If you are progressive wing Democrat, I don’t see why you’d support Warren over Bernie. She has shown herself to be hypocritical in her attacks on Buttigieg’s fundraising, given that she herself has funded her campaign using wine fundraisers. She has also shown herself to be disingenuous with healthcare..criticizing Buttigieg’s plan while having the same “transition to single payer” path in her plan. If you want progressive purity, why Warren over Bernie?
40
Well, that's the question, isn't it? Not sure your answer is correct, but it appears to be:
"Her lie about her ancestry is disqualifying."
16
I like Warren but she would be a disastrous presidential candidate. Her shrillness is off-putting and when speaking, she often sounds like she is on the verge of hysterical tears. Her hectoring and lecturing schoolmarm schtick doesn’t speak to working-class Obama voters who switched to Trump. Warren would be a fine Labor Secretary in the Biden administration, however. Or perhaps Commerce.
37
Good old Okie exponent of what he calls the "New Populism", Fred Harris--still alive and feisty at almost ninety--ran for President nearly half a century ago based on the proposition that "a fair distribution of wealth, income and power should be the specific goal of the country.” It's hard to beat an Oklahoma Democrat!
17
If Senator Warren would demonstrate she could get working class support in the heartland I think the moderates who like her but are afraid she is not electable will get on board. Instead of preaching to the choir in Greenwich village she needs to have rallies in West Virginia and court the folks she talks about in her speeches. When Obama won the Iowa caucus and demonstrated he had broader support that was a turning point for his candidacy . We need a fire brand like her to turn the country around.
23
@Barbara What's with the comment, "preaching to the choir in Greenwich village?" Senator Warren has been to Indiana several times. And I know many working-class Hoosiers that are unique repeat contributors to her campaign. Seems they recognize Senator Warren does mean to reorder the tax burden, start on rebuilding infrastructure, address climate collapse, etc. I believe the vast Midwest is waking up after 40 years of failed conservative policy to the current Republican apocalyptic debacle where to remain in office is to lie, cheat, steal, gas-light and divide the citizenry of the Unites States.
44
This is much more about our press than Elizabeth Warren. The Times should be ashamed. The Times handling of the last race was very poor, actually abysmal. Apparently you have not learned much.
Current editorial policy is more than reason enough to cancel my subscription.
39
I went to law school with Liz Warren. I call her Liz because that is what everyone called her back at Rutgers-Newark Law, class of 1976. She was very bright, asked good questions, provided better answers, and was courteous to all, which is more than I can say about some of our other classmates. We all commuted to school, half the class was female, and about 15 percent racial minorities.
Warren, in my opinion, has more personal integrity and brains than the rest of the field combined. Her positions are a little to the left of my own, but if elected, she will be a practical person. We all set our sights at a point on the horizon, and while we move toward that point, we never entirely get there.
Brains and personal integrity. What more can we ask for in a candidate?
185
As the going gets tough she shows her true colors -- I am tired of people wanting a woman, a person of color, a working class hero, .... to be the next president.
The position open in Washington is for a person with vision, intelligence, and a willingness to observe and learn; who will pick a cabinet of experts to help run the country efficiently and honestly; and bring people together with charisma and humanity.
A resume for sainthood is not required.
26
@Sue No one is looking for a saint, just someone who has integrity. Sadly, Ms. Warren is not that person. Her lie about her ancestry is disqualifying. When did it become okay for people we trust to run our country to lie?
20
@Ross Yes, and at the debate all she did was make false accusations about the wine cave fundraiser.
13
After the ‘wine cave debate’, I question her judgment in needing to resort to lies to make her point
I would have expected more from her
As someone who attended the dinner explained, yes there were people of means there, but among the 50 or so people there was a former flight attendant, a city councilwoman, a college dean and a professor. People for whom coughing up $2800 probably isn’t a decision made lightly
The “$900 bottle of wine” is a special bottle that is 3-4 bottles in quantity. What was served was their own wine, which is available at $185 a bottle on-line
29
@Jennifer
Thanks for clarifying -- it sure makes me feel better to know that a $185 wine was available.
I expect nothing more than crass attempts to further his own ambition from Mayor Pete.
35
@RAC
Facts matter. And the fact remains, she felt that she needed to misrepresent the facts in order for it to appear scandalous
26
@Jennifer
The fact of a $700 price difference does not matter. It's all way above anything any normal person would consume.
26
If the Democrats pick a center right candidate like Klobuchar, Biden or Mayor Pete, it will eventually make it a minority party and I can't wait. Claimed centrist policies are always center right. Examine Bill Clinton's and Obama's policies in depth.
Neither Warren or Sanders are truly the left as defined by European countries. They are barely center left, barely progressive.
We need change in this country in how we address massive income inequality. climate change, out of this world spending on Defense and other issues. A Centrist ( really center right,) President with a compliant Congress will never get the job done.
Everybody voter has to make up their mind but fixating on a position without examining its effect on the poor, working and middle classes, casting your vote purely on pre-conceived ideas is no different that a Trump voter.
29
I am from MA, and I voted for Elizabeth Warren twice for the US Senate. I met her a few times and I deeply admire her intelligence, passion and indefatigable work ethic. Without a doubt, Warren would be a fantastic president. However, I do not think that she can win a general election. Dukakis and Kerry are very similar to Warren, and they lost. I think Warren will follow this Massachusetts trend. I support Pete, Amy, and Biden, in that order. I think it will take a center-left Democrat to beat our current disaster of a president. Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania must be flipped. My hope is that Biden chooses Michelle Obama as his running mate.
16
@Linda - very sad to see readers resorting to sexist tropes (“hysterical”) to disparage a fame candidate. Women doing this too to other women is unsurprising, both men and women do that. Just say that you don’t like her and stop the insult. Because looking at what candidate Warren had to go through in her life to get to where she is, that’s very impressive. She certainly was not born with a silver spoon, had to deal with early pregnancies and lack of child care and money during her interrupted college years. She also went on to be the driving force behind the Consumer Finance Federal Bureau, an agency that is one of the biggest hallmark of financial reform post 2008, and one actually helping working class Americans.
Buttigieg? What has he done exactly? Or, shall I say, part-time mayor Buttigieg?
48
@R. Here we go again. If anyone expresses doubts about this professed working-class candidate, they are resorting to sexist tropes. "Women doing this to other women is unsurprising." All I can say is, weird. And what does Buttigieg have to so with this?
18
I'm for Warren, but I am for any Democrat who gets the nomination. If the left wing Social Democratic Party, possibly the largest political party in post WWI Germany, could vote for the ultra right wing Hindenburg for President against the failed Austrian art student in 1931, no Democrat should stay at home because their "favorite" wasn't nominated.
27
A woman should never change her name. It's who she is. It takes every persoin a long time to figure out what they believe in, what they stand for, and what career and activities they will follow to achieve their goals.
When a woman is known by different names at different times of the life - she looks confused and compromised.
It's time that keeping your name is seen as what it is - keeping your identify.
5
@BSmith , what a lot of mere personal opinion masquerades as wisdom these days.
24
The news media love to nitpick all the Democratic candidates but especially the two progressive ones who are most passionate about helping working and middle class families get ahead in this Gilded Age of obscene income and wealth inequality. Nevertheless, I will vote for either Senator Warren or Sanders without fear of the electoral consequences. It's long past time for the "little guys" to win one and if not now, when?
42
How do you get "Betsy" from "Elizabeth"? Is that a thing?
@David S. Yes, Betsy is a nickname for Elizabeth.
14
@David S. , that's where Betsy comes from, nearly always. So do Beth, Bess, Liz, and likely others. What an odd comment, btw. People are so querulous these days.
28
@David S. Betsy Ross's first name was Elizabeth, and Elizabeth I was widely known as "Queen Bess".
8
While Warren did a good job of exposing Mayo Pete's billionaire dependency in the recent debate, he did an equally good job of pointing out the extent to which she's really a Janie-Come-Lately on this issue. Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont is the real deal; we can trust him to follow through on this, not back off or postpone Medicare For All to the third year of his administration.
23
@bluewombat
I'm not sure he has a 'billionaire dependency'.
40 billionaires contributed to his campaign. That's 6.5% of all billionaires in the U.S. One could interpret that as doing poorly among that demographic
Assuming each billionaire gave the maximum of $2800, that's only $112k in contributions from billionaires. Which is what, 0.2% of his total 50 million in fundraising?
11
But she had 100,000 selfies. (Which aren't even selfies)
8
"....stalled in the polls"? She seems to have gone in reverse.
18
I suggest that we need another far left winger as president -- like Franklin Delano Roosevelt.
36
Another case of left wing bias in these pages. Her growth hasn’t “stalled”. Her support has dissipated like the pixie dust that most of her promises are made off.
16
She doesn't 'sell access" to her time . . . anymore eh?
She was dishonest to falsely claim Native American Ancestry over and over. She was dishonest in her debating Buttigieg's dinner with Billionaires. The dinner was attended by all age groups and professions, mostly educators. Warren lied about the $900 bottles of wine. She could have made her points without resorting to hysterical falsehoods.
30
@Linda If you knew how the tribe defines Cherokee tribal membership, and what that demonstrates about which faction won when the federal government set up the Dawes Commission, you might gain some perspective.
14
@Linda If you father's family would not accept your Mom because they thought she was Indian, you too might believe them.
23
So what?
Elizabeth Warren can no more deliver Oklahoma to the Democratic Party Electoral College column than Pete Buttigieg can do Indiana or Julian Castro can do Texas.
The only thing that Warren's return to Oklahoma aka Indian territory is going to do is remind people how fast and hard she fell for Trump's caricature nickname tar trap.
20
@Blackmamba , after her visit here in 2018, the 5th District elected their first female democrat ever to Congress--the first democrat of either gender since 1977. But she doesn't have to win Oklahoma to win the presidency; she visits us anyway. Obama won twice without it; so did Clinton. As for Trump's little-boy nicknames, I can't imagine why you think they're anything but more infantilism from the boy who thinks he's king.
34
@Blackmamba
She went to Oklahoma City, which was Oklahoma Territory before 1907 statehood.
Indian Territory is the eastern half of the state.
4
Should be our next President. She is our Okie. She honest, a woman and was a friend of Teddy. She has a plan and a vision.
39
Don't worry, Barack Obama behind closed doors tells wealthy donors to support Warren.
10
As time goes on, I have more and more doubts about Elizabeth Warren, and about the New York Times, which seems to have a cast of adoring journalist promoting her candidacy, without critical reflection. She seems very opportunistic and divisive. Highlight your working-class roots by all means, Elizabeth Warren, but don't think that you are kidding the electorate or that you are not turning off this female voter. I've had enough of this type of populism. The cheap Buttigieg attacks ended her candidacy for me.
22
@Caroline. Seriously why are you so superficially critical of Warren. The kind of artificial criticism being thrown at her is tiring and, shall i say, sexist. Just say that you don’t like her and stop the insult.
Unlike part time mayor Pete, she was the driving force behind the Consumer Finance Federal Bureau, an agency that is one of the biggest hallmark of financial reform post 2008, and one actually helping working class Americans.
Buttigieg? What has he done exactly? Or, shall I say, part-time mayor Buttigieg? he is a silver tongue entitled privileged boy. I will NOT vote for him until he gets national experience or voted into higher office and we get to see how he makes tough decisions.
35
@Caroline
There’s plenty to admire about her as is. She's the first candidate to call for Trump's impeachment after reading the entire Mueller Report. She's the only candidate who’s against selling ambassadorships to the highest bidder (normally, rich men and women such as Mayor Pete's wine cave hostess — who became the ambassador to Austria under Clinton, getting rewarded for placing the right bet is not that horrible except in the case of Sondland). She's the first to call for an end to the filibuster (Senator Sanders and VP Biden aren’t ready to end the practice, though I don’t understand how they’d get anything done).
And if anybody can outfox McConnell, it’d be Elizabeth Warren and Nancy Pelosi.
32
And, “Wine-Cave Pete”
5
Warren and Sanders are the only candidates that relate a credible story of how we got into the mess we are in now, who is to blame and how do we get out of it. The rest of the primary field is avoiding saying anything derogatory about the rich ruling class.
https://whorulesamerica.ucsc.edu
60
Please read your colleague's opinion piece today by David Leonhardt and ask yourself if your characterization of Elizabeth Warren as "left wing" is either accurate or fair. Your words matter, use them carefully.
11
She seems like someone who would be easily bought to be honest. Her refusal to admit that taxes would go up for everyone for fear of producing a bad sound bite and the adoption of a wealth tax even when there has been many cases where it does not work seems absolutely bizarre to me.
I want new ideas by someone who seems to have a grasp of the now and the future. This is why I choose to back Andrew Yang, and if I am going to have to support another person in their 70s that person is Bernie Sanders. At the very least he has shown integrity for decades.
6
I want to like Warren, but she needs to learn to pick her battles and recognize her own hypocricy. I don't understand the need to alienate wealthy people. Class warfare isn't a winning platform. Every time she tries to make up ground, she puts her foot firmly in her mouth. Last I checked, growing grapes is agriculture, and the people growing grapes are farmers. Why disparage anyone when you need every Democrat on your side to win the presidency?
27
@Pam ,
"she needs to ... recognize her own hypocrisy."
That would be rich:
"I honestly recognize I'm a hypocrite."
1
@Pam How about "we just fix the tax system."?
4
“Class warfare”: idiom created by wealthy donors to criticize candidates advocating changing a tax system that just is not fit for purpose anymore when so much national wealth is flowing to the top. Read Piketty and others: if you just tax income, you are basically hurting the upper middle class, very far from where the actual wealth is. She was right to propose a wealth tax and the country will not suffer from it.
34
I’m voting for Elizabeth Warren. She’s the only candidate that the Wall Street bankers are scared of.
We’ve let the filthy rich run amok for long enough. Hope it’s not too late to reduce money’s corrupting influence in our politics.
103
Warren will not last. Her manner of speaking is too far removed from the working class, and her ideas are hopelessly unachievable. And she always sounds like she is scolding someone.
26
@Emily: so you can’t support her because you do not like her tone of voice? One general bit of advice everyone? Whoever is the most charming candidate out there, usually turn out to be the most disappointing. Charmers, actors, politicians, crooks, the core skill set is projecting a set of emotions onto listeners and viewers that is completely made up. I decided half jokingly a while ago that i would pick the least charming candidate on set. He’d be the most likely to not lie and care about others.
We confuse so much charm and mindset, and then we are always negatively surprised when politicians disappoint or break promises they hinted they were making. With Warren and Sanders, we probably have two of the most “you get what you pay for” candidates.
22
@Emily , your condescension toward the "working class" is unseemly, and your evocation of sexist stereotyping is, too. Ironic that you'd mind a scolding tone--but Warren is quite personable, if you cared actually to learn anything of her.
26
@Emily
Amen @Emily. I feel scolded. And ready for my ear plugs.
2
Both-sideism is killing journalism.
The issue Warren raised about raising money isn’t about who drank what value wine where.
It’s that when people give money to politicians, they have expectations in return. Is that so difficult to understand or acknowledge given the income and wealth inequality in our country (abetted by the presidency and Congress over the years)?
The past fund raisers for Warren have zero influence as her policy views for the future are spelled out in greater detail than for any other candidate (ANY other candidate).
With Mr. Buttigieg, there’s a real concern. As Julián Castro said about Pete “ When you have a candidate who flip-flops so fundamentally on important points of policy, it does raise the question about whether big money is over influencing his decisions”
We saw a news story break out (not in the Times, obviously) that one of Pete’s bundlers was offering pay-to-play to future donors. To get in on the train before others have done so. Pete is the candidate with the most donations from Wall Street.
That (policy influenced by money) is what’s the real issue here. Not so-called ‘purity tests’ that appear to be yet another communication gift from the focus groups to Pete.
40
@Patrician
Precisely. Elizabeth Warren doesn't sell access. It's pay to play that she was protesting, not large donations to candidates.
39
@Patrician Mr. Buttigieg has been consistently advocating "Medicare for all who want it" (i.e., a public option) as a "glide path" to full Medicare for All since Feb. 2019, long before he declared his candidacy. There is no flip-flop. Secretary Julián Castro unfortunately was peddling misinformation, perhaps to his own advantage.
The thing about "access," is that, once granted, cannot be removed. Senator Warren continues to accept maximum legal limit donations from the same donors she held private fundraisers with before. In addition, she maintains access through her advisors and allies ("Inside Warren’s secret big-donor fan club," Politico, 11/18/2019.) Basically, Senator Warren is claiming moral high ground and at the same time, reaping benefit.
The maximum an individual donor could give to Mr. Buttigieg at the private fundraiser is $2,800. Most candidates on the debate stage have private fundraisers. So singling Mr. Buttigieg out is clearly for altruistic reason.
Moreover, Mr. Buttigieg does not have a PAC. Senators Warren and Booker are lucky to have one. Mr. Buttigieg does not have a generous donor shelling out $175,000 buying a voter database for him; Senator Warren is lucky to have such a millionaire supporter (long term too). I don't consider Senator Warren corrupted by such donation. Mr. Buttigieg is a man of integrity, and will not be influenced by $2,800 out of over 50 millions from 700,000 people.
17
@Patrician Elizabeth Warren flip flops on policy all the time and on her campaign finance practices, so this comment is certainly rich in its factual errors. "Purity test" is a term that is commonly used and does not come from focus groups. Elizabeth Warren is a hypocrite. But I am sure that R. from France will call me sexist.
9
"Betsy" and the entire field would all in my humble opinion make excellent presidents notwithstanding that the bar is so very low. But the man now holding the office got there not because of his mental acuity or deep political acumen. He got there because of his "charisma". No policy wonk he. Biden is the only one in the field who is a charismatic match. How about a Biden-Warren, Biden-Sanders ticket or a Biden-whoever ticket? This way, both progressive, "no one left behind" policy and humanistic ideology may once again rule Washington and the free world.
3
I am a moderate Independent. She has my vote.
I like her humble upbringing, self-made education and success (while being a mother), she's a fighter, lawyer, economics expert, sitting Senator, who can navigate DC & hit the ground running.
The media, Wall Street, and other Dems trashing her, just empowers my commitment to her.
She'll rebuild the Middle Class, lift the working class (like FDR), shut down corruption, rebuild infrastructure, end the wars--she's the real deal.
Don't just say you love her, donate to her, volunteer, and vote for her. We have to take the Country back.
Amen.
128
IT’S ABOUT THE BRAND
Elizabeth Warren’s stall in recent weeks is based on one thing: she injured her brand. Her brand was a straight-talking maverick that would fight for the working class and never play the evasive double-talk games of Washington insiders. She remembered, too well perhaps, the part about the fighting, but she completely forgot the part about the straight-talking when she refused to answer a simple yes-or-no question on whether her Medicare-for-All plan would raise taxes on the middle class. And so her repeated dissembling made her look just like… an evasive, double-talking Washington insider.
But:
Rather than learn her lesson there, she listened to her flame-throwing campaign staff and doubled up on the fighting instead of the straight-talking when she went after Pete Buttigieg in the last debate—only to be smacked by her own hypocrisy when he exposed that she had done the same thing she was accusing him of doing—raising campaign funds from wealthy donors—when she ran for the senate. That cinched it for Iowans. She was a hypocrite. The innocence of her brand was gone, perhaps forever.
When you privilege fighting over honesty you lose your innocence.
It will be hard work for her to get it back.
37
Her late conversion to identity politics put a final nail in her coffin in my opinion.
It was lethal to Hillary and also Harris and Booker.
It started with the Cherokee comment disaster and her recent comment that she will govern as one tough woman.
A majority of Americans except for the two political fringes, Trump's bigots on the right and Hillary's identity/social engineering elect me president because I am a woman and the era of the white man is over zealots on the left, are sick of identity politics.
18
I have not heard a lot of identity politics from her.
11
@R. -Thank you for your reply. While she was not nearly as bad as Hillary, Booker and Harris, nevertheless her comment to a question on how she Whould would govern as president gave her away.
Instead of saying as an American uniting all people she said as one tough woman.
What also killed her was her dogmatic, Neo socialist views especially on health care. Instead of uniting people and saying let's get a plan like canada ie private/gov't bond over time, she scared the heck out of people by obsessing about medicare for all and had blinders on.
6
I like Elizabeth Warren but her constant put down of the rich makes her scary in a capitalist country such as ours.
13
One could argue that she is really really popular in her own home.
The rest of the country? not so much.
8
Too late! Her Democratic social millionaire and elite academic credentials are not carrying the votes she needs in the flyover states.
I’m in shock.
8
The RCP Average on December 17th gave Biden 27.8%, Warren 15.2%, and Sanders 19.3%. (Nobody else showed double-digits.) If we assume that Warren & Sanders appeal to much the same set of voter preferences, that pair together have 34.5% —way ahead of Biden and everyone else. Clearly, this country is ready for foundational changes in its government, and welcomes the "excitement of the fringes". In fact, one might say that in 2016, both Sanders and Trump were appealing to this same hunger for deep change; some 60+ million primary voters said so. If either Warren or Sanders were to leave the race, the other would be the leader, right in the middle of what America wants to see in Washington in 2020!
Me, I voted for Clinton in 2016 but I started donating small amounts to Senator Warren as soon as she announced last spring. I still want to see a woman in the White House soon; they do things differently than men do, let's give 'em a chance. Time for a change!
74
@Brian Noonan
Yet as this primary and the last shows us, women do things often just like their counterparts.
Guess they're human just like the rest of us.
Maybe we should pick the best candidate regardless of their sex, orientation or ethnicity.
13
@Brian Noonan
Yes, Warren and Bernard have more support than Biden and one of them could easily be the front runner.
But their incredibly large egos make this impossible.
And that, my friends, is why neither of them will win.
What a beautiful Xmas gift to all of us.
4
Elizabeth Warren continues to be a strong voice for all Americans, not just those who pay for access to candidates in places like wine caves (and that's what her critique was about -- paid for access -- not discouraging those with the means to support progressive policies).
She also reminds us that government is supposed to work for all the people of this country, not just those who can pay for that access and who, therefore, help develop government policy for their own benefit.
Biden, Buttigieg and Klobuchar continually remind us that Americans can only expect so much to change (and assure their wealthy donors the same). The rest of us should only expect what is left over. And feel lucky to get it.
I appreciate Warren and Sanders reminding us that the government should serve all Americans and the system itself needs to change if we are to be a government of and for the people. They have my full support.
128
@avrds Exactly. Well said.
17
It is very interesting and revealing that so many reporters describe candidates like Elizabeth Warren, who care about middle- and working-class Americans, as left-wing and in the pejorative sense of the term. Interesting that these reporters use the ultra-rich definition of left-wing and revealing that these same reporters illustrate their ignorance and biases about main-street America.
Before Ronald Reagan, concern about the well-being of middle- and working-class Americans was considered main stream (and that is still the view of many people). Living wages, strong public education, comprehensive healthcare coverage, extreme income and wealth inequality, et cetera are major concerns of middle- and working-class Americans.
As long as Elizabeth Warren continues to advocate for values that are important to middle- and working-class Americans, she will continue to get the support of many Americans, possibly even a majority.
167
@John S. Well put, sir. Beats me how anyone can think people do not want a better life for themselves and their children and only want to work harder and harder so the rich can get richer and richer.
30
After subsequent reporting, I now consider Senator Warren’s wine cave attack on Mayor Pete at the same level as Senator Harris’s busing attack on Joe Biden. It really tarnishes my opinion of her as it does seem like a cheap shot. At least she didn’t have T-shirt’s printed with a photo of the wine cave if that means anything.
64
Quite the opposite for me. I was pleased that Warren pointed out where his funding came from. I wish she’d been more specific though. Politicians are owned by their funders.
78
Her critique was important not because rich people donate to Democratic candidates -- I say the more the merrier! -- but at least some give that kind of money to gain access and, thus, influence (or a job as a rich ambassador).
As Warren said, she does not sell her time. That is an important difference.
51
@Ash
The wine cave needed to be outed. Good for her.
That Democrat couple bought an Embassadorship from President Clinton back in 90s.
Mayor Pete has had similar quiet fundraisers here in Santa Barbara--rich buying access.
He didnt hold a town hall, meet veterans, visit homeless, stop at a senior center, meet with families, Latinos--he made a beeline for the uber wealthy with a pocketful of promises of access.
The American people need to know what he is doing behind the scenes.
84
When all is said and done, Sanders and Warren will have forged a new center. Warmed over triangulation always compromises to the rich.
81
@Rob
'Sanders and Warren will have forged a new center.'
Center?
They cannot get new fans because both are competing to see how is furthest to the left of Mother Theresa. They are competing for the same fringe that got AOC elected, Bernie in fact has the endorsement of that phoney loony tunes spin bin ready, enemy of job creation and tax revenue, hero to those who want to get paid for refusing to work, AOC.
No sir, there two went off the left edge, there is no reality in which these two can be anywhere near the center. They are too far gone.
4
@AutumnLeaf
You do know that Mother Teresa was a Reaganite who hated birth control and fetishized suffering, don't you?
17
I could vote for Warren, but I notice that her momentum seems to be going in the wrong direction. Amy Klobuchar is peaking at just the right time.
I just donated $37 to Tulsi Gabbard. Doesn't mean I'm voting for her, just sent her some money. I hope it was a good investment.
3
@sthomas1957 Knowing Gabbard's views and links, I think that money's wasted.
15
I have some oceanfront property in Idaho I think you’d be interested in.
12
@sthomas1957 Tulsi Gabbard voted "present" at the impeachment hearing....I don't think that you have made a very good investment. She is Republican.
22
What we have been witnessing in the media about Senator Warren over the past few weeks is shameful. She suffers the fate of being a woman and a progressive, which means that once public sentiment was crystallizing around her, there was an all-out battle to discredit her ideas and have her tarred and feathered.
Warren may make her mistakes, but she deserves better. The only reason she is not leading now is because some of her supporters were convinced by journalists she is "unelectable." That is not true.
187
Journalists are the only reason she’s not leading? That feels a bit like blaming the refs before the game is played. If her supporters were so easily “convinced that she’s unelectable,” then their support was soft.
There’s a large segment of voters who prefer more moderate policies. There’s another group who like Warren’s policies, but are concerned that swing state voters aren’t as far left as the Warren/Sanders bloc. And certainly, many voters prefer Sanders, whose authenticity and ideological purity can’t be questioned.
38
@JS27
Deserves better?
She choose to waffle and pivot.
The primary isn't over and she still has a decent following.
But to many her authenticity and chutzpah has been exposed as, not so much.
Depending upon which lane she's trying to occupy, we have other choices in each.
15
@JS27 Yes. You nailed it.
8
"Her professional prospects limited by her gender."
As the son of a woman who graduated from law school in 1941 and never thought that was any type of special achievement, it amazes me that the myth is still being passed on that it wasn't until the 1950s or, in Warren's case, even later before they could even dream of being a lawyer.
And Warren's politics stayed conservative until she was in her mid 40s when apparently she had an epiphany that the policies of Nixon and Reagan were not good for working class folks. Even Hillary Clinton, who was a Goldwater girl in her youth, recognized the moral failings of the Republican Party much quicker.
23
@Steve Hillary's involvement in electoral politics started in college. Warren was a bankruptcy and commercial law professor who was not involved in politics until the mid '90s. A lot of people (at least 63 million last election) don't pay attention to politics.
23
@rls
The Reagan/Bush era's? To be a woman and not aware of the politics promoted by Republicans?!
Guess it happens.
But to highly educated women pushing the envelope? Yeah, not so much; but sure, anything is possible.
5
The idea that people should change faster than they do is myopic.
Good for you and your mom.
Everyone has a list of things they were able to achieve—it applies to their place; support systems; and a host of other factors.
You and/or your family’s accomplishments cannot be compared to anyone else’s. And they are not yours, alone.
I wonder how many people have had conversations with you and walked away thinking, ‘I can’t believe he hasn’t figured that out, yet’.
9