I simply cannot understand how such a strong candidate’s position amongst the Democrats could have declined in such an unsettling way. As a more moderate a Democrat I decided to take the plunge and back Ms Warren. Mr. Sanders has so many ugly qualities:personally and idealistically. Why choose Bernie over Elizabeth? Trump has shown us that logic is useless. Perhaps she’s sputtered in M4A: so what? She’ll have an effective plan when the time comes. Haven’t Americans learned yet that candidates can promise to give everybody everything that sounds good and never even worry if they will actually deliver on their promises once the election is over.
I’m not sure what Ms Warren has to do to get back on track and actually win. At first I thought everyone kept saying we needed a newer and younger candidate to inject hope and optimism. But once again we have an old despot. I’m disgusted by an unpleasant old man with a nasty disposition, who promises some sort of socialistic utopia at all costs, who is fond of lumping every educated and all wealthy Americans together as an enemy of the people to be the person we choose. An exhorting bobble head with a message that gets lost on me because he vilifies an important part of the population who has something tremendous to offer in the right hands of the right leader. Of course Corporate America is getting away with murder. But the “common folk” leaves out an awful lot of people who deserve to counted.
8
For "Pete's" sake! Warren doesn't come out of a primary with good results and it's because "she's a woman and the media doesn't give her attention." This is exactly the kind of junk that Trump and the Republicans use against women and Democrats to gain the support of moderates who just can't stand hiding behind an easy and inflammatory excuse like being a woman for one's failings. Couldn't be that the voters simply don't like her message, right? That perhaps they're entirely gender-neutral but that her message doesn't resonate? Sensible people know that this is the truth and that her gender isn't the issue but it feels better to find a reason for one's failings other than looking directly in the mirror for the reason.
5
Elizabeth who?
2
It seems that Senator Warren is experiencing something that many smart women and older women face - being ignored. All you need to do is look at the average age of women on television in general to see the start contrast. Men may get better with age but women are expected to shrivel, dry up and blow away.
The irony is that Mike Bloomberg has picked up on her consumer protection ideas. Will we see what many women face at work, that when they make a suggestion it is ignored but when a man voices the same idea he is rewarded?
17
You can always go back to the, "But shes a woman, sexism" card, but in this case it's a weak play. The NYT endorsed Warren and Klobuchar! I've heard exactly zero Democrats say they wouldnt vote for a woman candidate. If that really is your argument then you are arguing that the party that nominated a woman candidate in 2016 and promoted her weak candidacy with abandon is sexist.
No, Warren is losing because she decided to back off her progressive bona fides and attempted to be a unity candidate. Well, there is no unity in the Democratic party. We are fractured between progressive and moderate, and there is no room for a unity candidate today. That was her mistake and its costing her now.
5
They're right. There have been basically no stories about her since Iowa and only dismissive comments. Someone posted this today, and it's one of the truly must-read articles of all that I've read about different candidates (and I read about a dozen daily). It's by a Moody's economist who favors opt-in Medicare, instead, which makes it even more credible. He also analyzes her wealth tax and what it will support and the likely outcome.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/13/perspectives/elizabeth-warren-medicare-for-all-taxes-middle-class/index.html
2
At first I was all Warren. Contributed to her campaign then came an endless stream of emails. Every day asking for a donation. Talk abuse email abuse. Next came the Medicare for all camping nonsense. It's like she flipped a switch and the real reason candidate became a Bernie clone. Sorry Elizabeth but you lost my support. I switched to Mike.
3
The honorable thing for Senator Elizabeth Warren is to withdraw and openly endorse Senator Bernie Sanders before it is too late.
1
Let's remember that President Clinton placed 4th in the Iowa and New Hampshire contests, yet he went on to win the presidency twice.
Warren is not out by a long shot.
Bloomberg has no foreign policy experience, no federal government experience, and has yet to be in a debate.
9
I saw Elizabeth speak at a town hall in NH a few days before the primary and she was electric. My companions, including someone deciding between her and Bernie, agreed. She explained her policy proposals in an easy-to-digest fashion. Wealth tax = 2 cents off every dollar*after* your first $50 million; your first $50 million is safe. That sounds reasonable to me.
If only the media would give her fair coverage so America would give her a chance.
She also has an inspirational story. Working class Oklahoma upbringing, commuter college, working mom, public law school grad who then rose to become one of the most respected HLS professors. Created the CFPB. Registered Republican up until her 40s until she got into the weeds of corporate and tax structure that caused her to fully understand how these systems benefit the rich and hurt everyone else. she understands the systems so knows how to change it. she also listens to the other side.
As far as M4A, we're not going to fully solve the problem of *cost* unless private health insurance is removed from the picture. I personally have excellent health insurance through my union but I would support a baseline coverage that might be less than what I have now, if we *all* have access to it. I could supplement my baseline coverage, if needed, with the money I'd save by not paying premiums, deductibles & copays/coinsurance etc. Kudos to Warren (and Sanders) for telling it like it is and standing up to corporate medicine.
Vote Warren.
15
@cee
It's insurance corporations against M4A, not doctors. Most docs wherever they work, would love to get rid of the insane mess of thousands of different insurance policies that only exist to enrich billionaires.
We don't need 'em.
5
She's one heart murmur away from consolidating the progressives. Long way to go.
3
The only way she regains the spotlight is with a gracious concession speech.
If you like her policies you will vote for Bernie - he is just more angry/authentic/passionate.
4
Love Warren, she’s the smartest person in the room, but it’s time for her to turn out the lights. Americans aren’t ready for her.
2
I think Warren is losing support because of her partial backtracking on Medicare for All and then implying that Sanders is a sexist when he allegedly told her a woman couldn't be elected president (which Sanders denied) ... and then her refusal to shake Sanders' hand after the debate. Her fall is from her own making -- not the media's.
9
Warren will go after Bloomberg in Wednesday’s debate. That’s how she’s going to get back in the race. Everyone will be going after Bloomberg. This will be like watching a pee wee basketball game where all five players on the opposing team rush the kid with the ball. It should be great entertainment.
6
Warren and her supporters are kidding themselves. She's going to do poorly in Nevada and then poorly in South Carolina. And the only state she's currently projected to well in is MA. Big whoop. And for all the cries of being ignored, she got a huge push from Big News last year. Until she let out the fact that none of her numbers work. The winner has been Sanders since he's the slightly older male version of Warren. Oh, and he actually believes the stuff he says.
7
I agree about what Warren brings to the table.
She has to be given adequate time in the next debate! She was essentially shut out of the last one. Moderators make decisions that can make or break a candidate when they ignore candidates raised hands. And, they seem to make those decisions to promote clashes, which, of course, generate ratings....
Warren deserves equal time with all front runner candidates. Voters deserve, and the country desperately needs, a much better system than a “horse race!”
10
@JL Warren got 15:54 in the last debate. Klobuchar 16:32. Buttigieg 18:28, Biden 19:38. Sanders got 20:07. Steyer got less than Warren, at 13:53 and Yang was the one shut-out at 8:05. Considering she led the early debates with more time than the others, I'm not surprised they made it harder for her this last time. She received slightly more than a half-minute less than Amy, but 2 & I/2 less than Mayor Pete and almost 3 & 1/2 less than the former V.P. Not a "shut-out" but certainly a bit less time. Bernie was the time hog!
I believe the moderators expected her to fight for her time like she did in earlier debates, so they put some walls up. That coincided with her less energetic performance...no one's fault. I remember wondering, during the early debates, when they'd get in her way as she monopolized nearly every conversation.
Warren is the most articulate well prepared candidate in the race. I feel she is most feared by
those most vested in the status quo, the corporations, the media, the republicans and the democrats extending their hands across the aisle.That's why she is most effectively being erased.
The hair on fire pundits present the ridiculous proposition the must pick the candidate that can beat Trump, no matter how firmly they're entrenched in business as usual. Its like Trump has everybody scared to death. Unfortunately it appears many people are starting to believe it.
Its like going to a weigh-in for a big fight and begging no to get hit.
11
Warren is the first presidential candidate who has ever inspired me. Not just policy arguments, speechmaking talent or ability to win, but inspired me to donate and work on her behalf because she is dedicated, brilliant and ...... this is key ..... pragmatic.
15
Her message is not being ignored, its the reason she's faltering.
10
Warren 2020! Come on people, she is the best, most qualified candidate, hands down. What does the woman have to do to get the credit (not to mention media coverage) she deserves around here for Pete’s sake?!?
15
I have "tried on" many candidates and voted for Warren. Warren is the best possible nominee:
1. She has emotional intelligence, takes on input from diverse constituencies, and adjusts policy accordingly. This is what will make her a great president. This characteristic may be seen as a "weakness" for Trump to attack, but it brings diverse people into the process and gives them a genuine voice at the table. Warren can unite the party.
2. There is no other candidate still standing that can unite the party to turn out the vote. Sanders cannot win because of the word "socialism". Right or wrong, it's a fact. Biden is done. Buttigieg and Klobuchar have just about zero standing and chance outside of white voters.
3. Warren has the policy knowledge, intelligence, and experience to govern along with the unique ability to work a crowd and give an energizing speech. She can get people excited! The only other person that can do this is Sanders (see number 2).
Bringing in diverse voters + exciting rhetoric + intelligence to lead = winning
Warren needs to bring the incisive critique and fire she has shown she has in the Senate to the next debate to show she can debate Trump.
Warren should win the nomination, take on a "moderate" VP, and then adjust policies to what Democrats and Independents can broadly get behind: money out of politics, a public option for health care, unity, taxation on Amazon et al.
23
I agree about what Warren brings to the table.
She has to be given adequate time in the next debate! She was essentially shut out of the last one. Moderators make decisions that can make or break a candidate when they ignore candidates raised hands. And, they seem to make those decisions to promote clashes, which, of course, generate ratings....
Warren deserves equal time with all front runner candidates. Voters deserve, and the country desperately needs, a much better system than a “horse race!”
7
There is a markedly wrong assertion in this article...Ms. Warren did not enter the race in the shadow of anyone. She came out fighting and was always front and center. To give credence to the notion that she has always been an "underdog" is nonsensical. She wasn't! Her recent precipitous fall in Iowa & New Hampshire speak to the fact that she simply does not resonate with many voters. This is a problem compounded by the fact that Ms. Warren refuses to get out in front of any crowds other than her followers. She needs to find a way to connect with a lot of voters who certainly do not need to be lectured on sharing their hard earned pay and/or reminded that the "big guys" have been squashing them. There are far too many middle Americans out there who do not feel that way at all and they are Mr. Trump's base. Unfortunately for Ms. Warren, there are many more of those voters than there are liberals who share her extreme leftist views. Her inability to connect with so many middle Americans is what is causing her campaign to unravel, not lack of media coverage.
4
Elizabeth Warren's plans have many of the same fatal flaws ad Bernie Sanders' plans
Forgiving student loans for public service and certain extenuating circumstances. However, universal forgiveness as Sanders proposes or forgiveness for incomes up to $100,000 a year--more than most people make in a year--as Warren proposes creates some serious fairness issues.
Warren and Sanders' student debt forgiveness proposals are incredibly unfair to all the families that worked hard and sacrificed so their kinds could attend college with little or no debt, as well as individuals that worked hard and sacrificed to get through school debt free or pay off their debts. Warren and Sanders' proposals are also incredibly unfair to the millions of Americans that did not go to college--less than 40% of American adults have a Bachelors Degree or higher.
Both Warren and Sanders' Medicare for All plans have the same fatal flaw of not having the math work out, as well as the flaw of forcing people off of private insurance and into some yet to be determined plan that might or might not be better than what they have now.
The tone-deafness of Warren and Sanders, especially on these issues is astounding. Fortunately, other Democratic candidates have proposals that are bother fairer and more feasible.
1
She wasn't the first, but she fell into the media trap.
First the candidate accepts that it's a horserace — it's not.
This fatal compromise equates running for office with entertainment.
It isn't.
Then we get the performances for the camera — hey, give 'em what they want.
But we don't want that, the media wants it for click bait.
Now because you're in the news cycle you think you can control it.
You can't.
What do I want from Warren?
A vision of what a much better America could look like, and a detailed plan to get us there, and yes a reminder that the truth matters and doing the right thing does too.
She doesn't have to mention the names of anyone else, including the President to do that. That bar is just too low to reference. Give me a dream instead but one that can happen.
I can be self righteous against what the republicans have done all by myself — show me something better than that.
4
Ms. Warren claims that "two cents" extracted from a few thousand rich Americans will pay for her vast and multiple spending schemes. She adamantly refuses to answer any questions about middle class tax increases. No economist or federal budget analyst believes her math is credible regarding M4A alone, without even considering the taxpayers' new burden for her other free stuff, college, child care, etc.
Middle class taxpayers are being taken out for a walk, a long walk on a short pier.
2
I think the media is so silent about Warren because they realize that indeed she is the BEST candidate.
But she doesn't fit the bill of being part of the good old boys club!
And maybe some are so keen on promoting Sanders because they feel he won't/can't be the nominee anyway.
The Democrats needs to straighten out and forget about the idea that more money from rich guys or wall street will benefit the party - the party that is supposed to be for the people.
I feel that indeed, Elizabeth Warren would make a great president and is the person that can make America great again for the rest of us!
15
Trump said that only he alone could fix all the problems which his supporters believed to be. That’s the line of a dictator who is replacing a democracy which as slipped into factionalism and anarchy.
So what message do we get from Sanders, Warren, Bloomberg, et al? We don’t need someone to save us from anybody, we need policies which restore our control over our government, especially taxes to fund it.
2
Warren is the only one to tackle corporate malfeasance. Citizens United has allowed icorporations to undue corporate charters which mandate “public good.” Corporate lawyers are now attempting to eliminate corporate taxes altogether since Trumps cuts. It’s a free-for-all. She’s also good on environmental issues since we are without a doubt 2 or 3 El Niño cycles away from 7 dead seas etc....
15
As all politicians can attest, Elizabeth Warren had some skeletons in her closet when she announced her candidacy. To be sure, the "first woman of color" on Harvard's law school faculty had to deal with questions surrounding her Native American Cherokee heritage.
Nonetheless, she was still considered a strong candidate until the debates started. That's when the public saw the real Elizabeth Warren.
First, she dodged the question and refused to admit that her Medicare For All plan would result in a tax increase for middle-class families. Her interview with Chris Matthews was political theatre at its worst.
Second, in Atlanta when confronted by a Black mother who supported charter schools, she "twisted" the truth by denying her son attended expensive private schools.
Third, she tried to downplay her educational resume by claiming she attended a "commuter" college. If University of Houston is a "commuter" college, I guess, the same could be said for N.Y.U. or Boston University.
The final straw that doomed her candidacy was "throwing her father under the bus" by claiming he was a janitor. Guzzling beer from the bottle is one thing, but disparaging your own father was the "final nail in the coffin".
3
She fought and campaigned really hard and I do respect her for that.
Her problem though is that she has a bad message and then she compounded her unelectability by claiming to be an ethic minority to advance her career. That is unforgivable.
In any case, it will be all over for her two weeks from tonight, when Super Tuesday results are tallied.
6
I feel more strongly for Warren than I have for any Democratic candidate in my lifetime, other than Obama in 2008. She's a technocrat with moral clarity--the sole candidate in the race who brings both a keen sense of what's broken in our system and an actionable theory of power to fix it.
She has three major challenges that I fear are collectively impossible to overcome. The first is misogyny. One can make the argument that she's the first major female candidate for the presidency who got there with her own name and on her own record, as opposed to Hillary Clinton--who had a formidable record of her own, but came to prominence through her marriage. This is still new to our press corps, and they've performed as you'd expect.
The second is anti-intellectualism. Warren surely has written more books than Trump has read, and even in the Dem primary what's lionized is Sanders' visceral connection, Biden's empathy, Bloomberg's money. (The exception that proves the rule is Buttigieg, with all his establishment merit badges; that's the sexism, again.)
The last is the opposition of big money. I think Warren scares them far more than Sanders does, because she knows how to use the tools of power to level the field--and cares about that far more than the sound of her own voice.
But she's got my vote for as long as she stays in the race.
16
I was very excited by her candidacy until she began showing signs of listening to political consultants. First she backed away from Medicare for All. The came the misleading “wine cave” attack. Worst of all was her attempt to paint Sanders as sexist. It was a wholly transparent stunt, the kind of thing I thought was way beneath her. I quit contributing to her campaign after that and have cast my vote for Sanders. I thought Warren was smart and genuine, the real deal, but she has shown herself to be just another calculating politician. Maybe her campaign is flagging because others are similarly disappointed in her. Sanders still stands out as genuine and unwavering, and that’s why so many people like him.
3
Her hypocrisy is the problem.
For example her student debt forgiveness program rewards irresponsible borrowers AND is a big payoff for the colleges and universities. She is part of the higher ed racket reportedly making a cool half million a year for teaching one session of one course per semester. Does her student debt forgiveness program require the schools to control costs? Nope.
She is against school choice but sent her son to a private school.
She is for gun control but uses an armed security detail.
She thinks the sky is falling from climate change but jets around on private planes.
She is for higher taxes on the wealthy. But she and her husband who are multimillionaires would not pay under her plan.
3
She is not leader material. She was too much a coward and or too calculating to have endorsed a candidnate during the 2016 Dem presidential primary in Mass.. She waited until after the primary and endorsed the winner.
3
Elizabeth Warren is her own worst enemy. Her policy proposals require a serious sanity check. Her baggage includes falsely representing herself as a Native American to gain advantage. Within that rucksack is the lie about where her kids went to school. She comes across as a smarmy wonk who really has no answers. She won't be missed.
5
The titans of Wall Street came down on Warren at the outset of her campaign. And their neoliberal Clinton-Obama Democratic Party cohort just finished the job. Best thing for the Progressives now is for Warren to team up with Bernie against the Party's two golden boy mayors: Pete and Mike.
8
Warren is our best choice, I wondered why
her standing dropped like a rock. No one can point out to anything she did and i think her slight change in Medicare for all or a little conflict with Bernie wasn't it. My reasoning are as follows:
1. There is definitely a glass ceiling for women for the highest office, unless the DNC blows a hole in this ceiling as they did for Hillary.
2. Conservative men but more importantly older women perpetuate this glass ceiling, while younger do not.
3. Her main reason to run is to mitigate the corrupt effects of money in politics. Her polls dropped because the GOP, corporate democrats and the media saw her as more of an existential threat to business as usual than Bernie, because they didn't think Bernie can win. They pushed Klobuchar, Bloomberg and Buttigieg, because they keep their money will flow. Finally, as I predicted that when Bernie looks like he may win, they will push her as a counter weight to Bernie, which is what is happening.
It seems that Klobuchar, Bloomberg and Buttigieg have problems with either women, youth or minorities which makes them undetectable to the majority of democrats,
The establishment is scared to death of Bernie because he doesn't compromise and Biden seems to lost steam. Trump's wishes to run against Pocahontas will be his worse nightmare in a must see debate. Democrats should vote their conscious, no matter whom, all are more than capable to be good presidents even Steyer.
8
I'm with her!
8
Try stabbing Bernie in the back again, that worked so well for you last time.
4
@Jon Q. Keep it up. R u planning to beat Trump without Liz Warren’s supporters? I will vote for Bernie for sure but I don’t have to send him donations. U will need us if he wins the nomination.
5
It seems that its really the media who is squelching both the female candidates.
5
As a woman who was peaking in her career, skill-wise, just as I hit the age of erasure, I watch what's happening to Elizabeth Warren with palpable, physical pain.
I have watched MSNBC and CNN cut to commercials just as it is her campaign's turn to speak. I have listened to panelist after panelist focus on the bright, shiny objects like Buttigieg, or the scary x-factor like Bloomberg, or the downhill toboggan ride of the Biden campaign for hours and hours while often giving her no mention at all, or just a quick name-drop.
I know exactly what is happening to her because I have watched it happen to countless other professional women. Women over 50 in this country - and probably over 45 - are so invisible that it is mind-numbing.
In my 50's I had a fancy car that needed frequent jump-starting due to a design flaw, so I carried one of those little battery packs. I'd hop out, pop the hood, and get myself going in no time. I often gave a svelte co-worker a ride. Eventually she did the jump-starting, too.
Whenever she popped the hood, helpers would come out of the woodwork to assist.
It's becoming sadly obvious that our pundits are just as shallow as the paunchy gallants sidling up to my car when Daphne popped the hood.
12
While I believe firmly this country will eventually wake up to the need for a Medicare-for-all health care system, most of the country is still in a deep sleep. I wish she'd never uttered the words. Elizabeth Warren is the most intelligent, principled, effective, and inspirational candidate in this race. (Sanders gets supporters angry, but Warren gets supporters believing they can effect positive change.) If she's still in the race when my state's primary occurs, I'll vote for her without hesitation.
23
I have a tremendous amount of respect for Elizabeth Warren. For now, I think people should continue their support for her—she still has a shot at the nomination.
Keep in my two things. First, her chances of being the nominee are slim. Second, there’s never been any indication that she would be the candidate with the best chance of beating Trump.
5
Warren is where she is by her own hand, the several unforced errors have got to stop. The thing with Bernie on stage, mic on, trying to pick a fight over something close to two years old was so badly calculated that whomever came up with it should be asked to leave. That contrived drama punched a large hole in the Warren campaign. And there are many more unforced errors that just have to stop.
If I'm not mistaken that remark for most people would never have caused such an uproar. The average American voter does not want to hear about way outside of excepted norms stuff. But oh no, Warren had to go there.
I have nearly always agreed with her policy positions and supported her as soon as she announced. I was a Bernie supporter last time, (voted for Clinton) but think Warren has a much better chance, though she may have already blown it.
Facts are facts, and maybe the press is doing her a big favor by backing off. If she can't figure out how to straighten out and fly right then voters are right to question her candidacy.
6
@The Iconoclast
So that's the most important criticism you have for a Senator with the most comprehensive and road-tested agenda for change, and best track record of solid achievements?
But if you must focus on that nit - Women in business, government and NGO's learned a long time ago to do exactly what Elizabeth Warren did about Bernie's statement. She didn't make it on camera. She went up to him afterward, as so many of us have had to do, and let him know about how his comments had landed.
Letting this become such a huge issue speaks more to the rabid qualities of Bernie's supporters and the press's hunger for reality-show plot lines than anything to do with politics.
We need to lift the level of discourse in this country up to somewhere north of Nero's Rome.
6
The media erasure is real. It should have been big news that she overtook the front runner Biden in Iowa. That laid the "electability" argument of picking Biden to rest. Instead, that angle was never pointed out.
Even the Nate Silver endorsement tracker is ignoring endorsements. Although she is still second behind Biden in endorsements, the number is a small fraction of those state reps and senators and mayors and DNC members who have been endorsing her according to local news stories on the campaign trail.
16
@Susan Kraemer
I agree. You can watch Elizabeth Warren being erased in most panel discussions most nights on MSNBC and CNN.
In the pages of the New York Times, the lack of coverage has been egregious, particularly within the stories on general election coverage, where she is way down below the lede and usually mentioned in passing.
The level of professionalism in covering elections has deteriorated dramatically. First, we have Trump finding the magic bullet of sensationalism winning billions of dollars in free CNN coverage, and now we endure journalism by clickbait. Even here, in the New York Times.
It breaks my heart, literally, that a serious, qualified, talented, courageous and brilliant candidate is so egregiously overlooked. America has disappointed me in this regard my entire life.
What a shallow, undereducated country we are, so easily distracted, so tuned to gossip instead of issues. We don't deserve Elizabeth Warren, but she's willing to serve nonetheless.
Unfortunately, I'm starting to think we all get the President we deserve and that the Mango Mussolini is our destiny.
12
If things do not turn around for Ms. Warren in the next two contests she should suspend her campaign and support Mr. Sanders. Both of them have worked hard to trigger the current renaissance on the Left. They deserve much credit for the broad acceptance of the once toxic economic measures that have ignited the Economic Justice Movement. Given their importance to the Movement, their experience, their development of its issues, their advanced age, and the differing status of their health, they must accept the fact that the Movement needs them to unite if it is going to stand a serious chance of restructuring this gilded, low-wage economy. Mr. Sanders is 78 years old and has had a heart attack and open heart surgery. I am confident that he will win the Presidency. I am not confident that he will survive to successfully implement the economic justice agenda. Ms. Warren is 70 and in perfect health. Ms. Warren, you have been the best, most articulate candidate in this race. Unfortunately, sexism is still an ugly reality that we progressives still must work to defeat. For the good of the Movement, please consider uniting with Mr. Sanders. Mr. Sanders, you are a proud man. However, you know better than most folks that the Movement you and Ms. Warren helped to ignite takes precedence over any individual. Do the right thing and unite with Ms. Warren.
5
@Howard Gregory
Correction my good man.
Candidate Sanders did NOT have open heart surgery.
He had two stents implanted through a simple procedure.
With Warren's knife work and inability to keep private conversations private, I'd be shy of appointing a VP spot to someone that is willing to advance their career over their own good name.
3
To Warren's credit, she is a problem solver, she focuses on the problems and then actually offers carefully considered solutions. Unfortunately that is a turn-off for some people, they prefer empty platitudes that promise to not rock the boat by avoiding any real solutions. I hate to say it, but if Warren dumbed down her message she would win over a lot of people.
12
Elizabeth Warrens problem is that she has horrible political instincts and a penchant for turning on her allies when she sees a way to benefit her career. She's made the same mistake over and over again. She sees an opportunity for herself to gain more power or influence so she takes it. That alone is not an issue. Problems is she tends to do it at the expense of her political allies, along with the ideals and values she professes. Her craven political move ends up backfiring on her personally and hurting her professed causes at the same time it damages her credibility with her supporters. Leading her to run into the arms of her political adversaries looking for safe haven again and again. Just like she did after New Hampshire when she was praising Klobuchar and her vision for America after coming in third instead of rallying those on the fence to her progressive cause. Same as she did in numerous budget fights, healthcare fights and primaries past. She always sells out reform for her political expediency. She's never going to succeed as a reformer like that nor will she be loved as a capable manager of the status quo. It has become abundantly clear Warren only really cares about what happens to Warren. Either that or she has the worst political instincts of all the candidates running.
5
@Aaron
Brilliant synopsis.
2
I'm with Ms. Zimmerman! We must persist as Elizabeth Warren would. I definitely think it's too soon to be ruling her out. Neither Iowa nor New Hampshire look like the rest of the country and there may be surprises ahead. This definitely will be a roller coaster ride of a primary.
20
Elizabeth Warren is a highly educated, wise and brilliant woman. The issue here is that Bernie Sanders attracts those who would otherwise follow her. Elizabeth is a woman, and as all women is subject to the age-old prejudice of sexism and ageism. Ageism is not run as much on males, and they are seen as kind or grand-fatherly, but there is a great prejudice against older women, who in our society are seen "past their prime", "snooty", ..... Just look at what happened to Hillary Clinton. For "peets sake", the Equal Rights Amendment is not yet a part of the Constitution.
15
@K.M
I agree wholeheartedly. Bernie should have endorsed Warren and stepped aside after his heart attack. He refuses to share power or the spotlight, and he cares so much more for his own ego than for the movement itself.
For if Bernie did care above all, for the movement, he would not stay in these fights until the bitter end, and pay minimal lip service to leashing his rabid attack squads.
If Bernie cared above all for the movement, he would have started campaigning for Elizabeth Warren the day after his heart attack.
I have no patience for so-called insurgents who care more about keeping the flag in their tightly clutched fist and being the one seen on the barricades, instead of actually helping the revolution move forward. Or, in our case, the restoration of our democracy.
Bernie wrecked the election for Hillary Clinton and he is gleefully destroying Elizabeth Warren. So much for solidarity.
5
@Bohemian Sarah Perhaps Bernie should have stepped aside. I am not sure. My concerns are some of his followers who appear to be sexist. Bernie himself said a woman could never win--and she can't if we do not come out in mass and vote for her.
6
I just saw a poll this morning on the today show. It showed, Sanders, Buttigieg, Bloomberg, Klobuchar and Biden. There were 6 slots the way it was laid out on the screen. Why leave Warren off? It was frustrating/upsetting.
14
Writing off both Sanders and Warren IS the path forward for the Democrats if they ever hope to beat the President. What they are proposing is unworkable and unsustainable.
Has already been proven a busted model countless of times.
1
@Phil Would it be unworkable if the Democrats have control of both the House and Senate?
3
She started in the progressive lane and was winning. For some reason, the media continually went after her on how to pay for her plans thereby injecting her image with negativity and uncertainty. Warren tried to give too much and put out a M4A funding plan leading to screeching from both the centrists and the right. Follow this strange saga with an even stranger saga where she tried to push the Sanders is a sexist message for a week or two with the aid of national media, and you get to where she is today (a very precarious position where she doesn't own the progressive lane or the centrist lane because she recently departed towards the center from the progressive lane). She's still my first choice overall, but she needs new advisers.
11
@Andrew
Yes, and also, he is sexist. If he really really REALLY cared about progressive causes, he'd see that having the first female President - Hillary Clinton or Elizabeth Warren - with plenty of overlap with his initiatives - does far more for advancing progress than yet having another old or middle-aged white guy who doesn't like to share.
To quote good old Justice Potter Stewart, I know it when I see it (sexism, that is) and Bernie's lifelong conviction that he alone can lead the revolution has now cost us at least one and quite likely two women Presidents.
4
Yes, why so much coverage for Pete Buttigieg and so little for Warren? I think some self-examination by the press is in order and quickly.
21
If Warren doesn't end up as the Dem candidate she certainly should be in the Dem administration. We need her knowledge and problem solving skills in the FTC Bureau of Consumer Protection, banking, labor, and more.
14
@Gina I agree she would be great, but would miss her as our Senator.
4
Here's how I hope it will go:
Democrats will focus their energy on beating Trump AND positioning the country to vigorously advance Democratic goals after Elizabeth Warren wins. She can win over more Sanders supporters than any other Democratic candidate. Amy doesn't have the resources to compete commandingly on Super Tuesday, and so much of the party's energy is with women. Many polls show EW can beat Trump, and that's before she can really make her case in a one-on-one against Trump. Health care is the big issue for Dems; EW has positioned herself as the bridge between Medicare for All now and a public option for all soon. A Bloomberg win that shows we the people are not allowed to support democracy via our small donations against the rich will destroy our party, as will the ask that women and minorities set aside bad treatment from Bloomberg "to beat Trump".
EW has shown a desire and talent to incorporate the best of the candidates who have left the race (staff and ideas) with her.
We are headed into uncharted financial and health care waters with the corona virus. EW is the one to navigate the choppy waters as she battles Trump's move toward an authoritarian regime and she devotes her energy to rooting corruption out of politics.
Go EW! I'm waiting for your Saturday rally in Seattle!!
16
Elizabeth Warren — still the best candidate and potential president. I just sent her another donation. I hope Nevadans and South Carolinians send her into Super Tuesday looking viable. It will be tough for me to vote for Bloomberg (the other most qualified candidate but with outdated views on women and non-white people), if Warren seems out of the running by March 3.
14
I'm strongly inclined to pass on any politician who refers to a run for office as a "movement." Two strikes for supporters who blame "the Media(sic)" and "the pundits." And not getting the votes is not getting the votes, regardless of where or when or why.
3
I was not surprised by the N.H. results, as I have lived I MA. next door to N.H. all my life. First, it has an open primary which allows unenrolled voters to take a Democratic ballot and vote and switch to unenrolled again. MA has the same method. I know these voters and they are not liberal Democrats. Some of them are Republicans who are looking for a Democrat to vote for, others are Democrats who don’t want their taxes to go up. Lots of people from MA have moved to N.H. in order to pay lower taxes(with fewer services). NH’s motto “Live Free OR Die” could be subtitled “free from government and taxes”. That’s why N.H. like to call us here in MA “Taxachusettes”. You get the idea. So I can see why Liz Warren didn’t do so well in N.H. Bernie has his strong base, Democratic liberals. Moderate candidates took the majority of votes. Two states with white, moderate voters will not decide this primary winner. Warren can still win.
19
People realized Warren never saw a person she did not think she could buy. If people wanted to discuss the myriad of flaws in her proposals to pay for everything that bothers us (with the proceeds of a single tax on wealth that has failed every time it has been tried)they met a cold shoulder or worse, threats that she would win and impose her will. Period. Or we were all really Republicans. Or Trump supporters. Or worse than Republicans. So people rightfully turned their backs on these name-callers. Extort someone else's vote!
So many of her supporters see her as a way to pay off multi-hundred thousand dollar loans taken to pay ivy league tuitions without great useful employment goals. And the excuse is that it would help the housing market if they could reneg on loans and keep their ivy league diplomas? Another attempted bribe that fell on deaf ears. Or worse. People hold this ugly behavior against a candidate who thinks she walks on water & lives in a bubble.
P.S. She never bothers to change out of her exercise suit for a debate--she's been outclassed by other candidates who listen and respect the job a bit more.
1
Those in Elizabeth Warren’s camp who think writing her off this year is a mistake are they themselves making a mistake.
She should have been written off last year.
Writing her off in 2020 means you can’t deduct her when preparing your 2019 taxes.
2
Elizabeth Warren has made the most sense for over a year. The problem with common sense, is that is difficult to "sell" to people who can't or won't think, or LISTEN. All you people who understand the difference between a platform plank, which can always be modified, and something truly to be expected to happen with our form of government, are fools. I would rather see some attention paid to likely cabinet picks. Elizabeth Warren can win and I'm voting for her. And the self-appointed media pundits, and I include the NYT among them, should step back, print what they candidate actually says and writes, and who she surrounds herself with, and let the people decide.
14
Coming out of Iowa all I heard on MSNBC and CNN was first, second and fourth place, as if there wasn't even a candidate who came in third. Remember: These are the pundits who promised us Hillary and delivered Trump.
7
Warren burned down the "billionaire bridge" with relentless rhetoric. Her naivete on this is astonishing. Is she unaware that we are and always will be a capitalist society?
@rab
Elizabeth Warren is, by her own cheery admission, a capitalist.
Look it up.
She wants a level playing field for that capitalism, just like that Commie, Teddy Roosevelt. Which, by the way, is the only way capitalism can work else you end up as we are, vassals to metastasizing international conglomerates and media giants controlling information and communications.
Our current oligarchy and massive corporate welfare and the tax cut for the 1%, not to mention the most hostile climate for small business in more than a century, is more like national socialism than capitalism.
3
There is little or no political reward for being honest and dedicated, a true public servant.
I will vote for Warren and keep hoping ... best advocate for us all evah!
15
My current preferences:
1. Warren
2. Sanders
3. Klobuchar
4. Buttigieg
5. Steyer
6. Biden
7. All other Dems except...
8. Bloomberg
Will Warren still be viable by the time Pennsylvania votes? I certainly hope so.
17
Elizabeth Warren is toast. She shot herself in the foot with her big government Medicare for all plan when she failed to identify the $20 trillion in funding that the plan would require. Flim-flam at best, and outright lying at worst on her part.
I put my Warren pin in the drawer. I like her but she's all over the place now. If she drops out Bernie would win the nomination and we would have real change in America.
2
@Larry Roth Hear hear! Your analysis is right on, Mr. Roth. I, too, have been disturbed to see Warren repeatedly undermined or conspicuously ignored in media coverage of the democratic field--even in the same paper that endorsed her candidacy for heaven's sake! Observing this pattern has reminded me of how shockingly wrong all those daily predictions of a Clinton sweep turned out to be on Nov. 8, 2016--of how duped, hoodwinked, misled, and manipulated I felt by the NYTimes and other news outlets.
As I have noted elsewhere, Bloomberg and even Buttigieg are just Republicans in drag with no Capitol Hill experience and a clear bias toward business as usual.
Warren threatens the interests and entities that are exploiting our citizens, and she isn't afraid to call 'em as she sees 'em. Nor would she ever think of doing otherwise. Hang in there, Elizabeth--we need your leadership, your plans, your knowledge, your hope, and your courage to do what is right.
11
Her message isn't being ignored, but it's a one-note song that's become a lullaby, putting anyone who hears it to sleep .
Pocahontas has sat around the caucus fire for too long and is toast. She had been so smooth and practiced in her misrepresentations that one almost thought what was being seen was a film loop going round and round. And all the NYTimes readers were all so willing to go amnesic over the little lies and then the big ones. She sounded so good when talking in generalities, but then the nasty details had to be addressed. Whoops. Bye-Bye Elizabeth.
1
Shes done. Should have been a good sport at least and shook Sanders hand. Shes displayed flailing poor judgement this entire campaign.
2
"While Warren is an effective and impactful senator with an important voice nationally, she has become a divisive figure,” the editorial board warned." Boston Globe
1
The media gave us the worst President in US History by its relentless coverage of Trump's every utterance. Will it now deprive us of Warren, one who undoubtedly would be one of our best Presidents? America deserves better.
15
Warren is the only truly qualified candidate, period. Everything else is hot air and posturing by the other candidates and journalists.
Get real before it's too late for her to do her job -
14
Mrs. Warren, I respect and like you, but even your own voice is trying to tell you that it's over, and it's time for you to drop out.
2
Very simple. Way too much baggage.
2
This feels so much like trying to inflate a flat tire every morning because you don't have the money or the time to get a new one.
Shades of Biden's campaign; Warren's is beginning to feel.
Pumped up by the DP and it's sycophant media, with the hopes it will last just another day; till something, someone better comes along (because we just can't have what's staring us all in the face right now~!~!~!).
The public knows...put a fork in it, it's over.
4
Liz, going into all of this, had some idea of how smart you are…
When Harry Reid talked – I always listened…
But, now that I have some idea of what a schemer you – or your strategy staff, or both – are…
Can’t unring that bell…
So, here’s the thing…
You have a great future ahead of you in the Senate…
In fact, if it goes blue – feel free to take out my formerly favorite NYS Senate centrist…
The one who made like a potted plant, while the dark side ravaged my deductions and reneged on my lower rates…
But – to lead the Senate, or the country, or the women at your rally in a chorus of “Bad Bad Men” – you have to first prevail, in the selection process…
So, here’s a suggested 3-step plan:
1. Don’t say anything tomorrow night you’ll regret any time between the morning after, and ten years after that. Hizzoner will have ads out – even before you wake – with slo-mo, Snapchat-like scrawls, and multiple camera angles (maybe even stealth drones) – for any penalizable offense
2. Day after LV caucus closes – drop out and endorse him
3. Spend all your time from then till 11/3 serving your constituents, campaigning alongside Mike in winnable US Senate contests, and advising him on things important – not to just the rest of us, but to all of us
Once, when remarking on the field, he said you’re, “honest and hard-working”
At this point, I think he may only have been half right…
For clarity, gives no pleasure to be right where Mike is wrong…
Luckily, it almost never happens…
It’s not her gender, it is her frenetic approach and her wrong ideas. Are her policies above criticism because she is a woman?
3
Elizabeth seems confused about what she stands for and people don’t have the time or energy to figure it out for her. She seemed to be on Bernie’s side but now she’s siding with racist mayor Bloomberg again Bernie.
2
She is proof of how effective money and influence from people who are willing to trash American society are at controlling what voters think. Another female candidate that is incapable of overcoming the massive attempts to get voters focused on non-essential information.
3
She could don full Indian regalia, complete with warpaint, go out on the warpath known as the campaign trail of tears and promise to return America to a tribal state that existed pre-Pale Faces.
She'd still be toast.
Turns out given any other alternative, Americans hate a phony who manipulates the system to her own benefit.
3
Ain't nobody got nothing to say about a 40-degree day.
I find the neighbor thing so lopsided. Senator Klobuchar is a neighbor to Iowans and she came in fifth. And the term "masshole" is actually in the Oxford dictionary so maybe NH likes Vermont better.
5
NH is a conservative (read “tightwad”) state - they don’t like the Commonwealth...until they need her superior healthcare, educational opportunities, social services, arts, natural environment etc. They have nothing in common with progressive Democratic Party ideals.
2
Those quotes from folks in her campaign are somewhat concerning. Do they believe their own blather? Do they think we voters are stupid enough to believe their blather?
It sure seems like she needs to change something.
I had already developed deep doubts that she'll be able to beat Trump. Her affect is off-putting. She sounds like she's on the verge of tears most of the time. Most female politicians do not strike me that way.
Plus she seems to be emulating Mrs. Clinton in her emphasis on her gender and on identity generally. It didn't work for Clinton. We all know that Senator Warren is a woman. Why emphasize it? And referring to Latinos as Latinx is a mistake. Yes it delights the woke folks but how many of them are there?
In Spanish the default gender is masculine, which is true in most, if not all, languages with grammatical gender. Does this really matter, i.e., does it subconsciously bias us? I rather doubt it.
In English we have two very common words, man & woman. Woman is only used to refer to females, while man is sometimes used to refer to human beings without regard to gender.
Latin had three common words, one, vir, referring only to adult males, one, femina, only used of adult females and one, homo, referring to human beings without regard to gender.
Were the Romans less sexist than us? No.
BTW the Latin word homo has nothing to do with the Greek word meaning same which appears in the word homosexual. It is a striking coincidence to be sure, but so it is.
1
Has she ever told the truth? About anything? Her outright lies have been disproved over and over. Her website is utterly hopeless. She has a "plan" for everything, but none of it is based in reality. And her latest "plan"? Have a young trans person select the Secretary of Education, to "make sure it's done right"...she is so bad it defies explanation.
2
Ms. Warren should have said her grandmother was black, not Native American. However, it's not too late. Having promised to pay off college kids student loans, offered reparations to blacks, she should now offer, for our voting brethren in Nevada, to pay off their gambling debts. This should put over over the top.
2
I now see her as a high quality VP running mate for Bloomberg. In my opinion, that would be the perfect mix for America and the world in these strange and unpredictable times. I believe she has the courage and ability to move policy forward, and work to get America back on track from the inside, but taking the Presidency at this moment is not something I see happening. Maybe 2028 is her moment, when Bloomberg exits and she has been VP for eight long years.
3
Were Elizabeth Warren to consent to become Bloomberg's running mate, it would put the lie to everything she has stood for her entire career.
2
@T.Curley Yes. I am hoping for a Bloomberg/Warren 2020 ticket as well.
@T.Curley If she doesnt win the primary I see a Sanders/Warren ticket
1
I have supported Sen Warren from the start and still do. My husband is now on board and we just sent her another donation.
Reading through many of the comments here is reassuring, she has a strong following. Mr Herndon seems to have ignited the zeal of a lot of her supporters. It motivated me to send this post. Keep the faith my friends. I think she can be the one if we stand firmly behind her.
29
Agreed! People are too quick to write-off anything the media tells them to, & how reliable is that media? How easy is it for statements started too early on, to quickly get latched on to, and become “truth”? How easy to succumb to sound bites! Remember the fable of the Tortoise & the Hare. I continue to volunteer and support Warren because despite popular opinion and polls - she remains the strongest, most capable candidate. Persist!
7
@Leslie Senior
Thank you , Leslie. This is no time to give up, she’s still working hard. I believe in her.
5
It's pretty clear that there was a bit of a media-bubble to the Warren campaign (including a NYT endorsement) that is not being maintained by the polls and voting. In my opinion, the mainstream media wants to divide the progressive movement and wants to keep Warren viable as long as possible - and that's what we see here with this article.
It's also pretty clear that if Warren can't win her own state on "Super Tuesday" her campaign is likely through and progressives will further unite behind Sanders. This has been the establishment's nightmare scenario since 2015. ANY scenario that redistributes opportunity for wealth in America is a nightmare for them.
11
Sorry, my phone is acting weird today... and lunchtime is over anyway.
@carl bumba Oh stop with the media conspiracy theories already! She's got some really interesting ideas.
You want her gone because you're for Bernie. Perfectly reasonable.
But she is a well known senator who's been campaigning hard for a long time, has released a large number of very specific plans and clearly has strong appeal to many voters.
There is no sign of her being a media creation. You're grasping at straws.
6
So it's pretty clear that there was a bit of a media-bubble to the Warren campaign (including a NYT endorsement) that is not being maintained by the polls and voting. In my opinion, the mainstream media wants to divide the progressive movement and wants to keep Warren viable as long as possible - and that is what we see here with this article.
It's also pretty clear that if Warren can't win her own state on "Super Tuesday" her campaign is likely through and progressives will further unite behind Sanders. This has been the establishment's nightmare scenario since 2015. Any scenario that redistributes opportunity for wealth in America is a nightmare for them.
7
Watching the New Hampshire debate I could not help but notice that there were many times that even when Senator Warren had her hand up to get the monitor's attention, and she needed to respond to another candidate's attack on her positions, she was ignored. Senator Warren was given far less time than the majority of the other candidates given her ranking in the Iowa caucus and the polls. Tom Steyer had more screen time during that same debate, although he ranked at the bottom in virtually all polls. Even in the advertisements for the upcoming debate in Nevada, the majority of the other candidates receive more face time. The question is why has the media treated Senator Warren's candidacy as over and provided less in press coverage when she consistently ranks high in national polls? Fair elections mean that the press must cover each candidate in a meaningful way and let the people draw their own conclusions about the viability of her candidacy. Finally, a qualified woman such as Senator Warren is electable, if we vote for her.
34
@Lisa So the guy whose comment is above yours is sure she's a media creation designed to split the left. I thought she was being a bit passive, you saw it differently but she's had plenty of exposure.
If a heart attack wouldn't cause Bernie's backers to rethink their support, I would suppose Ms. Warren's cause is lost.
10
@Connecticut Yankee and let's not forget, Bernie has yet to release his medical records. His backers may not care but the rest of us most certainly do.
2
No, she’s done.
11
There is no question that Elizabeth Warren would make an ideal president and is the best candidate. Bernie made the error of labeling himself as a democratic socialist which in this politically naive country has been converted into "Communism" by the right wing. He should join progressive forces with Elizabeth Warren.
Biden may be a moderate but he transmits the impression that he is not all that sharp. Bloomberg is a Republican at heart and is trying to take advantage of the Democratic Party's lack of unity. He is however, still light years ahead of the ignorant, incompetent Donald Trump with his Dictatorship staffed by his GOP lackeys. Perhaps he would make a good choice as a "moderate" VP.
At the end of the day, the key message to all Americans who care about the future of this nation is Vote Blue, No Matter Who. Vote Blue...or its game over!
14
I thought Ms. Warren was so incredibly strong when she launched. Just hearing crisp, succinct answers was such a breath of fresh air after hearing other candidates unsuccessfully trying to word-salad their way out of a paper bag. The "persisted" handle was perfect, and as a New Englander, how could she not end up in the top tier in New Hampshire? I thought we were all set.
But then came along Medicare For All, and then the non-answers to how to pay for it, and then the backtrack to a three year plan so it's not really M4A from the get-go. It's such a dominating narrative mess that I needed to be reminded from a Twitter follower about her 2 cent wealth tax and how well she articulates its benefits to the country.
I hope Ms. Warren prevails, but if she doesn't, I bet history will link M4A to her demise.
51
@Paul in NJ
I think her tactical error was positioning herself as a Sanders disciple, including the Medicare for All stuff. She isn't a Sanders clone and she isn't actually beset by Sanders clone non-answer policies. And that's why we liked her, and still do. She is everything that Sanders is and a whole lot more besides.
31
@Paul in NJ you forgot to mention her staged outrage at Sanders alleged comment during the debates.
It was almost as if she needed to play the gender card to win. That came across as desperate, weak, and pathetic. Not qualities anyone wants in a president.
7
True, and that's what makes her the perfect VP with Bloomberg, who is going to take the prize.
1
Why is it that the smartest, most articulate and most principled candidate - Elizabeth Warren - is written off? Candidates of money, male gender, and/or privileged status continue to be promoted as Presidential candidates. Welcome to the fall of Rome.
29
@Edie Harding Warren received as much publicity as any other candidate when she was ahead in the polls.
1
If her backers are convinced she's being ignored, they are absolutely right. Since New Hampshire, the press has once again decided that they don't need no stinkin' voters to winnow the field, they can do it by selective coverage. If they aren't covering only Bernie v. Bloomberg, they're only adding in Amy and Pete. Virtually nothing was decided in New Hampshire and even if it was, with Super Tuesday in only a couple of weeks and early voting for it already started, it will be re-decided anyway.
But that doesn't stop simplistic journalists from selective coverage. They have a love-hate relationship with contests: They love that the contest brings eyeballs, and hate it that they can't just announce the winner before the game begins based on the phase of the moon, the Big Bang, and the progress of the coronavirus.
It isn't really fair of the press to be putting their thumbs all over the scales so often. Cut it out.
23
It could be pure happenstance, or it could be some sort of Karmic residue of millennia of patriarchy, but:
Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar - diverse as they are politically - have accomplished the most in office, are popular as second choices, and do not have anywhere near the divisiveness of Misters Sanders and Bloomberg.
We should rally around them and nominated one.
We owe it to our children and grandchildren, and the rest of the world, if not ourselves
18
@Mark Keller How about a Warren-Klobuchar ticket? That's a team that could get things done!
5
I so agree, Mr Kelly. But I think there is still a huge swath of misogyny in this country. Both women candidates should be doing much better, but men won’t support them for president!
4
@Mark Keller Well said. I agree. If Warren drops out, I am supporting Klobucher. If they both drop out, I will vote blue-no matter who!
4
Any little bit of attention about Warren from the press these days, even though niggling, is grudgingly appreciated because it is something. That's how much respect this outstanding candidate has been getting from the media. It's all about Bloomberg and Sanders. That's the horse race. Warren's supporters want the public to know how she can create change so that the government works for the people. Bernie is louder but that doesn't make him better. Bloomberg is much richer but that certainly doesn't make him better. Wake up Free Press and help to educate us, so the people are the informed citizenry we need to be.
23
She has lost already, just didn't realize or admit it yet.
Voters leaning to the "radical" left will consider her as a weak copy of Sanders. Most of them will of course support the original over the copy.
Voters leaning rather to the "center" will chose Bloomberg, because he has enough money to saturate media with advertisements. And most people don't vote for ideas or for so-called "electability": they vote for the one who appears as the best-looking, and looking nice mostly depends on the amount of money you can spend on your image.
This is so true that NYT, like most US newspaper and media, keep tracking how much money each candidate gathered. They know that what matters most is money.
Warren doesn't have as much money as Bloomberg, and isn't as charismatic as Sanders. Conclusion: she's done for good.
7
@Lauwenmark Hillary Clinton spent a $565 million on her campaign. She lost. Trump spent half of what she did. Money doesn’t always matter the most.
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/09/us/politics/campaign-spending-donald-trump-hillary-clinton.html
1
warren is in 3rd place and she definitely needs to stay in - no one is the clear front runner - bernie got half the votes he got in 2016 when he lost and pete is about in the same ballpark - the two extremes of the party have a lot of disdain for the other - yet warren is the only one both moderate dems and progressives (and even some socialists) like & trust. i know other candidates tried the 'uniter' angle and while she shouldn't do that quite yet - she truly is the one who can head the dem ticket in states that we'll need both progressive and moderate dems to win back the senate. i think the press needs to stop echoing the bernie voters who are just trying to push her out - with the mistaken idea that her voters will flock to him - bc we won't - she drew in moderates and progressives for a reason - if she leaves her voters will fraction to other candidates no matter who she endorses.
11
Warren would be the most effective president.
First of all, her analysis of what's wrong with our country and what needs to be done to fix those problems is exactly right. Get the influence of big money out of politics so that politicians are responsive to people, not big donors and the lobbyists.
She's pragmatic, has proposals that are supported by solid studies, and knows how to pick good people. Her list of executive actions would improve health care and protect the environment immediately. Her hiring rules would keep lobbyists from getting government jobs.
But few people are going to pay attention to the nuts and bolts aspects of doing the job, but to who's got the most appealing sales pitch.
169
@Cayce Jones If only what you hear from Warren were what the rest of us hear, you would be right. But it's not. Besides trying to buy every issue...
I know that the wealth tax has been tried and it failed every single time for a variety of reasons. Her response was to snottily diss the person asking the question. She had nothing! But it's her road or the highway.
She could not explain how her proposal differed from failed taxes in any way at all. Since she tries to use it to cover every spending proposal she has, it's extremely important that she can't answer a single criticism.
The same goes for her Medicare4All. When she learned people preferred their health ins to a govt program and responded with a 3-yr delay, she decided that was the end of the discussion. Three years pass in the blink of an eye--but are inside a President's term--her only reason for selecting such a rapid phase-in.
Medicare for All needs to be discussed, perhaps adopted if it can be paid for and is wanted by a majority. Till then, no one in Congress will be able to pass it. But Warren refuses to discuss this truth--and so refuses to discuss what she would do to help reinforce the ACA--the real program people depend on now.
She is cold and harsh when a citizen does not buy what she's selling 100%. That is the person we see, not the act she puts on on stage for supporters. Loving to take selfies with adoring supporters is a flaw of Trumpian size when the candidate refuses to discuss impt issues.
6
@Cayce Jones
Seems like she'd make a great advisor or administrator; a technocrat if you will. Which is a great and a much needed position and power behind presidents.
"But" as your final paragraph states, that isn't what makes people follow or chose, as leaders.
Warrens policy's and ideas will live on under the right president. Vote accordingly, or not.
4
@Cayce Jones When Democrats recapture the White House, we need our country and the Democratic Party to come together to repair the near-fatal damage done to national and international institutions. We need money out of politics to effectively address the unmet needs that resonate with the Trump base AND Bernie fans. We need someone who understands how to manage government in a good and a bad economy so the needs of ordinary Americans prevail. I sincerely hope that if Bloomberg's entry and the unwillingness of Bernie fans to gravitate toward the more moderate candidates fuel an intra-party civil war, Democrats of all stripes will unite around EW.
6
I am truly a neighbor to Warren. Live a block away for the past 10 years. And I will not vote for her. For senator yes . . . president in 2020, no.
We are hemorrhaging as a country. This election is triage -- getting rid of a venal, despicable being who played enough voters to their fears and frustrations. Many now in the center -- moderate Republicans and Independents are receptive to change. But not to either Warren or Sander's social/financial restructuring of our country. It's a sales pitch they cannot make while our national economy seems prosperous. It isn't; however, the PRIORITY is ridding ourselves of this corrosive virus called Trump. In November. Fini.
Bloomberg 2020.
@Hannacroix Bloomberg, like Trump, is another symptom of our broken political system.
If not Warren for the change we actually need, then Klobuchar would make a fine choice to bide our time until we can elect a true progressive.
(And Bernie? Bernie cannot win.)
1
@LEM Just don’t ask her who the president of Mexico is. Trump probably doesn’t know either, but then we are trying to do better. That one isn’t even a “gotcha” question.
2
Liz Warren is a polarizing figure. It maybe due to a combination of reasons not least her gender, but also confrontational attitude, poor understanding of the business world, inclination to make up things that purportedly aid her electability, and in general her inclination to scold everybody that she thinks is not on the same page as her.
Do you really need all that in a leader ? We don't need angry people controlling the levers of government. They will never get anything done and simply end up spending 4 years blaming everybody else for their failure.
7
I fear it is over for her, though I believe she is the most intelligent of all the candidates.
She occupies much of the same ground as Bernie but doesn't have the same kind of fanatical following. I doubt she will catch lighting in a bottle in Nevada or on Super Tuesday.
It's going to come down to Bernie, Bloomberg, Buttigieg, and Klobuchar. I think Biden and Warren will be gone after Super Tuesday.
4
Once it gets to the general election, I will support any Democratic candidate against Trump. But we are in big trouble now. Sanders is great but he is ideological. We need more socialism in American society, but "socialism" as a total system is not a coherent position because capitalism is not entirely bad. We need it too. In Germany and Australia, everyone has health insurance, but the private option exists too. I don't get why the single-payer ideology? Leapfrog Germany? The Sanders supporters don't give a hoot about moderates, and they will be disillusioned if Sanders is not the nominee and they won't enthusiastically support Buttigieg, Klobuchar, Biden or Bloomberg. And the same is true vice versa. The supporters of these moderate candidates don't give a hoot about the progressives. Klobuchar defines herself against progressives. The centrists have their idea of who can do the best against Trump and they don't pay any mind to all to the "millennial" support they will lose. The situation is hopelessly divided. I supported Warren and donated to her campaign because she is the best candidate to bridge the gap between the two sides. But I admit tht she has not run a good or coherent campaign. I will now stay neutral with respect to all the others. I wish Warren were a clever political strategist to go along with her being brilliant at policy.
5
This race is not over yet, and pundits have proven repeatedly they cannot predict the future. Every time I hear Warren speak on TV, I again want to bite for her. She has fresh ideas for the future. What ideas do any of the others bring? Certainly nothing from Biden or Bloomberg. We are voting in Illinois now. I am voting for Warren.
16
We need our Senator back!
Warren has been campaigning for the presidency since before she became our Senator.
So many votes lost, so many days absent.
Give up your campaign and come back to Massachusetts where your salary is being paid for by: "We, the taxpayers of Masschusetts"
4
@BP Votes? In the Senate?
The Senate is sitting on dozens of bills, and Mitch brings none of them up.
If anything, Mitch's stuck senate is enabling these senators to continue their campaigns.
4
She has neither credibility nor credible plans.
Americans will not ignore her years of claiming she was a Native American or put undue stock in the Boston Globe article saying it didn't help her career. She is not a Native American any more than any other American. She would not have claimed such heritage if she didn't think it would help her career.
Trump for all his bullying and stupid statements was justified in his constant mocking of Warren. Trump refused to let the issue die and he was justified. The press wouldn't have given a Republican a pass.
She was not fired because she got pregnant. She quit to go to law school. Statements like these make her untrustworthy.
Her financial plans were so financially irresponsible the WSJ called them a "fairy tale". Sanders for all his Marxist rhetoric blaming pharma (best cancer survival numbers ever), the insurance companies (who pay for the cancer treatments), and "housing speculators" (Bernie owns 3 houses) at least admitted taxes would go up to pay a trillion and half dollars in student debt. Warren would not.
Who would pay for this debt? Those who were frugal and judicious in getting an education or those who do not have an education past high school. This is regressive and rewards sloth and financial irresponsibility. Some lesson to teach our children!
I want Warren to comeback to stifle Sanders, but her demise is due to her dishonesty and financial irresponsibility. If she's finished the country's better off.
7
Hey America! Elizabeth Warren fought through a bad cold and soldiered on after losing her voice so as not to disappoint the people who came to see her in Reno. (*)
She will always fight for you. It’s now time for you to have her back as well...
(*) if you think every politician does it, Amy Klobuchar took time off during her cold. If she’s THE fighter, what was she doing? Resting? Prepping for the debate?
10
@Patrician Doing research on the president of Mexico.
1
@Bashh
Too funny!
What part of Elizabeth Warren is appealing to you? That she is not Trump? OK, but that goes for the other 320 million Americans. What else? That she lied about being a Native American (cause she had high cheek bones) to get a job at Harvard (no, 1/1024th is not NA)? That even the CBO says her medicare-for-all plan would cost $30 trillion? That she likely made up a story that Bernie said "a woman can be President?" 80% tax rates? Seriously, what is it? Cause to the rest of us, she just looks like she's pandering to any group who will listen and thinks they are going to get some of the "free stuff" she's gonna hand out.
11
@Jerome Thank you for this!!! It's not about her being a woman and being "erased." She's just a problematic character!
7
It's obvious to anyone—even to people who are not "die-hard backers"—that the media has written her off. Even the New York TImes could not bring itself to endorse her wholeheartedly, in spite of her being visibly and by far the most brilliant, highly qualified, dedicated, and principled of the candidates. That was a shocking moment when you divided the endorsement, as if to say that she was somehow undeserving of unqualified endorsement. You and the rest of the media are dutifully trotting along and helping Bloomberg, an aggressive oldschool right-wing male (masquerading as a centrist) who plans to buy his way straight into the presidency, pushing out this extraordinary woman who would make history and who is the only person qualified and motivated to restore our constitutional democracy after the damage done. It's deeply disturbing to anyone who is paying attention.
12
An easy way for Warrennto both get attention and establish herself as the leader in the field is to start calling for - and leading - mass street protests against Trumps lawlessnessz. It’s time for a Democrat leader to turn up the hear a thousand percent as we watch our country slide into despotusm without visible reistance from its citizenry.
1
Hopefully, after her 4th place finishes in both Nevada and South Carolina, Senator Warren will return to the US Senate where she be noticed again and regain her 'spotlight'.
2
You can't nominate a Whole Foods candidate in a Campbell's Soup nation.
9
Warren/Mayor Pete - Easy Peasy!
1
Was she smart enough to return the money and buy the poor kid a meal?
2
Problem with Warren is she comes off a lecturing school mom often shrill and seems to lose her voice a lot a sign of weakness that Trump never displays . In debate with Trump he lurk behind her looking menacing as he did with Hillary and his motor mouth will rant and rave as top execs did in 1950 when a woman exec dared to contradict him leaving her looking weak and the damsel in distress look hurts any image of her standing up to world leaders. Bloomberg has the chutzpah to trash Trump to his face and point out all his foibles ,Trump will look like a poor relative and a spoiled brat with 3500 lawsuits and a reputation as a lying fraudster.
3
The media elects a President in this country. The undue coverage that Pete got after Ohio- a small state with very less diversity just cost Warren any kind of coverage. Media is for people with big pocketbooks. If this how it will play, let Bloomberg be the nominee. I will take a Billionaire with brains and good ideas than someone that will have a sure chance of losing against DJT in November. One will be deemed a Socialist by the media and the other an openly gay man by RNC and surrogates.
She made a good concession speech in NH. She should listen to it.
3
I was thrilled when the NYT endorsed Warren and Klobuchar together. Not so thrilled when afterwards I had to scour the news for more news of them. Warren seems to get coverage only for her Medicare For All "debacle" and her "waning" campaign. Klobuchar briefly shone, and now, too, has dropped out of sight. Why is this? Or do I already know why?
I have read more than enough about Biden and Buttigieg -- and lately, way too much about Bloomberg. Meanwhile I'm curious about Klobuchar, and excited by Warren's ideas and her well-considered plans for this country. Warren is smart and serious, realistic and experienced. And now, portrayed only as a loser. Nevertheless, may she persist.
15
I have backed Sen. Warren since the very beginning, and I'm not giving up. If she was a man, she would be the front runner right now. I am 100% convinced of this. It saddens me that we let sexism destroy our chances of electing the most capable person for the job. It hurts us all.
17
I watch a lot of political tv and many "pundits" are acting as if Warren doesn't exist, despite the fact that she is in the middle of the field. She is one of the smartest people in this race and I hope she can refocus her campaign. We are going to need to clean up Trump's corrupt bog and no one would do a better job of that than Warren.
15
This paper's coverage of Warren has long been biased; her staff has just started pointing it out.
NYT articles for the past year consistently use more negative and patronizing language when discussing Warren than with other Democratic primary candidates. An article after a debate purported to be a list of each candidate greatest strength – the only thing listed for Warren was that she attacked Mayor Pete's wine cave fundraiser. And let's not even get into the multiple character assassination pieces interviewing Wall Street billionaires - none of whom were public figures or political players - that this paper felt the need to run for several days in a row back in the fall, as if we should care about their opinions just because they have money.
This article is no exception: the subtitle says Warren supporters are "convinced she is being ignored", an offensively dismissive phrasing that could have easily been written, "arguing she is being ignored".
The media needs to face up to its role in shaping American politics. It is no coincidence that Warren's poll numbers dipped after this paper allowed rich white men to throw temper tantrums and threaten Democratic voters. Bloomberg is using his spending to get the media to talk about him as a front runner – as soon as you did his poll numbers jumped! Trump has been manipulating the media from the beginning. Warren doesn’t play that game – is that where your bias against her comes from? Or is it just more unexamined sexism?
20
This newspaper did that to Hillary Clinton, as well.
Hmmmm. Good on race, weirdly hyper focused on nonbinarism and utterly negligent about its own deeply entrenched sexism.
3
It's pretty simple. If you think Elizabeth Warren would make the best president, don't give up now, with 98% of delegates yet to be allocated. Let her be the arbiter of when it's time to quit.
Rather: talk to your friends, knock on doors, make phone calls, and donate. Whatever the reasons for the polling slide, the ground game can help make it up.
And then: vote for her! If she's behind now, the way she gets ahead is simple, by getting more votes.
18
It's sad to see Elizabeth Warren's campaign externalizing blame. There is no conspiracy: it's not the media, not the powerful rich, not the patriarchy, not lack of minority backing. It's Warren's policies.
She is not electable, and would be destroyed by Trump. From the beginning her plan has been to provide everything to everybody - open immigration, health care, child care, pre-K, college, and expanding social programs at huge expense, and without providing a credible explanation of how she would pay for it. Sanders is more credible, but will likely go the same way as Warren.
It's been clear to many that her campaign would not catch fire, but the media kept up with her. Now that the hard numbers are coming in which demonstrate this reality, the interest has waned, and she will ultimately have to drop out. The media is covering the front runners.
Most Americans are in favor of a safety net, but also value personal responsibility, sacrifice, hard work, initiative, and investment in oneself. My wife and I limited our family to two children, because that's how many we knew we could raise well. Should our society pay for someone who wants to have five children? Enter Bloomberg.
5
Elizabeth Warren is the candidate that Republican and Democratic bankers both fear. Check out the Warren Geithner video on YouTube. I was impressed with her ability to call out preferential treatment for the rich in 2009 when they received trillions of dollars. 11 years later, Warren is still the most impressive advocate I’ve seen.
I still remember when I opened my credit card statement and my APR interest rate was down thanks to Warren and friends fighting predatory banks. One person with the help of others can make a difference! Warren 2020!
17
I have yet to make up my mind (I know, NC is already voting and my last chance is coming!) but I don't like all the criticism being leveled at Bloomberg for spending his own money to campaign. I think that's preferable to promising folks lots of wonderful things that these candidates can't possibly deliver. Bernie and Liz offering free health care and free college amounts to a bribe, even though they know that the votes aren't likely in the Congress.
3
Warren seems dependent on positive media coverage. In my opinion, that makes her a bad candidate to put against Trump. One of the reasons I like Mr. Sanders so much is that he doesn't need the media to succeed. He rose to the top in 2019 with practically no positive media stories. It's because of his supporters of his who tirelessly campaign. They will help him beat Trump.
1
Warren's problem is two-fold. Number one, she does not seem to connect with voters. It's all heady policies which are great but people don't seem to feel a sense of connection to her. Number two, the original version in Bernie Sanders is running in this election and has more traction and name recognition. Why would people vote for the watered-down version? She is not going to be any more palatable to Republicans or right-leaning "centrists" even if her policies are somewhat diluted.
There's also the gender issue. You've got to shoot the moon to do it as a woman, which isn't right but I think it's also true. At least today. Hopefully the landscape changes going forward and Warren, Klobuchar et al have done a great service in that regard.
2
Warren came across as a another would be “man on horseback leader” who could fix everything on behalf of the people. Bad message. A leader in a democracy represents what the people want, not what they should want. She only had to sell the electorate upon an agenda that offered what they want, fairness and equal opportunity to prosper under liberal democratic government. Instead she was going to make things right her way, like Bloomberg will do it his way, like Sanders will do it his way, and like Trump has promised to do it his way—all authoritarian populists.
2
If Warren was saying something that was visionary, interesting, pertinent, she would be much higher in the polls and the media would be spending more time covering her. The problem is the Warren message - it is not a message of a leader of people.
3
I have a proposal: let's forbid polling on election races and focus more on policies.
5
I firmly believe that a woman can win the presidency. Hillary had every opportunity to do so and simply failed. As a Warren supporter, I attribute her problems to the same kinds of problems any politician faces. Bernie has been winning his competition with her for a certain segment of the Democratic vote. Many, including myself, find her concepts for funding her promises to be unrealistic. These are issues Elizabeth is going to have to deal with if she wants to win. Misogyny is not the problem.
28
@Jim Reho I'm puzzled as to how you can find her funding proposals unrealistic and yet seem to support Sanders, whose funding proposals such as they are, are almost entirely incomplete. Case in point, Warren has been the only candidate held to account for her health care proposals. Bernie has left entirely open how he would actually fund M4A, saying he doesn't need to go into that detail at this point. Warren, trying to actually calculate the true costs, was able to show that M4A would need to be phased in over time. Instead of being respected for her honesty and attempt to actually find the costs, was denigrated. Neither Bernie, and obviously not Biden, Bloomberg, Buttigieg, Klobuchar have given any indepth accounting for how they would pay for their proposals and how their proposals would actually do anything to cover everyone. They tinker around the edges with the concepts but have no details.
47
@Linda I was thinking the same thing.
14
@Linda Thank you, you nailed it down.
11
All Lizzie needs to do is to ask ALL the candidates on stage with her this week to pledge to take a physical exam and report results to the American people.
In the case of Sanders, why is no one demanding that this near octogenarian with documented heart attacks (indicating he clearly has coronary heart disease) release his full medical records?
Will moderators ask him at the next debate?
Warren can drive home the point that it's not just Sanders.
Like all CEOs of fortune 500 companies, presidential candidates should be required to take and make public a full physical/mental examination.
2
Bloomberg is doing what Warren should have done: go left of Biden and right of Sanders. Instant M4A is impossible - even she admits it. The way out of fracking is ending carbon-generated electricity - not instantly banning fracking, which would increase coal burning. Bloomberg has triangulated on taxation too and has vastly more credibility on this subject than Warren Sanders or Trump.
1
The media, consciously or unconsciously, is putting out messaging that supports the old white men in the race. I support Warren wholeheartedly and am really enraged by her dismissal. I don't think the media is understanding just how mad women are right now.
The discrepancy in media treatment between male and female candidates is very, very apparent. Bernie had a heart attack, but it's no big deal and there's no pressure to produce medical records, even though this might torpedo his campaign if he's the nominee. Trump probably had a stroke, but that's over with. Meanwhile, Hillary had pneumonia in 2016 and was about to die and/or maybe had brain damage.
Bernie's campaign is also shooting itself in the foot by going after Warren so viciously and falsely, claiming that Bernie is the one true savior who can pass an M4A bill immediately. (Unless we win the Senate, his supporters are going to be very disappointed. They are not getting that everything does not hinge on one white savior, yet they expect unquestioning support if he gets the nomination.) Elizabeth Warren can get things done. She has a track record, whereas most of the other candidates still standing do not.
16
This is not a normal primary with ten candidates still in the race. Of course it is fluid. If we want a president who is educated and thoughtful and who will hire experts and make policy with best evidence, I think Elizabeth Warren is the best choice. But I also think the press is playing favorites and making premature judgments and she is suffering from the prejudices of the press. NYT -- take a look back at your headlines and admit it.
16
She needs a new look. Change your glasses!!
2
@Bob Coleman Yep! That's what's important isn't it Bob, her "look:
7
What about the three old white men at the top of the ticket, Bob? They have looked the same for years - just older. Shouldn't they, too, change their look? Because, after all, a candidate's physical appearance is the most important characteristic for the leader of the free world, right?
2
@Wally Cox
It makes a difference, and I agree with Bob Coleman. Her glasses are fine in my opinion but, the Mom in tennis shoes uniform must be swapped out for professional-looking attire.
Warren is not a quitter. She will rally. She was counted out when she was running against Scott Brown for Senate. He was a very popular Senator from Massachusetts. Warren won
I am noT counting her out just because the press has decided to do so.
She has the talent, commitment, common sense and vision.
What’s not to like?
56
It’s so early and NH and IA are both small states and not representative of the US or the Democratic Party.
I’m still 1,000% for Warren and can’t wait to vote for her in the primary — and the general!
38
@L Iowa is a swing state that Dems need to win.
And if the state favors the Democratic nominee over Trump, they will.
1
Somebody asked what Warren should do to rejuvenate her campaign.
I say go back to what made Bernie think she should be the Democratic nominee in 2016. She needs to go back to explaining the Social Contract and how instead of government being created to help us all achieve goods we can't get on our own, it has been high jacked for the benefit of a few. Then she explains how the wealthy paying back, into the system that enabled that wealth, gives opportunity and freedom to everyone.
She shows how regulating markets and protecting equal voting ability to elect governments will prevent the wealthy from gaming the system for their benefit, allow capitalism to work as it should and actually open up opportunities for the person with a better mousetrap to put it into practice.
THEN she goes on to show how that wealth will be used by government through specific programs that she has developed. that will increase freedom and opportunity for all.
For me, it is not just a matter of moving the money around or programs, it is returning us to the notion of individual freedom within a supporting society Because that is how it really works.
I keep saying it is getting the Reaganite ideas of rugged individualism and cowboy capitalism out of our heads.
I think she is the only one capable of explaining all of this to us, because she once did. The truth about human life is that nobody makes it on their own. Nobody.
You can find a Youtube video of her speech from 2011.
Let the teacher teach!
29
@Christine I think the problem is there's only so many people smart enough to grasp the things she says.
4
Elizabeth Warren is finished. Her biggest mistake was trying to appease the hard left, while simultaneously trying to win the confidence of centrist Democrats.
Despite his very vocal fan base, Sanders is just too far left to beat Trump. Bloomberg, despite his flaws, has the best shot at taking back the White House.
12
@WS Read Paul Krugman today in the NYTs. I was reluctantly realizing Bloomberg would do the job, but now I will do whatever I can to stop him. That said, if he's the nominee I'll hold my nose and vote for him.
5
Sure trade in your hard left votes for the millions of votes you will get from the right. Why can the hard right ask for and get all they want????
2
Coverage is based on popularity. Warren didn’t mind all of the coverage she received when she was a front runner. None of the coverage is due to her gender. It’s due to her falling poll numbers.
10
Fair and unbiased media coverage should be just that. When the media continues to treat elections as mere horse races, it confuses voters and influences how they think and how they vote. This doesn't always lead to the best candidate for the job, as we [should have] learned in 2016.
1
It’s a bad sign for Warren that she is currently third in California polls. I can’t see a way forward to the nomination for her without a majority of California delegates.
6
I think critical assessment of the role of political analysts and pollsters in election coverage is sorely needed. The intensity of the presidential horse race has become absurd. Everyone hyperventilating about hourly changes in what we know are deeply flawed polling methodologies. Two small states vote and Warren gets written off? While Bloomberg is talked about endlessly. Warren has been erased in coverage, except for the criticism of her “failing” campaign. Analysts have become actors in presidential campaigns. Most disturbing, it seems the opinion business has swallowed up news gathering during elections. The “chattering class” as Robert Reich refers to them, can’t stop with their predictions, psychoanalysis, campaign management critiques and candidate baiting. Especially in post debate discussions. Who landed a punch? Who took on the front runners? The pundits themselves have prompted some of the bitter attacks among Democrats about often trivial matters. They need to something to chatter about; their paychecks depend upon it. The branding of political reporters. This is wrong. I vote for cutting the columnists and TV analysts by half. Redirect the money into investigative reporting on who else is manipulating the election. Many are, from the GOP to foreign powers. Plus the garden variety ineptitude of state election officials. Heaven help us.
23
Elizabeth Warren deserves better coverage as the one who can bring this country while taking on the powers that be.
23
Right now Warren is looking to salvage a top cabinet post. A VP spot would appear to be out for any candidate but Bloomberg. Look for Warren therefore to use the slightest excuse to get behind Bloomberg after Super Tuesday to offer him a way to shore up female support where he is abundantly vulnerable.
4
@Edwin EXactly. - his platform is very close to hers
1
At least the DNC isn't trying to actively sabotage her like they are with Bernie and did with him last time. There's no way she can win. She just can't. Put her on the ticket as Bernie's running mate and they'll be a shoe in. After 8 years of Veep she can easily slide in to be Prez for the next 8.
Don't do this and the Dems lose it all.
2
I stood in line for an hour and 40 minutes to vote for Elizabeth Warren. She is my first and only choice for President.
Bernie Sanders and his supporters are a big reason why Hillary lost and Trump succeeded. Sanders ego was damaged that Hillary beat him, so instead of caring about our country first, insuring a Democrat won the election, he wanted to punish Hillary for winning the Democratic nominee. Sanders did not give his full support to Hillary Clinton, which he should have. I find that very hard to forgive.
If Sanders is the Democrat nominee for President, I will vote for him (anything to oust Trump), but I don't care for Sanders the man. Or the Sanders supporters who are out harassing anyone who says anything negative about him. Those supporters were in full force in his last bid for the Democrat Presidential nominee. Haven't we had enough of that behavior from Trump and his base supporters?
Elizabeth Warren 2020. Go Warren!
48
@Valerie Bernie did far more for Hillary in 2016 than Hillary did for Obama in 2008. Bernie supporters were also more loyal than Hillary supporters. Yet we are still smeared as being responsible for her defeat. Did you know Bernie shot an ad supporting Hillary, but she hated him so much she never aired it?
And what did Hillary do to reach out to Bernie's supporters? Nothing. Just like she did nothing in the Rust Belt and lost what used to be safe blue states. She was arrogant and incompetent.
1
@Valerie Except that Sanders endorsed Hillary faster than she did Obama, held more rallies for her than she did for Obama and more of Hillary's people voted for McCain for president than Bernie's people did any other candidates combined even considering the higher population of the US at that time. You also might excuse a bit of frustration on the part of a group of people who worked their behinds off only to find out the process was literally rigged against them. If Bernie's people had stolen the primary from Hillary you can be sure her people would have done more than just be a bit upset and vocal.
It may help you feel better to blame Bernie's people for Hillary's loss but reality just doesn't match up to your set of "facts".
1
@KM I understand you are a Bernie Sanders supporter, which is fine. But I stand by my comments. No other campaign supporters are harassing Democrat nominees with death threats. That was exactly what happened last time around, when Sanders ran for President.
Hillary Clinton is hardly "incompetent". Clinton is intelligent, articulate and more than capable of leading our country. I feel the same way about Elizabeth Warren, which is why I voted for her on Saturday.
If Sanders is chosen as the Democrat Presidential candidate, I will vote for him. Anything to remove Trump from office.
7
It’s quite clear what has happened to Warren: she came out with her wealth tax idea, and immediately the Washington Post, the Times and other media outlets started writing columns about how her campaign wouldn’t work. The billionaires who own the media don’t want to lose their money. It’s as simple as that.
26
@Bob
I think you’re right about the timing. Wall Street rose up and quashed her.
Which is why she has my admiration—and my vote.
11
@Bob Yet somehow she snagged the Times's endorsement for president
3
It is still very early. This year's contest has been the most fluid & unpredictable in modern history. So it it is way too early to count Warren out. Her campaign is built for the long haul. Indeed, when the focus was on policy, she surged, because she has more comprehensive plans than any other candidate.
Unfortunately, many in the media prefer to frame every story in terms of the "horse race. This is misguided. Biden, the early favorite, is sinking like a stone. Bernie is loved by 30% & reviled by practically everyone else, & is sure to ignite a strong "Anybody But Sanders" movement if he shows signs of becoming the nominee. Buttigieg is a lightweight; all fluff & platitudes, he is not ready for prime time, & America in 2020 is not ready to elect a gay man. Klobuchar has major weaknesses which are exposed upon closer scrutiny; she embarrassed herself during an interview with Spanish speaking media by being unable to even name the president of Mexico.
Ultimately, only Warren has the potential to unite the progressives & moderates. Thus, she will do a better job of stimulating a larger turnout among Democratic leaning voters. It's about time the media stop trying to marginalize a candidate with such a broad range of support & such a high potential ceiling.
47
This country is full of misogyny. Full stop. Don't put her up against Trump. It does not matter how qualified or talented the female candidate is, she cannot win in this country. Explain to the little girls all over this land that the judiciary and supreme court are too important this time around. Women will have to wait for now. Climate change, womens reproductive rights, the economy, separation of church and state, these are all more important and very much on the line.
2
@Gary This was the same thinking before Barack Obama got elected. The country is full of racists, how can a black man get elected? He did. And now? We can elect a woman. We did elect a woman if you go by popular vote. The country is ready. She's the best candidate we have. She'll be a better president than any of the other choices.
8
This country is more sexist than racist.
I feel bad for Elizabeth Warren, and I support her for the nomination. But numbers don't lie; 9 percent and fourth place won't get it done...especially a neighboring state into which you poured a pile of money and other resources. You can't blame it all on sexism and media coverage. Sorry. Take the L, move on.
2
It's funny because YangGangers were saying the same thing about their candidate...that he was getting less airtime etc. And now that he's dropped out, he seems to be getting more notice than when he was in.
Either way, I do love Elizabeth, and what makes her stand out imho is... Bernie supporters are too 'rabid' and ultra-PC just for the sake of it.... Bloomberg is clearly buying his way in... as for Amy, I find her to come off as too much of a classic politician ('fake'). Pete....I do like him...
That said, Elizabeth's team needs to figure out how to get her to stop her literal 'finger-pointing', when she's making a strong point. It comes across a certain way, that's probably making her lose some otherwise potential supporters...
5
@Lisa Bernie Sanders supporters are "too PC?" This is the exact opposite of what moderate liberals say about him. His supporters are falsely blamed for being sexist and/or racist. How do you explain that? In fact it is Warren who seems to appeal to the worst kinds of PC identity politics, especially with her petty dig at Bernie accusing him of being sexist.
She had plenty of attention and momentum until she decided to use an 18-month old accusation of sexism against Sanders. Then it all fell apart, and rightly so.
21
@Len319 she didn't decide to use that nor did she call it sexism - the reporting was quite clear that she told someone off the record in real time what he said and it got gossiped about and cnn decided to run the story right before the debate. bernie's camp didn't have to turn it into the war of the sexes or pretend it was some wild lie or crazy betrayal - he admits to saying something very close to that and it's something many people have said - so he cornered her w/that's a lie and she had to confirm what she had said a year earlier - your reading of what happened it disturbeing.
8
@Len319 She didn't "decide to". Someone in the meeting talked about it, and then there was clamoring for Warren and Sanders to speak up. And it wasn't a charge of sexism -- the headline writers did that. A ton of analysts were saying things like "American isn't ready to elect a woman president". Sexism would be if Sanders said "A woman can't do the job of president", and no one is claiming that he did that.
4
@Len319 Completely agree--that was a cynical political move that completely backfired on her, thankfully...even though the media tried its best to assist her with it, including during the debate.
Also, she waffled on Medicare for All...and for her supporters who were true progressives (i.e. interested in actual policy, not just in supporting a woman candidate), that was also just too much.
2
Warren is the Perfect Match for Sanders
Sanders/Warren
Yin/Yang
--they give rise to each other as they interrelate to one another
3
If Trump wins it will be because the media act like lemmings: first its all Biden, then all Buttigieg, then Klobuchar. Now Bloomberg!
Second, Democratic supporters (see some comments below) are often quite mean and vicious to anyone but their favorite.
Any of the Democrats now running would be preferable to Trump. Sniping in this way will surely elect 4 more years of Trump.
22
Warren is vying for progressive votes with Bernie Sanders who is something akin to a cult leader with regard to his followers. Warren did get a lot of publicity when she was rolling out novel policies but now reality has set in. Once Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez endorsed Sanders that in effect ended Warren's chances. The progressives are going with Sanders and Warren's support is rapidly eroding. It is now a democratic socialist Sanders backed by AOC against more moderate candidates. The big question is whether one of these more moderate candidates will emerge to take on Sanders. If several stay in to the end the result would probably be a brokered convention and several days of Democrats fighting among themselves on national television. It is hard to think of any way such a dispute could end amicably.
4
Nevertheless, she persisted.
69
@Sherry "Nevertheless, she persisted."
Somehow, no one pointed out to her that that line is in the past tense--or if they did, she ignored it. It's an epitaph, not a motto for going forward. That the Warren camp doesn't see something this obvious says a lot.
2
The press and video media spend more time and print space influencing the news rather than objectively reporting It. They helped elect the current occupant of the White House with too much coverage because he manipulated them with ratings inducing sound bytes....
The MSM outlets and papers still haven’t learned....they need to report the news, not make/influence the news.
If they do their job correctly and cover Elizabeth Warren fairly, the country can only benefit!
52
@JL Ratings and polls dictate news.
@JL You are so correct. If I want to know what’s going on in the world I turn to the WSJ. I despise their editorials but the reporting is good and the topics are broad. The election coverage here is terrible.
2
I could not believe she took the bait and actually gave a price for Medicare for All of $20,000,000,000.
I love her too but she will never carry the only 12 states that matter.
And voters do not want to hear 7 more months of Pocahontas taunts. It's too painful to watch as is everything the child in the White House does.
3
"It's the math, stupid."
In the two contests so far, Bernie scored around 25%, and the moderates--- Pete, Amy, Joe--- about 54%.
Elizabeth, whom I admire very much, is neither fish nor fowl at this point. Where are her votes supposed to come from?
And with Bloomberg coming on strong in national polling, it wouldn't even matter if Biden dropped out, the numbers would be the same.
I respect Warren and I hope she doesn't become a reality-denying whiner like Sanders and company. Bernie is only "the leader", barely, because the majority vote is split among the others. And if Warren dropped out, I suspect that a substantial portion of her supporters would switch to Klobuchar.
In the end, the "winning ticket" is going to be an old, moderate, white guy, with a female VP. I'd like that to be Warren, but I'm not sure if that's really the best choice tactically. We'll see.
5
She has herself to blame.
It's was al there for her in 2016 and she declined to run.
It was there for her last summer and she self-implode.
Instead of borrowing a page from Bill Clinton winning textbook, Trangiultion, ie: embrace your opponent's ideas as your own and strip them from their weapons to attack you. She took the bait and start compounding the mistakes. Agreed on the debate stage for giving medicare to illegals, decriminalizing illegal border-crossing, and then the big mistake that dommed her: a 40 trillion M-4-A bill.
When she announced the M-4-A plan, Bloomberg saw an opening. Now we are painfully watching her demise.
10
@morGan Trangiultion? And it was never 40 trillion. But she was brave enough, unlike another, to give a figure.
1
Warren took a calculated and deliberate risk in attacking Sanders claiming he was lying about saying a woman could not win. Up till that momen though I had long supported Sanders I was leaning towards Warren as more viable but she lost me. I know everyone tried to spin it a a 'miscommuniction" but it wasn't. Either you believe Sanders said that or you don't and I don't and I was especially turned off by her running after him at the end of the debate, if the sexes had been reveresed she would have been attacked for stalking. I think she is very smart and has terrific ideas but I had already been concerned about her seemingly backing off national healthcare and claims of native ancestery and the attack on Sanders pushed me back to him
6
Here you will read how the establishment Democrats are afraid if Sanders will be able to beat Warren.
Establishment Democrats are not afraid if Sanders can beat Warren. They are afraid he might beat Warren, Bloomberg, Biden, Buttigieg & Trump and put them all out of business!
If Sanders gets the nomination and proceeds to defeat Trump — strong possibilities on both accounts — he will have redefined the American politics for generations, force Democratic Party to reform or die and expose the Republicans for the dinosaurs that they are.
Warren's establishment Democrats and the Republicans are determined to destroy Sanders chances — a massive upsurge in voters turnout is the only response!
3
Let’s cut to the chase: it’s ALL about Her gender. She has long been my favorite, but I can see the writing on the misogynist Wall. A day of reckoning WILL come. Not this Election, as WE must dethrone the creature. But Soon.
Seriously.
30
@Phyliss Dalmatian
Up to now, I don't think this is the case. Among many Democrats these days her second X chromosome is an asset that offsets misogynistic tendencies (that surely persist in the party). For the general election though, this probably wouldn't be the case.
Warren's problem is one of phoniness/honesty. Her apparent political opportunism clashes with her great policy ideas. (Bloomberg and Buttigieg probably don't have such concerns.) If she can't get the support of the working class in her OWN STATE, the folks she is supposedly an advocate for, she's doomed, imo. And if the working class isn't backing her because she is female this IS a big problem that needs to be 'educated away'. But, imo, economic disparity is so terrible in the country that we can't afford to wait until there's a viable female leader or no noticeable misogyny before we make progressive reforms (and it would be hard to go this route without being sexist, ourselves.)
2
@Phyliss Dalmatian I disagree with you. It’s not about gender. Good senators do not necessarily have the leadership chops to be President.
2
@Phyliss Dalmatian Even the comments on this board are so virulently misogynist. The men hate her specifically because she's a woman. They will find any small flaw to knock her down. They (the commenters) weren't good enough to do anything with their lives, and they can't tolerate being surpassed by a woman. That's what it's all about. I've been watching it all my life. Brilliant women cut down by nasty, small-minded, lowest-common-denominator men.
4
I will never count out the next president of the US -- Elizabeth Warren. Yes, this is the usual media dog and pony show -- sexist, childish, going for the superficial nonsense. Those of us who think ignore them but their power is great...look who they elected in the last election with their delight in spotlighting the ridiculous rather than the real deal. The media reality show is formidable...but if anybody can think their way through it, it is Elizabeth Warren.
49
She was finished after the sexism stunt she pulled with Bernie. My Warren supporter friends were appalled that she would try to tear apart the progressive movement that way. They won't be voting for her anymore
She's Vice Presidential material now.
2
I am a strong supporter of Warren and contributing to her campaign. First, she doesn’t have good advisors who can help her get elected. Instead of showcasing her strengths and accomplishments, she tagged along with Sanders on Medicare for all without any idea how she can accomplish it both politically and financially. She should have said that as a President and with the support of Sanders, she will rally the people to support Medicare for all. Once a great majority of the people behind it, she can push for legislative changes and bring Medicare for all to a realization. If a great majority of the people want it, believe me government will find the money. That is democracy.
10
@Kodali If she doesn’t have good advisors that’s a signal she won’t make a good President. To succeed in the job you have to be brilliant at reading, hiring and inspiring people.
1
Warren has lost so much momentum that she’s no longer a top tier candidate. She pretty much pinned her hopes on some specific radical proposals instead of an agenda that she could articulate simply. No proposal offered during a political campaign can be considered to represent more than a representation of a political agenda, so it should be presented that way. Medicare for all etcetera represents a move to restore equality which strengthens democracy and the role of the people in government policy making. The people deciding not some exclusive elite. That was the message that Warren should have associated with her candidacy.
1
Sanders supporters would be happy if the news media ignored him a little more. Better to be ignored by the liberal elite than have all out war waged on your campaign.
3
Bloomberg/Warren would be a winner ticket.
Can a woman win the Presidency?
Yes, Amy Klobuchar can!
6
She’s my candidate -she’s the smartest, best organized, most pragmatic, and charismatic of them all. It’s the media that’s ignoring her and making it sound like she’s all done. I wish they’d ignore Buttigieg and Bloomberg and see how far they get (neither holds a candle to Warren)!
51
That's the Candidate! A tweet from Elizabeth Warren @ewarren, showing the support of the people:
"A young girl came up to me tonight and said,
“I’m a broke college student with a lot of student loan debt. I checked and I have $6 in the bank—so I just gave $3 to keep you in this fight.”
We’re staying in this fight for the people who are counting on us."
11:43 PM · Feb 11, 2020
https://twitter.com/ewarren/status/1227453110374879232
18
That deceptive photo of the lone Warren supporter says it all.
What you're seeing is the Dean-ification of Elizabeth Warren by the mass media.
Smell an easy story line? Run with it! Drive it home! Beat it to a bloody pulp!
Just as the mass media drove the Howard Dean-as-raving-lunatic narrative into the ground, so they're now doing with the Warren-as-has-been narrative.
Wring that story for all it's worth, Mr. Herndon.
36
@Drew
I don't think you appreciate how the media used the "special effects" from that audio feed against Dean's campaign - and just how adversarial the press had been toward his campaign before that event. He NEVER had the backing from mainstream media like Warren had/has. Warren, with her NYT endorsement and favorable volumes written on her can not play the victim now that the balloon has deflated. On the other hand, Dean could "play the victim", Jerry Brown probably could, Nader definitely could and, of course, Bernies Sanders' press coverage is one for the history books on American journalism.
2
@Drew So true. I am so SO sick of it.
2
@Drew
I don't think you appreciate how the media used the "special effects" from that audio feed against Dean's campaign - and just how adversarial the press had been toward his campaign before that event. He NEVER had the backing from mainstream media like Warren had/has. Warren, with her NYT endorsement and favorable volumes written on her can not play the victim now that the balloon has deflated. On the other hand, Dean could "play the victim", Jerry Brown probably could, Nader definitely could and, of course, Bernies Sanders' press coverage is one for the history books on American journalism.
Once you start making this kind of argument, you’re toast.
8
It was stunning how Warren has been virtually ignored by the Times since New Hampshire. She needs a good debate Wednesday to get her back in the mix. Mike Bloomberg provides a useful foil.
She’s still the best candidate. It ain’t over yet. The fat lady is just getting warmed up.
54
the Bernie Bros have destroyed her.
14
Liz is one Howard Dean scream away from obscurity.
7
@William
To be fair to Dean, his was a full take down. He never had the media backing (e.g. endorsements) that Warren had and still has. There will be no Dean Scream... even this article is kind.
1
Well, honeymoons don't last forever.
Warren has been the darling of the press since she indicated to them she wants a revival, rather than a political revolution. And that, imo, helped get her that NYT endorsement. Now it's undeniable poll and voting results that are finally forcing the media away from her. The argument that the media is disregarding a campaign that actually has solid, widespread support applies FAR more to the Sanders campaign; it's been an unspoken media POLICY since 2015. Strange that this argument for Warren can even be made here....
10
Elizabeth Warren is an excellent Senator and would make a good President.
But it is never a good sign when candidates and their surrogates start whining about how the “corporate media” is against them. No, the race is not somehow rigged against Senator Warren. On the left, she has a less devoted following than Bernie Sanders, and more moderate Democrats don’t believe she can win the general election.
Personally I’m skeptical about either Warren or Sanders, who are very appealing within the liberal bubble but not so much to Americans at large. I believe more mainstream Democrat like Bloomberg or Klobuchar has the better chance of defeating Trump, and that really is what matters for our country and the world right now.
6
@David, first off, Bloomberg isn't a Democrat (neither is Sanders). Second off, the press has been all over this election making choices ahead of voters. Not just handicapping Warren. They artificially knocked Harris out of the race, too, and lopsidedly covered both Beto and Mayor Pete. Now they're all breathlessly babbling about, "Can anybody stop Bernie?" and "Is Bloomberg buying an election?"
One of the funniest things I've heard yet in the press was a young, freshly scrubbed reporter on TV talking about how with all the money Biden and Warren don't have, how will they ever compete in Super Tuesday. For the record, I live in the biggest Super Tuesday state, and the ONLY campaign who has actually knocked on my door was Elizabeth Warren's.
The other funny thing was yesterday's interview with Joe Biden on MSNBC Deadline Whitehouse. I hadn't seen any interviews with him in full before, and he was sharp, nuanced, realistic, and to the point. In fact, the commentators, who included Mara Gay from the Times, and Jonathan Lemire from the Post, seemed frustrated trying to talk about what the viewers saw with their eyes, and the previous press characterizations of Biden as "slow" and "not on his game". I was left feeling that the press had been mischaracterizing Biden for months as no longer sharp when he actually is.
12
@ondelette
I've noticed that EVERY candidate seems sharp, sincere and enlightened when seen in a full interview compared to their debate performances and snippets in the press. This doesn't seem to bode well for our democracy.
4
@David
False equivalence:
Media rigging against Warren - mythological.
Media rigging against Sanders - a no-brainer.
Many may think here it's me who is brainwashed. But they should try to find this "cult member" a single, major media endorsement of Bernie Sanders... doesn't have to be New York Times.
1
Not writting her off, but I agree with James Carville that she would be much higher in the polls if she came over as center left rather than "Bernie light". I like her and I also feel she has been getting short shrift.
20
She’s (likely) done. Here’s why. It’s going to come down to who can prevail between the moderate and progressive wings of the party. She isn’t pulling over the Bloomberg crowd, and likely not the Klobuchar voters either. If/when once is them drops, their base likely moves to the other. Additionally, she are Bernie are vying for the same left-leaving voters, and there is zero chance she is taking Bernie’s ppl. They are dug in and appear to significantly outnumber hers. In fact, it’s more likely that Bernie starts to pilfer people on the fringes of EW’s base than vice versa. As such, at least to me, it appears that EW’s only hope is Buttigieg flaming out and his voters moving to her, but those folks are just as likely to go to the moderate candidate or to Bernie.
Looking at the playing field, she may have a sliver of hope left, but a whole like of things will have to go right for her and wrong for others. I wouldn’t be too optimistic if I was in the EW camp.
11
Sorry Sen. Warren backers, I am writing your candidate off. Call it a mistake if you want but as the Math guy would say numbers don't add up at a time money will make the mayor go, not mayor Butti but mayor Bloomberg. The wall of wealth has come up in the democratic party and it will keep the have nots behind. Sorry it turned up this way but that is the unfortunate reality. Bye bye Ms Warren. All is not gone. There are still 4 years in the senate. Make the best of them.
10
Warren is my second choice, but I think she has some bad advisors steering her in the wrong direction. It seems she's trying to be the one to straddle progressive and moderate, but she's too moderate for progressives and too progressive for moderates.
I think she has also been playing the woman card too strongly. That kind of pandering turns off more people than it attracts. It didn't work for Hillary. Klobuchar is wisely not going all in with that strategy.
13
I donated to Senator Warren before I read this article.
Thanks to the article, I am about to donate to her again.
I will vote for the Democrats' nominee. I dearly hope we nominate Sen. Warren. She is brilliant, energetic, thoughtful, and high integrity. As cursed as we have been with Trump, that's how blessed we would be with President Warren.
74
@MC I couldn't agree more. Elizabeth Warren is my first and only choice for President. And I also just donated to Warren's campaign. Go Warren!
13
@MC By far, the most [intellectually] talented, refined, and sophisticated candidate is Senator Warren. It is sad to see that money (ex NY mayor) will almost gain you instant credibility and status in a presidential race. Senator Warren is incredibly gifted (wisdom, intelligence, logic, and her ethics).
11
@MC I agree with you that she is energetic. I don’t find her brilliant but above average in intelligence. She may have more integrity than a Trump. Her use of affirmative action is a deal breaker for me. She has missed over 50 percent of the roll call votes this session after assuring Massachusetts voters that she was not running for President, but announced within 90 days that she was. Not doing the job she was elected to do is more than troubling to me. Lying about her children attending only public schools is another whopper. Collecting many donations from the wealthy until she stopped taking them. Did she refund the earlier contributions? My bet is no. One of the least effective members and most partisan members of the Senate. For me, hope the Democrats nominate anyone else.
Elizabeth Warren has been my candidate ever since she opted out of the race before this one. The Party needs her, the nation needs her, and nothing within her is holding her back. Yet there is this lack of broad connection and commitment in the electorate. Is she not "relatable"? Not authentic enough? Compared to Mayor Pete, in my eyes she is golden and he's tinsel. I give the candidate and the campaign -- in which I am earnestly volunteering, door to door -- some time. We will get the candidate and the President we deserve -- and that's a scary thought.
51
The United States needs to stop this charismatic leader search and get back to having a liberal democracy based upon governance by the consent of an informed electorate.
6
Most of Warren's base, myself included, are highly educated and informed. Smearing others for having a different worldview than your own is erroneously supercilious and severely short-sighted. It has been evident for some time that the United States is ripe for change. Trump is merely symptomatic of the many growing problems that have been ignored now for decades. Voters who pay attention and understand the issues know that a return to the status quo is not a viable option if we want to keep the future Donald Trump's of the world at bay. If we don't, we will continue to have more 2016's indefinitely.
2
@Jon Quitslund
“She opted out of the race before this one”. Yes she did! She was WEAK- they all were except Sanders, not to take on Hillary.
1
Imagine how much more quickly she would have been erased had she had a heart attack. Yet no one even talks about Bernie's mid-campaign heart attack and stents, nor do we ask if an 80-year old should be president. I was really hoping after 2016 this country could be ready to elect a woman to the highest office but apparently we are still living in 1950.
38
@Real Thoughts I share that frustration. And remember, African-American men were allowed to vote 1870, while Women didn’t until 1920. Which, if that same pace of shifting public attitude applies to presidents, we still have another 50 years to go :/
1
Warren is the only candidate that understands the banking system and knows what the banking system did to the economy.
55
Warren is done. Not overlooked but rather rejected.
10
Let's all pencil in Andrew Yang; the most normal and humane and welcoming and forward thinking among them.
His stepping out has me politically homeless.
It's not about your color, or gender, or ethnicity or whether you consider yourself male or female or neither this particular day; it's about economics, and Yang got that. In the most human of ways <3.
2
We need to stop trying so hard to find the “right” candidate, because it won’t work. It happened in 2012 with Romney. They over-thought the decision, and chose the “safest” one to beat Obama. The clean-cut, plain vanilla politician, Romney.
In turn, we’ll nominate Biden as the Dem candidate, because he is the “safest”, most plain vanilla candidate of those left. The fear of losing will lead us to overthink and attempt to please everyone right into the wrong candidate. As Romney lost to Obama in 2012, we will lose with Biden.
I gladly choose Ms. Warren as my candidate. To me she is by far the strongest. But I worry, as I can see that same over-thought decision making happening within her own campaign. Trying to please everyone everywhere, watering down her responses and fire.
Only a worse Narcissist than Trump could beat him at his own game, and we don’t want that type of person as President. Our attempts to replicate his skewed version of ”strong” would be feeble in comparison.
The Dems must stop attacking each-other and unify,support each-other, then unleash themselves in an organic way against the common enemy. As Trump is naturally horrible, it will take someone who is naturally and extremely bold and sharp to overcome him. Not a manufactured bold, but like the fire I’ve seen Ms. Warren exhibit for many years.
She needs to be herself, and say what she will, and stand for what is right even if it offends people. Nurture her fire instead of douse it, and we can win.
24
Where others offered vague generalities, Warren has offered specifics. While others have gotten media attention all out of proportion, the press cuts away from her speeches - if they get covered at all. Where others have cozied up to Big Money, Warren has stayed with small donors.
She is number three in the delegate count so far. Unlike Bernie Sanders she is an actual member of the Democratic Party. Unlike Pete Buttigieg, she has national experience and a track record of accomplishment. Unlike Amy Klobuchar she has detailed plans. Unlike Joe Biden she has a realistic view of what the Republican Party really stands for - and is prepared to deal with it.
The NY Times endorsed her in a split decision, damning her with faint praise and "Yes, but..." equivocations. Only 2% of the delegates have been awarded to date - yet the press seems determined to write her off after two of the least representative primaries in the process.
But then, this is the same media that obsessed over Hillary's emails, that amplified GOP messaging over sham Congressional hearings, and gave Donald Trump a pass on his numerous shortcomings. This is the same media that is normalizing the Trump presidency even as he and the GOP dismantle our democracy before our eyes.
And how does this story start? "A bad month for Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts keeps getting worse." Nice job of setting the narrative in stone, eh?
83
"Ms. Waite said the last week had taught her that 'corporate media doesn’t want' Ms. Warren to win." Nor does the corporate wing of the Democratic Party. Makes me support her even more and to continue contributing to her campaign. She has well thought out plans for the major issues facing this country and is a refreshing alternative to angry old white men. Go, Liz! #Warren2020
28
I'm not sure, at this point any can argue that the Democrat party has essentially "rigged" their primary. I do not support Warren, but the changing of the rules to allow Bloomberg to buy his way in at the 11th hour would incense me.
12
Sanders can’t win and Warren can. But Warren threatens the American oligarchy like no presidential candidate in the past 50 years. Sanders is their perfect candidate because he’ll lose; the country isn’t ready for a candidate who calls himself a democratic socialist, even though that’s a fine thing to be. Because he’s a loser (and because he’s a guy), he fills the time on cable and Trump is celebrating. Sanders and his followers should be ashamed for what they did to Clinton, for now saying in large numbers that they won’t vote for anybody but Sanders, and for being significantly responsible for the decline and death of the republic. Their purity won’t be worth much when in four years representative government is finished but they’re childish, like their candidate, and the rest of us will pay the price. They will, too, but they won’t take any responsibility for it. They’re about to discover the meaning of “it can’t happen here.” What they’re about to discover is, it can, and it is. Unfortunately they don’t care.
18
@ADN Sanders beats Trump handily in the polls today, just like he did back in 2016. And his margins are much bigger than Warren's. So I'd be interested if you have any actual evidence that Warren is more electable.
@KM
The most recent polls I’ve seen show Sanders +3.6 and Warren at +2.1. That’s insignificant, especially with both being in the margin of error. The one thing I know about Warren is that she’s predictable, she cares about the country as much as she cares about herself, and neither are true of Sanders, whose ego makes Trump’s look like nothing and who is well known to not know the meaning of the word “team.” And they’ll crucify him on Russia, Cuba, and his wife’s finances. The press is beating up on Warren and giving Bernie a free ride. That’s almost a guarantee he’ll lose.
2
Most of any recent coverage of her has been negative. Why is that?
15
The question is: Is she being ignored because she's losing the race or is she losing the race because she's being ignored?
I'd say it's the latter. The media has given Buttigeg outsized coverage and he came in second in the really despite being unqualified, disingenuous and example after example shows he was not good at governing his small town.
Bloomberg polls well by just buying his own media coverage via commercials. Politics is all about coverage and since the media deems her not exciting, they either don't cover her or try to generate excitement by creating a sinking ship narrative for her campaign.
I just had a reunion with several friends. Many said they were going to vote for Warren but think she's done so they're already thinking about their backup person. I had to remind them she's not done, especially if they vote for her. People literally forget that it's about the votes, not what Chuck Todd's pundits say is happening.
272
@Dash
Senator Warren is being ignored because many of her good ideas like financial reform are being lost in a morass of too-much, too soon social programs. Of course, the chief of these is Medicare for all.
If she would have moderated her message, with say a public option for healthcare, Elizabeth probably would have had a decent chance.
I think most of Senator Warren's ideas are great. Proof of her intellect comes in her student, Representative Katie Porter, who will do great things down the road.
But Senator Warren's message is infelicitous in these dangerous times of Trump. Rome was not built in a day. And neither will reform of the American society and the economy.
Hence, I am loath to accept Warren as presidential nominee because her message has not be more modulated and appropriate. This shows a lack of political savvy and planning by her staff.
We saw this sort of thing four years ago. To move forward today, I prefer the blunt force instrument of Mike Bloomberg. After the era of Trump, we can begin reconstruction.
10
@Dash
As an advocate for Andrew Yang, I can say that the media most definitely ignored him; perhaps that's a factor with EW.
Thank you for not blaming it on her gender.
She's got some great ideas, but her divisiveness and pandering to the Alt Left has me disappointed, just saying.
9
@Dash She didn't do much at the last debate. I don't see that as the moderators' fault. Not sure what her strategy was.
She has not been ignored by the media. That's a silly claim. Folks know about her. They know she's got plans. If they don't know much of what her plans are that's because they're too lazy to read an entire article.
What's the cure for lazy voters? Maybe saying stuff that gets their attention. Trump in his own sick way is good at that.
She was doing really well for a while. How does your "lack of coverage" theory explain that?
She stumbled over healthcare. After all those times when she said she's with Bernie she tried to distance herself and it blew up in her face. Not good politics.
Can she recover? We'll see. This next debate looks critical.
2
In the numerous debates leading up to Iowa and New Hampshire, Warren was allowed more time than almost all other candidates to comment or respond.
The problem isn't that that networks cut coverage of her post-caucus or post-primary speech short. It's that the more the general public hears her, the less they like her.
8
On the night of the Iowa Caucus, I watched the press move into full "ignore Warren" mode. They skipped her speech until they had shown all others, despite the fact that she started speaking shortly after Mayor Pete. As the media coverage progressed, I realized everyone was being regularly mentioned except Warren. The situation has continued and in some instances become worse. The media is the conduit for much of the public's knowledge about candidates. Ignoring one, or implying he/she is no longer viable, sends that message loud and clear. In this election, all non-Trump supporters consistently tell pollsters that the most important aspect of their decision as to who to vote for is whether that person can defeat Trump. Being left out of the media coverage, or treated as an afterthought, is tantamount to saying a candidate no longer has a chance. For the record, as a long time supporter of Klobuchar, I chose and still choose Warren.
Studies of the media coverage done after the 2016 election, also showed that Trump received a great deal more media coverage than Clinton, and that most of the coverage of Clinton was focused on the "email" issue or allegations of misconduct over the decades. Rarely on her actual policy positions or her accomplishments as a Senator or a Secretary of State. We are seeing a replay with Warren. The press was complicit in Trump's election. Thus far, they appear to have learned little.
34
It does feel like an "erasure" by the press and the pundits. I never did get to see her speech in New Hampshire.
Part of it, I suspect, is because she is a woman. But I also see the media as easily distracted by a nominating process that they treat as a horse race or other sporting event. And right now there is a lot of money (mostly his own) being bet on Bloomberg.
Bloomberg says that if a woman wants to be taken seriously, she needs to stop spending her time shopping at Bloomingdales.
Well, Elizabeth Warren has been spending her time fighting against the predatory practices of the banks and others who want to undermine working people in this country, while the rich like Bloomberg get much, much richer. I take that very seriously.
As president Warren will have all of our backs. So right now I have hers.
506
@avrds
The article indicates that she is not being erased. It says she's 4th in cable news mentions behind Biden, the national poll leader (until most recently) and the campaigns biggest story (because of his decline) and Sanders and Buttigieg both of whom beat her handily in the the first two contests. You think she should be mentioned ahead of them?
She certainly got more positive press than Buttigieg going into Iowa and he won while she finished third. Then she got clobbered in NH which is to a large degree in her media market. What's the basis for the argument that she should be getting more press? Or that she is getting less that she should because she is a woman? Seriously, if Buttigieg had Warren's results and was getting the 4th most mentions, do any of us really think the press would run a piece about how he was being "erased"?
18
@avrds Or it could be that her candidacy is no longer as a front runner. Warren got lots of press when she was leading in the polls. Now she has been in decline. She wasn’t erased. She has just faded as her popularity has.
25
@avrds Perfect commentary, thank you. I would add that a perfect ticket could be Warren/Buttigieg. She has the experience (read age, too), the agendas that we need, and is an administrator, par excellence. He is a more fluid communicator, a party "up and comer", earnest. (His economic experience and achievement in Indiana needs to be understood as largely as being the product of a university town which is its own driver. So..
Warren/Mayor Pete: The Workhorse & The Show Pony. My ticket.
20
It’s clear as day to me that Ms Warren is the best bet for Democrats. She’s smart, passionate, experienced and yes, very electable. The country needs a revolution led by thoughtful leaders, and not by rabble rousing, demagogues. Warren is exactly that person who can lead. It would be disappointing to see her candidacy fade. I’m confident that voters in the remaining states will see what those in Iowa and NH failed to see.
122
@Californian 100% agree, she is by far the best candidate we have had in years, but Warren needs to fire her new campaign managers. Her messaging and focus prior to hiring on Hilary's old campaign staff was on point. She needs to go back to basics, focus on policy and how she will fix America.
16
Elizabeth could be elected nationally. She would destroy DJT in a national debate. Bernie will not be able to do either of those things. Warren has a far more distinguished resume than Bernie. Sanders is a spoiler and he’s doing irreparable harm to the Democratic Party. Of course, he’s never claimed to be a Democratic so I have no idea why the party is letting him do this...again.
51
@Jean Sims Would you rather Sanders ran 3rd party like Nader did? Are you sure?
And if Sanders is so terrible then why did Warren copy his platform when she decided to run? Bernie's the only real FDR democrat running, and has experience as a Mayor, Rep, and Senator, which is more than Warren can say.
1
Resist the negative narrative! Elizabeth Warren is our best bet to put US back on our track day one of her presidency. She is proven, look at the work of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, for example, before it was dismantled by the current administration.
She declared her candidacy a year ago, tomorrow, and has not stopped working, listening to ordinary people around this country, creating a long list of well thought out policies to address the growing list of issues that damage our country and our individual wellbeing as Americans. Is it no wonder the powers that be, in Washington, Wall Street and Russia etc. want her to disappear, she works for us. Resist the negative narrative!
81
This is the usual complaint of the candidate that isn't doing as well in the polls as he/she thinks they should. We were subjected to it from Marianne Williamson's fans, and then Yang's, then Kamala Harris boosters, Corey Booker backers, etc. It has nothing to do with the media, it has everything to do with the disappointment of the candidate and his/her supporters.
6
It has everything to do with media. There are far more political pundits assessing even trivial matters and baiting candidates to attack each other than there were a generation ago. They have become actors in our elections while promoting their own careers. This is wrong. We need more hard news reporting on the others trying to influence US elections, from the GOP to Russia. There are many at work we know nothing about just months away from the most consequential election in history.
4
I don't know about anyone else, but my enthusiasm for Senator Warren dissipated with her support of Medicare for All, importantly not because I oppose it but because it would forfeit the election to The Leader. No policy prescription is worth supporting that does not contribute to the defeat of Trump. I think she blew it.
7
She's not getting the media attention because she's not polling well and did badly in NH. There is no specific animus towards her and certainly not because of her gender because Amy Klobuchar (also a female) got lots of press after her very good showing in NH where she beat Warren.
This isn't a popularity contest, this is the most important election, ever, not just in our lifetimes. If she doesn't do well in Nevada she should drop out and throw her support to Bernie Sanders.
6
@lzolatrov
It is the most important since the last and the next election. I’ve heard this for 50 years
@lzolatrov And yet, to compare, Warren didn't get lots of press after her very good showing in Iowa where she beat Amy Klobuchar. And why should she throw her support to Sanders when he won't throw his to anyone else?
3
I don't know how you can cancel college debt(and I and daughters have 20k plus each) if you don't make whole people who already paid loans or did not go to college. I don't know how medicare for all works for the 80% of the country with private plans that are decent (as I had for 40 yrs). I don't know how college can be free without considering the millions employed in non Ivy type schools(Rider, Pace, Sacred Heart for ex) who would be devastated by making college totally tax subsidized(not free). I don't know how a wealth tax that would come out of doctors, lawyers, small business holders, corporate officer, farmers worth (say) $10 million dollars at 2% every year (in addition to income tax). I have never heard it close to explained and I can't take it seriously esp since I have had Obamacare for 2 years (medicare finally this year) and it works great. That is why I don't take her or Bernie seriously although if what they said was remotely true my daughter's and their families lives would be much easier
5
@arthur I believe she's made a significant effort to document the plans and has had them scrutinized. You're incorrect on some of the basic facts. Perhaps you might consider visiting her "Plans" page on her website? It might be helpful. Yeah, very wealthy people and corporations are going to have to pay a little more but I would argue they keep getting away with more and more as the burden falls on the middle and lower income folks.
14
@arthur Warren’s plans are meant to bring structural change to corruption in Washington, fairness to the economic system & build up the shrinking middle class. Details are easy to find (Google the source... Warren website, speeches on YouTube, etc). One correction: the proposed 2% wealth tax only applies to fortunes over $50 million. Look it up.
3
@arthur The wealth tax starts at wealths of $50 million - no one would pay a cent before then.
2
Stay the course, Ms Warren. There’s a bunch of us in California waiting to vote for you on Super Tuesday. You are our best and strongest candidate.
73
She is falling back because her programs are perhaps laudable for the long run but doubtfully implementable "on day one".
She will either lose on that basis or be unable to implement them , especially if the Senate is still Republican.
Please wake up and smell reality!
“It was concerning — do they know something I don’t?” Kristin Ritenhouse, 49, said of New Hampshire voters. “Because my neighbors like me.”
Exactly correct. Voters in New Hampshire know her well, too well in fact. These voters have no problem voting for women; both U.S. Senators are Democratic women. Many Boston Globe readers (including New Hampshire residents) have suffered quite enough of her disingenuous stories, American Indian heritage, fired for being pregnant, and many many more. And, to put it plainly, her personality is grating, like an overzealous grade school teacher.
Naturally, she has her defenders too. But they are fewer in number each time her stories depart further from reality.
5
@Stew R Yes , sexism is a factor and statements like "And, to put it plainly, her personality is grating, like an overzealous grade school teacher" exemplify what women have to battle just to be heard.
14
@Stew R
"her personality is grating, like an overzealous grade school teacher"
As much as it pains me to agree, she speaks too fast and the pitch is too high. I believe in her sincerity, values and intellect but can see how others simply see a pompous harangue. Buttegege has the same problem but even worse. He doesn't sound sincere.
3
@True Believer
I generally agree. Mr. Buttigieg is a master of double-talk. He has a calm reassuring temperament; but, upon analysis, it's one platitude followed by another. He is very intelligent, which causes the empty rhetoric to be even more annoying.
Pompous harangue are very well chosen words for Ms. Warren. And, in New Hampshire and Massachusetts she is known as someone who exaggerates on a good day, and often is less than truthful about her life and past events, to put it gently.
I've known and know many accomplished women; none of them are as abrasive as Ms. Warren. To the contrary, I've learned social graces from them, and respect them deeply. A senior executive woman where I work is as tough-minded as most successful men, yet handles herself with aplomb and grace.
Warren will drop out after a few more bad losses and drying up of the donor pool and for good reasons: It came out she was a Republican until age 47, represented the large corporations she now pretends to despise, misrepresented her heritage and foolishly said " I'm with Bernie" instead of coming up with her own health care plan. Goodbye and good riddance.
4
Let's be cleah.
In Des Moines and right after, Bernie Sanders, his campaign and his supporters showed their true colors. The candidate showed that at heart he is an authoritarian and a gas lighter: he denied Warren could even have her own memory of an event. In the entire history of the world this 78 year old man is the only person with an infallible memory. He is perfect! Where else do we hear such grandiosity?
When he first heard of what she recalled, did he call her to try to discover what she remembered, showing respect for another person's opinion? No. What sort of democratic leader is that? Where else do we hear of such confidence in his having the "best" brain in any contingency?
The day after this public knifing, his campaign boasted of all of the new donors that had contributed and his followers were all over social media attacking Warren and anybody who supported her.
Now they are demanding we unite behind him
After this? That would be a big no.
25
@Christine But it was perfectly okay for Warren to stab Sanders in the back by proclaiming he did not think a woman could win against Trump. Something that took place in a private conversation when she reached out for his advice, which she then spun way out of context to vilify him - her old friend. Friends do not do that to each other. I was a huge fan of hers, but then was not after that incident. I thought it showed poor character. Hence all the snake emojis.
5
@Christine
Hold on. You’re trying to make Warren and her campaign the victims re the coordinated hit piece with CNN the day before the debate? Wow. It really highlights how we can live in two different realities depending on preference. Most folks I know were equally disgusted by what happened by the “public knifing”, only they viewed Sanders as the one with the knife in his back. It looked to many of us like a dirty political trick, and reeked of the same shenanigans pulled by the Clinton campaign last election. I think that horrible miscalculation by Warren (with CNN co-conspiring), really sunk her campaign.
For the record, I’m not for with Bernie or Warren, though I will vote for whoever prevails in the D primary.
4
@Christine The only "knifing" that took place was Liz stabbing Bernie in the back. She started tanking when she pulled the hit with CNN because people found Bernie's version more credible than hers. Her refusal to shake his hand after the debate was the icing on the cake. ALL unforced errors by Warren.
1
Elizabeth Warren is exactly right when she says these powerful corporations "have our democracy by the throat." No matter what your issue is, we have to start by addressing the corruption and the big money in politics that are making it impossible to get anything done.
I believe she would do that with intelligent and fair reforms that would make the system work better for 99% of the country.
52
Warren made a mistake attacking Bernie regarding a women for President. She lied and people lost faith in her.
12
@Melinda Why do you think it is that when a woman points out sexism, she is more attacked than the sexism itself? I have had many people, both men and women say that they don't think the country is ready to elect a woman as president. Which is why I believe Elizabeth Warren. Bernie may not want it to be true, he may not believe it to be true, but he may have been positing it as so many have. For her to be disqualified for calling it out is sexism personified. For the record, Warren is my top choice, but I will vote blue no matter who, Sanders included.
13
@Melinda
What is your evidence for her lying? They had a private conversation, and at best, each remembered something different. Unless you think Bernie is the Pope -- and maybe you do -- he is not infallible, and the odds he "lied" are that same as the odds she did. Or maybe neither of them lied. Hasn't that ever occurred to you? Happened to you??
And you might want to consider the entire context of the media-amplified dispute. I'm sure it won't change your mind, but that's the problem with fervent Bernie supporters. They're no different from fervent Trump supporters, at least when it comes to the importance of facts and context.
It's pathetic that a woman jumps to this conclusion about another woman without any basis in fact.
11
@Melinda
How do you know she lied? By claiming to know that she lied, you are showing that you think you're omniscient, just as many of his other bros think they are.
Elizabeth and Bernie have their own recollections of the event. See Christine's comment above. He and his bros apparently thought that she wasn't entitled to her own or wasn't capable of having one.
And yes, women can be "Bernie Bros" too.
6
I first became aware of Elizabeth Warren when she testified before Congress on bankruptcy legislation. She was articulate, strong, and clear in her support of people who were suffering due to circumstances they could not control (health care bills, divorce, job loss). Her interrogator, Sen. Biden, was not sympathetic. As a single mother who was drowning in debt from a divorce and job loss, I knew she got it, and she still gets it.
America, wake up! We need someone who will represent our values and win.
The media is now in horse race mode and setting the tone. If you want someone who truly cares about you and has the ability to make it happen, vote for Warren.
66
It would be cool if the media would equally cover all the candidates instead of picking their own favorite, then pushing that narrative as if they are the sages who know the American people.
Allow us to choose. Give us information. Fact check for us. We can decide who our candidate should be without you navigating that decision for us.
If we were given balanced reporting in 2016, that oaf would not be in office.
29
Warren hasn’t been erased. Her campaign has faded. When her poll numbers were high, she had lots of coverage. Her numbers have been slumping while others have been rising. It’s not possible or advisable to give every candidate the exact same amount of coverage. That does nothing for the general public. The reality is the Warren has become a second tier candidate in this primary season. The media’s job is to be relevant, not necessarily fair.
4
@John and the media's job is to report the news, not make it.
2
A month or two ago NPR reported on studies that showed that a significant number of Democratic voters were motivated as strongly by the gender of the candidate as they were by the candidate's policies. In other words, though these voters' preferred policies indicated a strong preference for Warren, they were saying they planned to vote for either Sanders or Biden. The number of such voters was larger than the polling margins between Warren and the leaders. I believe Democratic voters must do what they can to consciously question their own assumptions. We want the best possible candidate and president, not merely the best one who is also a male.
61
@Robert, I think there's concern that *other people won't vote for a female candidate.
2
@Robert
Woman here, Robert. And I'm so with you on voting in the best possible candidate. Merit is where it's at.
And,
Let's stop with the pretense about gender being a ball and chain. It's not the 1950's anymore. Identarian politics have, IMHO, gotten stale, and worse. More women are getting graduate degrees and MDs, too.
MLK said we should judge another by the content of their character, and not the color of their skin. (I infer gender here, too.)
That would be considered a racist comment today by many of the Alt Left, sadly.
It's not gender, IMHO. Warren is hard to embrace personally, as is the my-way-or-the-highway progressive left.
Her 9yo trans advisor commentary didn't help; neither have her American Indian heritage-as-minority status claims nor her pretending that Sanders (who personally doesn't interest me) is misogynist by rumor. She's got some of her own baggage to contend with here.
She's worked hard and it looks as though she may be on her way out. Let's not pretend that's due to gender.
1
@boycats
Oh and as for the details: The Native American thing isn't real. It's just a Trump Republican lie that the Sanders folks, who can never resist a shiny new conspiracy theory, have picked up. The whack-a-misogyny that has plagued the Sanders campaigns is anything but a rumor.
9
I supported Liz for her bid for the Senate. I will not be voting for her for the primary.
Her skill sets are best suited as a legislator. Regardless how her campaign tries to "reframe," her temperament and rhetoric simply do not support the notion that she could possibly be a uniter.
People need to give voters some credit - a campaign can only go so far with good organization and spinning messages.
For a lot of us, Liz is just not a good presidential candidate, and it has nothing to do with her gender.
23
@Sue, although I support his policies I'd say Bernie is even less of a uniter by way of temperament and rhetoric. So not sure why you're giving voters credit.
15
@Sue, please list your reasons why Elizabeth is better suited to being a Senator than President.
8
@Leonard
Bernie doesn't call himself a uniter, Liz tries to.
I don't think "unity" is a top priority for those who support Bernie. I am not here to debate whether voters should care about unity.
My point is that the message has to be authentic, and the campaign cannot "reframe" their way to something the candidate is not.
3
Our country is in a very strange moment. How is it that the Democratic Party, faced with the danger of Trump and McConnell, manages to marginalize Warren, Harris, Castro and Booker in favor of:
1) a super-rich guy who buys the silence of concerned interest groups with massive donations and is impatient in explaining past poor decisions, 2) an old rabble-rousing socialist who has not shown an ability to compromise and whose followers are becoming cult-like akin to Trump's on the right, 3) an elderly man of accomplishment whose time has clearly past and 4) a smart young man whose lack of firm principles and inexperience is masked by use platitudes and an appealing smile?
Amy Klobuchar, temperamental as she is, and a calm but persistent and tenacious Elizabeth Warren provide the best hopes for not only winning, but governing. Let's hope they still have an influence on and a chance of winning during the convention.
158
@Scott Emery
Please read the report/commentary by James T. Kloppenberg (Pete's former teacher at Harvard, https://www.commonwealmagazine.org/reading-buttigieg ) on Pete's character:
"At a time when so many equally capable recent Harvard graduates are off feathering their own nests, Peter is doing the thankless work of political organizing, not because he expects a reward but because he believes it is important. Many would describe his choice as quixotic, but I respect it. Peter unquestionably has the capacity to excel at Oxford and afterwards. He thinks clearly and writes beautifully. Beyond his obvious talent, he has a backbone. It is his strength of character, the depth of his democratic convictions, that will make him a forceful presence in American public life."
"That was the question that engaged Buttigieg more than any other. How could Americans unite politically when American culture was becoming increasingly polarized? "
Amy and Liz are great senators. They don't have executive experience, specifically, the experience of running government (not just a CEO - managing a company is vastly different from managing government).
Pete has extensive executive/governing experience, and that shows in his proposals. Both Liz and Bernie in recent days have come to Pete's side about the path to M4A. Amy offers experience, not vision. Her proposed policies overlook the root causes that got us Trump.
7
@Scott Emery If the "Socialist" is so out of the question, then why did Warren basically copy his entire platform? She's only running because Bernie opened the door.
3
@Scott Emery I don't think your description of Sanders supporters is accurate and frankly it is ugly to attack your fellow Democratic primary voters who believe in him. Not only is it ugly, those attacks don't work as demonstrated by Hillary's "deplorables" comment and Mitt Romney's writing off half the country before her.
I'm a Sanders supporter and I am not "cult-like." I know lots of other Sanders supporters and they are not "cult like" either. Perhaps those people do exist but it's just as likely you're being taken in by misinformation and internet trolls and it's a certainty that the generalization is overly broad in any event.
3
Warren is brilliant and would make a good president but her campaign has made some serious mistakes that have cost her big time.
Her campaign's biggest mistake was going full woke. They lost 90% of voters with that decision.
27
@Dale Broader America definitely engages in identity politics.
1
Warren is terrific, but she's not being erased. She's being treated like any fourth- or fifth-place candidate would be treated.
If she hadn't come off as evasive about Medicare for All (saying that yes, taxes might go up but your overall costs would go down), she might be doing better.
24
@Jeff
I agree on health care- but Bernie advocates the same and outlandish policies over all - yet his cult is stronger than ever.
Voters do respond to male demagoguery I guess.
4
She's still going to get my primary vote here in Ohio. I think primary voters worry far too much about casting their vote on "electability", "sure-fire winners", and "beating Trump".
Look, your vote is there to reflect what YOU want. This may sound counter-intuitive, but don't think too hard like a political analyst or pundit. Just vote for the candidate that matches your needs and ask everybody else to do the same. If your candidate appeals to the needs of the most voters, they win out in the primary.
The electability problem simply resolves itself.
95
@Jordan Farr, I agree except that the electability problem doesn't resolve itself because of independent voters that don't vote in primaries.
1
@Leonard Many states allow "independent" or unaffiliated voters to vote in primaries. In fact, only 12 states have closed primaries. In addition, there are states that have registration available on the date or close to the date of a primary so people can change their registration for the primary and vote. This is particularly important since in many, if not most states, the number of registered "unaffiliated" voters is the largest block, not Democrats or Republicans.
Karl Rove developed the campaign strategy of attacking an opponents strength....remember "Swiftboating" and the ridicule of Kerry's military record? In this case Warren is portrayed as an elitist Harvard professor, who by definition is out of touch with the day-to-day struggle of wage earning. The purpose of this is to erase her story. I believe Warren's greatest strength is her story. She and her family lived economic hardship in the heartland. Warren drew on support systems of both family and government to achieve economic security and success. Better yet, she went on to understand, address and CHANGE fundamental systems affecting the financial security of others coming from backgrounds like hers. This is profoundly provocative and threatening to the folks who now run the country through the legalized bribery system we call campaign contributions. So, with enabling allies in the media, Warren's opponents (D, R, and generic 1 percent) will continue to flatten her into a cartoon while we Warren supporters will help people see this determined public servant, the authenticity of her story, and the possibility she offers for a way to put cops on the beat in the world of banking and finance.
117
Unfortunately Bernie and Elizabeth are in the same lane--take their totals and add them up and you have the overwhelming front runner. Not to rehash the "woman can't win argument", but I do think Bernie believes gender is a negative factor and didn't want to join forces and support Elizabeth for that reason. There really aren't enough resources to put forward two, non fat cat, non corporate Dems this cycle. I think Elizabeth is a much stronger candidate for the general and has a much higher ceiling in the primary, but Bernie will soldier on with his 25% that keeps on top early and Elizabeth, sadly, will fade. Once again, the left fails to unite with a non ego based rational strategy and the leftie boys show they can't be counted on to sacrifice for the common good.
14
@jsf Bernie tried to get Warren to run in 2016, and she refused. So why should he back out now, when he's the one who opened the door for a progressive campaign in the first place, and she demonstrated that she won't fight the tough fights? Also Bernie is more electable than Warren according to the polls, and is very popular with independents.
@ First time NYT Commenter
You certainly are entitled to your feelings. As a fellow woman of color, I vehemently disagree with you. Senator Warren has in no way, form, or fashion attempted to coopt the experiences of indigenous women. Like most Americans, Elizabeth learned about her presumed Native American heritage through her family's oral history - passed down intergenerationally. I have a similar experience. My great grandmother was said to be "100%" Choctaw American - do I have any proof other than my grandmother having a traditionally Native American name, no I do not. Given the Senator's background as a Professor and an academic, it is not surprising that - like most people who are curious about their lineage - she took a genetic test. While I certainly respect Native American customs and beliefs, there also needs to be respect for different epistemologies - including empirical science.
Senator Warren is not only brilliant, a great leader and teeming with integrity, but she also has a depth of understanding, compassion, and sincerity about addressing the intersection of racial and economic injustices - reminiscent of Bobby Kennedy. She is hands down the most genuine, knowledgeable, and committed advocate for social equality and broader educational and economic opportunities for every American in this presidential race.
She is The antidote to Trump/Trumpism.
236
@Edwina Very well said! Thank you.
15
@Edwina
Thanks for writing this. I was always told that my grandmother (also from OK) was part Indian. Oral history matters, family history matters. And the fact is that, with Warren, the oral history made it difficult for her parents to marry. That's the reality of her life. It's true.
BTW, my sister recently had a genomic analysis; lo and behold! where'd that bit of Native American DNA come from?
3
I'm only donating to two candidates--Warren and Sanders. I really hope she can hang in there because I think as others fall off, their donations and followers will flock to the progressive, experienced, pragmatic and tenacious Elizabeth Warren
37
A great Senator; however, she lost me when she came out with Medicare for All. Bernie as the Nominee will be a disaster and will divide the country just as much as Trump.
8
@Philip W, nobody will pass M4A. The best that we'll get is an improvement over the current system rather than nothing at all, which is what Republicans are trying to give us.
1
She's being erased? No, the word for what she's doing is "losing".
22
@mojo nixon jr. Not any more than other candidates that are finishing behind her and getting more coverage
9
@mojo nixon jr.
The actual voting is just beginning. Let's vote all around the country before we announce a winner.
If we are interested in a potential president's skills and not how much money they can raise or if they are a man, then Elizabeth is not finished. She has so much to offer!
39
Complaining about the process doesn’t work. You only get the media to focus on your grievance, which does nothing to attract new voters. Warren must engineer some big moment before Super Tuesday. I have no idea what that may be.
2
ehh- she challenged Bernie and he beat her. She has not been able to "...walk-it-back..." to the middle. Her "...Bridge Over Troubled Waters ..." is not catching on with either the Left or the Middle.
She has to win somewhere. soon.
I hate to get into conspiracy theories because to me that is the province of a certain other Democratic candidate but it is hard to explain the media’s near-silence on her election showing so far in favor of candidates who did much worse, and the weird shortage of speaking time for her in the debates.
She is still the perfect candidate: she has the popular ideas of Sanders without the unhelpful talk about socialism and revolution, she has an inspiring personal story and winning style without Buttigieg’s (I’m sorry) weird name. And she’s not a recently-Republican megalomaniac like Bloomberg—do I have to spell out why he would be a bad candidate? We’d be fools to write off her candidacy.
43
Senator Warren should persist in her policy- based campaign. She should not give in to the temptation for doing mainstream dumb-down political rhetoric. The only thing i would change is come down harder on the other candidates, from policy side of things. Ask them the hard, albeit boring questions. Where is Trump's health care plan? Why have GOP senators not taken up congressional approved legislation? If the President and his cronies care so much about "Congress getting back to its business", how come they have reneged on their basic responsibilities? Why does Trump administration and the GOP leadership have almost no women amongst their ranks? No black people amongst their ranks? Mayor Pete has not released his numbers for his healthcare plan. Where is it? How can he promise not to be beholden to special interest as a President, if his path to white house is paved by special interest money? And above all, ask senator Sanders what his plan B is when his plans are overwhelmingly rejected in Washington?
None of these questions might win her the nomination. It may even inspire some unwelcome scrutiny on herself. But it will command her and get campaign the respect it deserves.
21
Didn’t help her that the Saturday Night Live actress who portrayed her, Kate McKinnon, also portrayed Hillary Clinton. Warren being Hillary lite or Road Show Hillary is particularly damaging as Hillary and Bill’s reputation has slid over the past few years.
Warren seems to me head and shoulders the best candidate--she combines the best features of the rest of the field. Progressive but pragmatic, incisive but warm, experienced and future oriented. She would be ready to govern on day one, and she strikes me as best positioned to make mincemeat of the GOP. I'm all in for E Warren!
250
It's quite likely that this is the natural state of enthusiasm and interest around her campaign/candidacy and that the aberration was the bump she received last summer and early fall as a result of very favorable media coverage during that period.
Remember that there was very little interest in her campaign early on. She was banking on her reputation as a policy wond but her poll numbers were low and there just wasn't a lot of excitement. Then she chose to tack to the left and at the same time release a slew of plans. These moves generated a lot of attention and a tremendous amount of favorable press. She rolled out plan after plan and the media ran with it. Press coverage was almost fawning: She was the wonk with all the answers. If the press failed Warren, it was in treating her too favorably through the Summer of 2019. Most of her plans were impossible pipe dreams and could have used more pressure testing. Instead, they were simply parroted by the press until, on the debate stage, she was called out on the impossibilities in her health care proposal. The health care plan was exposed (and many of her other plans would have been had anyone bothered to test them). Her campaign has been faltering ever since.
I would proposed that had the press been more critical of Warren 2019, she would have either been exposed earlier or refined her campaign in ways that would have strengthened it. But as it stands, more attention hurts her campaign.
11
I phone banked for Warren last weekend and it was a positive and eye-opening experience. I called voters in Texas and many many said they were voting for Warren. The rest were undecided and what became clear is that the main criteria for their Dem primary vote was picking the candidate who could beat Trump. Policy seemed less important than a collective panic that Trump will be re-elected and that is the sole criteria for their vote. I think Warren could come out swinging against Trump even more as she strives to be a unifier - not an easy task.
160
There is a problem with news coverage of Elizabeth Warren, and it often sounds something like this: “Straining themselves to avoid criticizing the candidate or campaign, Ms. Warren’s most loyal admirers are trying to reframe the New Hampshire outcome in the most flattering light possible.” My sense is that no one who has a good sense of Elizabeth Warren is straining to support her, but her media coverage is indeed straining credulity. If anyone is straining, it is likely the big money interests that she would very skillfully rein in were she to become president who are straining against her. Unfortunately it doesn’t take much more than uttering the words “labor union” to ensure their enmity.
191
I'm someone who volunteered for Warren in the past and was a constituent of hers for years. Over time, I have grown to lose faith in her. When I think of media erasure of Warren, I actually think first of how the media has given her a pass on the fact that she coopted struggles of indigenous people for her own career gain. I used to think this was just a republican smear, until she doubled down on it with her DNA test. Since then, I can't help but ignore that she has been missing with it counts. She allowed Wall Street friendly Hillary a free path in MA in 2016, she didn't show up to standing Rock, her own supposed community, when it counted, she no longer says the phrase Medicare for All, she attacks Bernie as a sexist while giving a pass to gropers like Joe Biden, etc.
She has every right to run, but I'm grateful that progressives seem to be making the right choice about her record. As a person of color, I regret having stumped for this elite, out of touch white politician who took advantage of the struggles of women of color for years.
21
@First time NYT commenter
"I used to think this was just a republican smear, until she doubled down on it with her DNA test."
A politician using science? Lock her up!
...Andrew
1
@First time NYT commenter
Her supposed expertise on bankruptcy has been challenged by other academics for improper/biased analysis in her seminal paper. She has always refused to respond to these criticisms. Lawyers are usually not the best authorities on economics.
1
It’s very early in the primary process. There’s a lot of gaming going on with the amount of money spent, and microtargeting if delegates. Voters have to put mass and social media in its proper place, and do a little thinking and soul searching.
- Who can help create a fairer America?
- Who will stop Americans from being ripped off?
- Who can lead and model a restoration of America’s values?
- Who’s smart and detailed enough to deal with a disruptive global economy? Climate change? Digital world?
- Who has led big change for Americans already, against the odds?
- Who do you want your children and grandchildren to look up to and admire as President?
I’ve analyzed this over and over again. It’s not even remotely close. Choose the candidate you care about, not the horse you think will win. All this handwringing about electability is wasted breathe. No one knows nothing at this time.
Vote your head and heart. Make it count.
81
Manufactured consent.
If all the people in Iowa who liked Elizabeth Warren but did not believe in her because of the media narrative that she wasn’t electable had in fact voted what their hearts were telling them, Warren would be leading this race right now.
What do the pundits know? Wasn’t Joe Biden the electable candidate? How electable is he looking right now?
Fear has driven the electorate to do irrational things. Trying to figure out who the mythical midwestern voter would vote for. You can be sure that Indiana will still vote for Trump over Buttigieg. So, where’s the electability argument for Pete?
Warren appeals to all the different factions within the Democrat Party and would be the best candidate.
I would happily vote for Sanders, but he can’t win.
Sanders and his team need to be honest with America. A socialist cannot win the election where naturalization tests still have a question on the economic system of America being Capitalism.
A socialist cannot win when the economy is looking as strong as it is (while not working for broad swaths of the population).
I know Bernie corrects people that he’s a Democratic Socialist. You think most people understand the difference? (When Bernie is running for the Democrat nomination, add the words...)
Democrats cannot win an election which is a referendum on socialism. There will be mayhem down ballot.
We can’t nominate Bloomberg for all he stands for (plutocracy).
Warren is the only candidate who works.
107
Since the media coverage is pretty awful (witness Bloomberg's rise and the frenzy to dig up every comment he made since he was about 7), she may want to thank her stars. Being a front-runner, to the media, means "tarnish." Like Hillary's emails, although Trump and his many Russia connections went uncovered. As for Warren's stall, she can only thank herself and her insistence on Medicare for All. Unless she recognizes that, and does a U-turn, I don't think her chances will improve. I'd love to see her make that U-turn, though. I think she'd be a superb president. But she'll have to say -- I hear you. You don't want Medicare forced on you. I'm not sure she's capable of that.
6
@Andy And Bernie's stall? Oh wait he doesn't have one. Yet he still says Medicare for All. So yeah it's not that. And Medicare for All, like Sanders, isn't implemented on day one. Both Warren and Sanders in the first year will just increase medicare for 50 years old and above, and children will be covered. Then it's incremental. See the point is both Warren and Sanders believe that after Americans actually see Medicare working for children and 50 and above they will want it for themselves. And if not, then I'm pretty sure new ideas will happen. After all, both Warren and Sanders actually listen to people, unlike some we know that are only set on vengeance.
21
@Charles Bernie is a mystery to me. He and Warren match on 90% of issues, it’s true. IMHO she’s more articulate and appealing, healthier, not to mention an actual Democrat. I think Bernie is fueled by his giveaway — wiping out student loans. Bernie is naive and would kill the economy— his sources of funds wouldn’t just sit there and be taxed. We’ll see if he’s on top after Super Tuesday.
9
@Andy You do realize Elizabeth Warren was a Republican until the late 90s?
She is the only candidate willing to get to the core of what is happening to this democracy. Democracy is an extremely fragile form of government but I don’t think the citizens are willing to do what is necessary for the reform that is required. And in that case this system of ours will fail and we will mourn and it will be too late. And the media will end up where the dictator wants it to be and it will be sorry. But it will be too late.
63
I like Elizabeth Warren and her ideas but she’s GOT to stop the canned commercial! On the debate stage, with precious free exposure on news shows, she answers the question briefly then goes into the word-for-word commercial. I see the news hosts tuning out just as I do. Amy Klobuchar glowed after New Hampshire and gave a great speech mentioning where to send money quickly at the end. PLEASE, Elizabeth, govern yourself accordingly.
17
Warren is not my candidate, but I agree she's been ignored, particularly since Klobuchar became the press darling. I guess there's room for only one woman in the race, and predictably, the older one loses out.
43
Go Elizabeth Go!
Your policies so full of substance and a plan are so needed by this country.
Two too many lightweights consuming Outsize share of
media.
Just like 2016 - hype, polls, trump policy and substance.
96
I love her, and will continue volunteering for her campaign. She’s my favorite candidate.
I’m a little tired of all the chatter encouraging her to drop out and being told it’s time to vote for someone else.
Iowa and New Hampshire are two very small states with populations whose demographics are different than mine. I’d like to see this process to play itself out some more before for switching over to a different candidate.
184
I like Senator Warren.
I think her programs are the future of America.
However, she and Bernie are working the same side of
the street and fellow Democrats are saying her programs
will never work.
Well if you are happy with the 1 % running and ruining this country and being just one medical emergency away from
bankruptcy keep voting for the Candidate approved by the 1 %.
I went to the Emergency Room recently.
I waited 15 minutes, there was no one else waiting,
then I was taken to one of those little rooms.
Only one other person was in emergency and her oxygen tank had failed so they were waiting for the store that sold her
the device to open so she could get a new one.
A nurse took my temperature, pulse and blood pressure.
Asked me what my symptoms were.
Then I sat in the little room and waited for 75 minutes to
be seen by the doctor.
He was a very nice man and after five minutes he told me
that he would write a prescription and I could go home.
Twenty five minutes later the original nurse returned and
I had my prescription.
At the pharmacy, after they filled the prescription, cost $ 150,
I was told a generic brand was available.
A week later I got my bill $ 1,250.
No blood taken, no invasive procedures...
Sadly the Media has decided that Warren is no longer viable
and soon they will turn on Bernie and we will probably end up
with Bloomberg for President and either Mayor Pete or
Amy K for VP.
Keep up the good fight, Elizabeth all the way to the Convention.
273
@John Brown ~
Not to be too cynical, but Idaho has not voted for a Democratic candidate for President in at least 42 years.
Indeed, I have supported Sen. Warren for a long time, but fear she is getting the be the worst hit by Bloomberg.
5
@jhanzel: So a billionaire is trying to buy an election again by stealing other candidates ideas and you're discouraged by that? Get behind her and help support her even more. Bloomberg is following IQ45's playbook, don't fall for it.
13
@John Brown I consider myself a progressive. However, after my experience in a Canadian emergency room which has given me lasting back problems after being instructed not to eat or drink anything and waiting like this for 13 hours, becoming very dehydrated (obviously) and sleeping in a contorted position on an uncomfortable chair in an overcrowded space, only to find that the triage nurse had completely ignored my urgent referral but also that the physician who referred me to the emergency room had grossly misread a non-urgent problem as an urgent one, I'm rethinking my position on healthcare. I woke up the next morning with pain in my thoracic spine for which I got physiotherapy partially covered by my Canadian insurance for six weeks. A year later it is still causing me problems. (My other experiences with the public healthcare system in Canada were consistent with this though not quite as bad.) But hey, at least the trip to the ER was free!
2
Warren 2020! She has my vote. Persist!
I live her stance on corruption. It’s exactly what the American people need, regardless of Party.
211
@Jackson: You clearly have the Internet since you're posting on this site, so go to her website and read about her policy plans. She is NOT the Establishment by any stretch but knows how to work within it, which is crucial for governing.
17
@Jackson Then why is the DNC trying to place Bloomberg for the next coronation, just like Clinton. If she was establishment, she would be coronated. Sorry. Don't see it.
10
Elizabeth Warren is my senator and she has my vote. Go get ‘em, Elizabeth. You are the smartest person in the race and I am honored to vote for you.
331
@Caryn
Probably the "smartest", yes. She's a Harvard professor, afterall. It's when she tries to dumb herself down to those that need representation is where things ring untrue. The working class in your state and the local papers seem to have figured this out.
3
@Caryn Buttigieg is the smartest person in the race.
Warran has shown poor judgment many times and there is something ungenuine about her. Calling out Bernie onstage is the latest example. Always talking about Oklahoma and her brothers is another. And, it is simply poor judgment that you can pull the plug on corporate healthcare.
I decided to volunteers for Warren and did 2 canvass last weekend. I can tell you her message, life story, skills and policies resonate very well. People almost always told me they are considering her. She has to persist because she's bringing a lot to this race, whether she wins or not!
267