Clintons.

Drago said...

Warren has certainly used "vivid" self-descriptions of herself for professional reasons for decades......and then promptly "forgot" about doing so for decades.

cubanbob said...

Althouse the American people aren't looking for a cage match between Capitalists and Communists. Nor are they looking for representatives who favor illegal aliens over Americans. The 2018 House elections were between squishy Republicans and Democrats who ran as moderate Republicans. The Republicans are going to wake up and join the Trump train if they hope to win and if the Democrats continue with their revamped Bolshevism the Republicans are going to have a hard time not winning both houses of Congress and the White House.

dreams said...

We have Trump and a real Trump, Trumps a kind of like Trump.

buwaya said...

K.Harris does seem to have the big money behind her.

Big Mike said...

Democrats keep saying that they'll "fight for" this and they'll "fight for" that. But the only politician who is truly fighting for the middle class is Donald Trump. Go Donald!

rcocean said...

Warren won't win. the Democrats play identity politics. Maybe you've noticed. The White woman vote will be split between Warren, Kobachor, etc.. The Black/Hispanic vote won't be. They'll vote for Harris.

madAsHell said...

"Warren is like Trump"

Trust me! I'm not falling into the fox hole next to her.

She's a lot like Obama. Credentialed, and profoundly stupid.

EDH said...

There's a growing sense, even in Mass, that Warren is a dead candidate walking, and that to embrace her is to embrace a loser.
.
Joe Battenfeld, Boston Herald:

Joe Kennedy III gives clout away, and too early

U.S. Rep. Joseph P. Kennedy III dimmed his national prospects with a predictable endorsement of U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, linking him with a sinking presidential hopeful with plenty of baggage. By backing his former Harvard Law professor so early in the campaign, Kennedy lost some of the national clout that he could have gained by waiting and seeing...

Inga...Allie Oop said...

“Alhouse, Meade needs to do a better job explaining how alpha males think to the superannuated hippie chick he loves so much.”

“ @Althouse, let your husband mansplain to you.”


Wow, what a condescending asshole you are. Althouse has lived with enough men to know how they think, she’s not stupid.

Sam L. said...

I'm down with that.

Robert Cook said...

"The 2018 House elections were between squishy Republicans and Democrats who ran as moderate Republicans."

The Dems didn't "run" as moderate Republicans, they are moderate Republicans, unfortunately.

Robert Cook said...

"Trust me! I'm not falling into the fox hole next to her."

You certainly won't fall into a fox hold near Trump! He'll be lazing away his days watching TV at Mar A Lago while your ass is being shot at.

Robert Cook said...

"If the Democrats are rebranding themselves as the latest iteration of the Communist Party...."

Which, of course, they're not. They're sticking with "moderate Republicans."

Wilbur said...

So how do the Democrat candidates go after Harris? Do they directly equate her to Hillary, as "the chosen one" of the donor class? Or do they come from the left, attacking her as a former prosecutor who did little for her peeps?


They'll leave the Willie Brown stuff to the deplorables. They won't go there.

traditionalguy said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
traditionalguy said...

Spot on , Professor. Liz Warren is a Trump mini-me that will fight to beat him the bitter end.

If she had run as populous in 2016, provided that she not been suicided by the Clintons, she might have won it all. But that ship has sailed.

West Texas Intermediate Crude said...

The election is PDT's to lose.
He will lose very few who voted for him last time- certainly most of the folks who voted for him reluctantly are pleasantly surprised by his performance. The voters who favored anybody but Hillary will not be impressed by any of the Democrats.
If the Dems nominate K Harris (and I agree that the fix is in for her), she will pull in a few minority voters, but most of them will remember how the last black president was a disaster for them- racial pride plus 4 bucks will get you a latte at Starbucks. They will either stay home or vote for the incumbent who fattened their paychecks.
If Schultz runs a serious campaign, nobody wins 270 EVs and PDT wins in the House (each state's delegation gets one vote).

Seeing Red said...

The Dems didn't "run" as moderate Republicans, they are moderate Republicans, unfortunately.

To you.

johnhenry100 said...

Robert Cook,

Of course anyone has the right to run for any office.

Of course Bernie Sanders has the right to run for the president.

He is not an interloper in that sense. He is an interloper for, when convenient, pretending to be a Democrat.

The Democrat Party should be able to prevent interlopers like Sanders from adopting their brand but they are not.

That Sanders felt he had to run under the Democrat label instead of his lifelong independent label shows the the 2 major parties do, effectively, "have dibs" on the presidency and most other political offices.

If you think having dibs is wrong, as I do and think you do, you should find the idea of Sanders running as a Democrat abhorrent or worse. As I do.

John Henry

narciso said...

Well Sanders is a far left activist like Warren Wilhelm like Raul grijalva like our candidate for governor last time, so how does he differ from the Democrats I guess he is more george Galloway than Jeremy Corbyn but that's a distinction without a difference.

cubanbob said...

Robert Cook said...
"If the Democrats are rebranding themselves as the latest iteration of the Communist Party...."

Which, of course, they're not. They're sticking with "moderate Republicans."

If you are a Marxist everyone else looks like a capitalist or a fascist. Even squishy Republicans aren't going to go for the New Green Deal and Medicare For All. Tough choice for these recently elected pseudo-Republicans in Congress.

Q said...

The richest and most powerful people in America were rich, really rich, but they wanted to be even richer — regardless of who got hurt.

So, every year, bit by bit, they lobbied Washington and paid off politicians to tilt the system just a little more in their direction.


You'd never guess, in reading this sort of thing, that the wealthiest people in America skew overwhelmingly to the left. That the majority of America's billionaires are Democrats. That the people in the zip codes with the highest incomes in the nation consistently favor the Democratic party.

Dabitterpill said...

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/02/thousands-of-supporters-line-up-to-see-trump-in-el-paso-hundreds-arrive-24-hrs-early-75000-request-tickets-for-8000-seat-arena/ Ann when fauxcahontas can reproduce this, THEN you can say JUST LIKE TRUMP