WaPo: Why You Shouldn’t Underestimate Elizabeth Warren (More Favorable Than Obama, Rubio, Biden)

[ChangeUp106]

Just saw this pop up on Twitter from Alex Wagner.

"But, a new Quinnipiac poll proves why Warren would be formidable in 2016 if she decided to run. Using a feeling thermometer — 0 meaning you feel totally cold about a politician, 100 meaning you feel warmly (aka) strong favorably toward a pol — Quinnipiac tested the majority of major national figures.

Warren finished third — behind only New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (53.1 degrees) and Hillary Clinton (52.1 degrees). She finished ahead of, among others, President Obama, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz and Vice President Joe Biden."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/08/06/why-you-shouldnt-underestimate-elizabeth-warren/

I know it's not likely, but every day I see more and more about this. At the very least it raises her profile to be Senate leader someday.

[Scuba]

1. Count me in.

[Jackpine Radical]

7. Don't look now, but

I think somebody just stole your Warren sticker.

[JRLeft]

44. If she runs she has my support.

[krawhitham]

74. +1

[Hydra]

2. Senator Warren would certainly do a good job, but that's why they won't let her near it

I'm sure they're upset enough having her in the Senate, and not having her Junior status slowing her down.

[okieinpain]

14. lol, she bet not get in hillary's way, her supporters would go nuts son ..

NUTS!!

[demwing]

67. That's funny, I wanted to correct you

Warren's now the Senior Senator from MA.

Then my brain caught up.

[Neoma]

110. What are they going to do? Point out she's obviously white again?

[Le Taz Hot]

3. K & R for Elizabeth Warren.

[uponit7771]

4. If President Warren does not, on day 1, pardon Snowden and make him head of NSA and CIA

...release every person who has ever smoked weed ever, put the WHOLE Bush admin in Gitmo, put EVERY ceo in jail except for COSTCOs ceo, implement universal health care with medical records kept by the Martians (cause we can't trust our government), Make the minimum wage 12.50 an hour and declare SYG unconsititutional ...

Then...

The professional left, bashers, fudr and wingers


Will call her a sell out....................................too


I wouldn't want that job for nothin!!!

[Arkana]

5. This. A THOUSAND times this.

I don't want Warren to be President because there are elements on the left that would declare her a sellout instantly. The things she would have to do and say to get nominated, let alone elected, are things I don't want her to have to say.

[Volaris]

34. I think she would rather lose than NOT tell the Truth as she understands it.

Also, -I- would rather her run, and lose for being honest, than any other scenerio.

What's that quote from West Wing? "It's not the fights that we lose that bother me, it's the ones we don't bother to suit up for."?

Well, if Mrs. Warren wants to run, I'll get dressed for that, but honestly, I thing she might have more power and influence if she stays in the Senate, all the President seems to be able to do the last 12 years or so is kill "terrorists", otherwise, it's mostly the CONGRESS that's worthless and needs changing...

just my 2 cents...

[NorthCarolina]

95. "I don't want Warren to be President because there are elements on the left that would declare her a

sellout instantly"

Really?

That's your reason for not wanting her to be President?

Really?

[Arkana]

105. That and the fact that I'm sick of special elections.

[ChangeUp106]

6. That actually made me laugh

And I'm not in the Obama fan club anymore

[nevergiveup]

8. Thanks for the reality check.

You nailed it!

[Metric System]

10. BINGO

[blackspade]

13. What a collection of tripe.

[uponit7771]

47. tripe = Obama bailed out the banks, no really this was posted yesterday.. FUDr has overran DU with..

...tripe

[blackspade]

56. Nonsense post.

[Purveyor]

81. Oh they DLC'ers are out in full force as of late. These Warren post's must be ringing bells at

headquarters.

BTW? Anyone heard from Hillary lately?

Many world stage issues that I would think she would be checking in on by now or does she
think she just has 'this one'(nomination) in the bag already?

Some might ask "Hillary Who"?....

[daleanime]

15. Give me 8 years of President Warren....

and then we'll compare.

[Fearless]

25. +1

[silvershadow]

33. +1

[uponit7771]

46. Nope, never EVER EVER given the left another chance...they CONSTANTLY prove as a group that they

....only pay half ass'd attention and are easily distracted.

There's even a trap post on it!!!

[daleanime]

50. So your into traps?

Yaoi or yuri?

[uponit7771]

51. No, just think trap post are funny because of the science behind them. People sholdn't be so sloppy.

...and easily distracted and half ass pay attention and take half the information to come up with a conclusion.

That's how FUDr had to work Carter, Clinton and now Obama

We'll learn, I know this has EVERYTHING to do with 2014 and thank GOD that DU is nothing like the rest of the left

[daleanime]

53. Yes, people "sholdn't be so sloppy"....

and maybe a little more forgiving.




And no otaku points for you.

[uponit7771]

57. ...of Obama??!!? Yes, I agree, more forgiving of him...I believe he's trying his best to do good

[daleanime]

58. Very narrow definition there....

so sad that I don't fix in. Nice of you to converse with us non-persons.

[dreamnightwind]

60. Lol

I don't fix in either. Is this poster you're responding to serious, or sarcastic? If serious, would be an excellent candidate for my ignore list. And what's a FUDr? Any idea?

[daleanime]

61. Check with them about how serious they are...

I try to deal with every one the same.

FUD? I hope its fair use doctrine, but fear, uncertainty, and doubt is possible.

Hope its not 'fouled' up disinformation (polite version).

[Fantastic Anarchist]

72. The poster is either a really bad parody or ...

... or, well, let's just hope it's really bad parody.

[woo me with science]

107. "never EVER EVER given the left another chance"

It would be hard to top as parody; that's true.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

71. Nicely done!

[woo me with science]

106. Is this the pivot?

Is this the moment where you guys pivot from saying that you support Warren's views but think she is unelectable, to outright screaming against her?

I think you are a little bit early on this and should check your notes. You are supposed to pretend to be on the side of the 99 percent for just a little while longer before you come out full-throated against her.

[NorthCarolina]

99. The Corporate House of Cards would fall quickly under a Warren Preidency.

That cannot be allowed, so she WILL be diminished. You can see on these boards that they are already hitting her with the "she's too far left to be elected" line, BUT I can assure you they are scouring the internet for tidbits that can be crafted into something more sinister. I can see the Google searches now "Warren agrees with Ron Paul"...anything there we can use? No? Well lets try "Warren believes in UFO's" Anything there? No? Damn, well lets try......

I actually came into this thread just to see what our pro-corporate faction was crafting on the Warren attack front. Even though it is early, I knew because of her popularity that they would be busy...AND of course I wasn't disappointed. Right on que....and I occasionally enjoy reading their contortioned logic, and watching to see how the line of anti-Warren rhetoric develops. Make sure to catch it all now while it is still in it's infancy, and watch it grow!

[daleanime]

102. ........

She's human, so I'm sure they will find something they think is 'usable'.

[LordGlenconner]

18. Spot on.

All it would take is getting crossways with their ideological purity just once, which will happen by the way. One doesn't get elected president without being flexible on a previous position or two.

[Hydra]

19. I've heard there's coffee cake left in the breakroom

You'd better hurry if you want to get some.

[Fearless]

26. If she even attempted any one of those things

She would be leading the pack.

[uponit7771]

48. Yeap, Obama has done NOTHING to lead the pack on ANYTHING...so yeah, he better get to

...burning his underwear and walking aon water

[Fearless]

83. Being anti corporate would be a start

[Coyotl]

28. I thought the topic was Senator Warren, not your personal issue of choice

which seems to be bashing others?

Oh, and people who run for President don't need hard skin for what extremist think about them because they don't even think about that stuff, no time. Some people want the job of President because someone has to do it and it is a job best not left to asshats like Bush.

[uponit7771]

49. The reply was about Warren, people are inflexible and unreasonable why in the world would she put

...up with the left who are full of overt whiners?!

[Tarheel_Dem]

84. Which is why Warren, like Sanders, will never run for POTUS. They both....

know they could never actually get elected, and even if they did, they'd eventually have to "Compromise" to get anything done, and they'd meet the same fate as WJC & BHO.



The internet left has fallen victim to its own insular rhethoric, and no matter what anyone says, it'll somehow be Obama's/PTB's fault that Elizabeth fell on her face.

[eridani]

87. Thinking that the New Deal was a great idea = whining n/t

[Egalitarian Thug]

70. I wrote similar below, then saw your reply. There are about half a dozen of these that are

absolutely freaking out over their growing irrelevance here and are in pure attack mode now.

As usual, the lefty's are right and the authoritarians are wrong, always wrong, about everything.

[daleanime]

111. I'll bite....

what do you think the 'authoritarians' are right about?

[Egalitarian Thug]

112. Absolutely nothing at all, ever. n/t

[daleanime]

119. I hear that....

[Enrique]

37. wrong

i'd be ok with Snowden at NSA and Glenn Greenwald at CIA.

[Maedhros]

42. But, to his credit, Glenn would never take that job [n/t]

[Fantastic Anarchist]

73. !

[HughBeaumont]

43. Oh, it's already starting . . .

. . . and I'm linking this as a progressive and a huge fan of Alternet (Granted, the original article is from The Guardian, and they make the huge mistake of labeling Hillary as a "liberal", but still):

http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/why-are-liberals-hillary-clinton-and-elizabeth-warren-so-quiet-about-snowdens

[Number23]

62. + a million brazillion. And alot of people wouldn't take the job either for the exact same reasons

that you posted.

[demwing]

65. Isn't it just too easy to turn down a job

that we'll never be offered?

For my part, I'd absolutely refuse to be the Pope.

Nope.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

69. Such bullshit.

Really unbecoming of the time for my reply, but I'm feeling generous today.

[Zorra]

78. Nah, we'll have a lot more patience with someone who we know isn't faking it.

[summer-hazz]

89. ^^^THIS^^

Is why I will vote for her.. She could win if we ALL get around
her and vote her in!!!

Pay attention... she is wildly popular..

Elizabeth Warren!!!!!!
Yes she can win!

[uponit7771]

116. cause Obama is evil!!!

[MannyGoldstein]

79. As long as she actually tries, I think it'll be OK. nm

Last edited Wed Aug 7, 2013, 12:01 AM - Edit history (1)

[Progressive dog]

93. How true and how sad. nt

[JoePhilly]

97. Lol!!!

[tridim]

101. I've never seen a point more nailed than this.

Thank you!

She has to do it all with 100% GOP obstruction too.

[SheilaT]

9. I'd also like to know exactly what her

name recognition is compared to the others named.

My guess is that she has much lower name recognition right now. Give it some time.

[Safetykitten]

11. I want a Warren Presidency.

[Plucketeer]

35. Me too! nt

[blackspade]

12. Warren is awesome.

[antigop]

16. Can we PLEASE concentrate on 2014? PLEASE? No one has announced for 2016. nt

[L0oniX]

27. Please tell this to all the Clinton worshippers. n/t

[antigop]

29. I've mentioned it. nt

[Metric System]

31. Huh? All I see is thread after thread of posters bashing Hillary. I've seen few pro-Hillary threads.

[Beacool]

54. Hear, hear!!!

The so called Left seems to fear a Hillary presidency as much as the Right. Go figure.......

[Maineman]

94. The right (Republicans) fear her primarily because they think she might win.

She would beat a hard right radical. My perception is that she is awfully corporate and big bank, big money friendly.

[BlueMTexpat]

113. +1000! eom

[Maedhros]

45. For me, 2014 is not an issue.

Not a lot to discuss (for me).

Easy vote for U.S. Senate: Jeff Merkley (D-OR). I don't see a Republican challenger unseating him.

Easy vote for U.S. Congress District 3: Earl Blumenauer (D-OR). I can't imagine a safer seat for Democrats.

Governor: If John Kitzhaber runs again, he'll probably win. I don't see a strong Republican challenger.

It's more interesting to discuss potential Presidential candidates.

[winter is coming]

17. IMO, this says more about Warren's message than Warren herself.

I don't mean to diss Warren by saying that. It's just that there aren't that many politicians out there who will say things like "the game is rigged" and make efforts to change that. Dems running in 2014 would do well to realize that economic inequality is a huge issue.

[Hydra]

20. Expect a fail on that

And then for the "liberals" to be blamed for the bloodbath in Congress.

[ananda]

21. Count me in too!

..

[ecstatic]

22. I really like her, but she doesn't have the charisma necessary

to win a national election. I really hate to say that. Her DNC speech didn't go over well. I'd definitely vote for her, but I don't believe Independents would.

[Metric System]

32. I live in the Mass. TV market and I saw enough of her to agree with this point. Don't get me wrong,

Elizabeth Warren is an asset to the Democratic party and I hope she wins re-election after re-election. However, like it or not, you do need more charisma and the IT factor to lead a national ticket. It may not be fair, but that's the reality.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

52. I'm not sure if she has any intention of running in 2016?

[Beacool]

55. I like Warren and hope that she remains in the Senate for many years.

But I don't see her running for president in 2016. She had never ran for elective office before she ran for the Senate. As it is, she barely won in a blue state. The presidency is a very tough job, what makes her supporters think that she would be ready for the task? Speaking against Wall Street does not a president make.

I agree on the charisma issue. I felt the same way about Kerry in 2004. Both good people, but their oratory style makes their speeches as interesting as watching paint dry.

[ecstatic]

59. True, but Kerry has really come out of his shell!

He rocked the DNC!

[Beacool]

109. I haven't heard any of his recent speeches.

[foo_bar]

82. she did come out of virtually nowhere to defeat an incumbent Senator

Granted it's Massachusetts, so maybe it was more of a Saxby Chambliss level upset, but I'm not sure Markey could have done the same, and you have to give Brown points for reptilian charisma.

I filmed Warren delivering her stump speech in my smallish town, and you could tell she didn't relish the glad-handiness of retail politics, and she seemed rather pained as she recited her (focus-group approved?) applause lines like "...the millionaires and billionaires!", but that's what I like about her: she seems like a nerd inhabiting a politician's body. (So does Hillary to a large extent, although she's a little better at disguising it, even if she doesn't quite possess her husband's Nerd-a-billy charisma, but next to Warren she's practically Elvis.) I realize nerds don't historically fare well in presidential primaries (see Paul Simon/Tsongas, although Hillary vs. Obama was kind of a toss-up in that department), but perhaps we live in peculiar times.

[BlueMTexpat]

117. Like you, I would prefer Warren to have more Senate experience before

being a Presidential candidate, just as I would have preferred that Prez Obama have the same. I believe that experience would have helped him to avoid at least some of his worst mistakes - most of which have resulted from believing that one can actually reason with the GOP of today. That is simply not possible.

I do believe that Warren would be an excellent to outstanding President, just as she is proving to be an excellent Senator - and generally a boon to MA and us all. But I have major doubts about her actually winning a national election in 2016, even with the GOP Klown Kar Kandidate group. I also believe that Warren herself is truly not interested in running for Prez in 2016.

I will support whoever is the Dem candidate in 2016. Period. Even for Hillary, 2016 would be a VERY difficult slog because the RW zealots hate her almost as much - or even more - than they hate Prez Obama. Unfortunately, there appear to be several here at DU who hate Hillary almost as much as the RW zealots do, which is yet another reason why 2016 would be difficult for her.

[Beacool]

121. I agree.

I'll go to my grave thinking that Obama should have sat it out in 2008 and ran later on. Experience does matter in life. I still think that someone who had been in DC less than two full years did not have the chops to handle the bag of cats otherwise known as Congress. I feel the same about Warren, she has even less elective experience than Obama did in 2008.

As for Hillary, I have no idea whether she'll run or not. Although I know that the pressure is intense for her to run again. I wish that both sides would leave her be until after next year's midterms. This is the first time since the mid 70s when neither Bill nor she are running for office. She's enjoying her freedom.

[Mass]

23. I read the same article concerning Scott Brown two years ago. Not that I want to compare them

(one is a total joke and the other one a real person) but I want to point out to the stupidity of these types of articles. DC fluff at its best.

[antigop]

24. I like what Elizabeth Warren has accomplished so far, but just because someone feels "favorably"

towards someone, that doesn't mean that someone will necessarily vote for that person three years from now.

A lot can change in three years.

[AppleBottom]

30. Please! I would love for a human being instead of robot run for President one of these days. nt.

[Life Long Dem]

36. Why would anyone choose Obama?

He's not even able to run. So I'm sure people take that into consideration.

[DirkGently]

38. She is a badass. n/t

[mountain grammy]

39. I'm in.

[earcandle]

40. I would prefer Warren to Hillary any day.

Warren is not a war-monger like Hillary.

[Maineman]

96. I agree.

[loyalsister]

41. We need Warren in the Senate

We need all the sensible people we can find. Aside from that, I don't think she has the range of experience studying policy that Obama did because he had spent time in the IL state legislature. When it comes to policy, she is an expert in one area.

[demwing]

64. Same here

but I should also say that I prefer Hillary to any other party's candidate, without hesitation.

[GiaGiovanni]

63. K & R

/

[DeSwiss]

68. The only reason she's in third....

...is because no one knows about her. Not enough at this point, anyway. But head-to-head she would demolish Hillary using one word: Banks.

- Hell, Hillary is a bank.....

K&R

[woo me with science]

108. This is the truth, and the corporatists in both parties know it.

They will do anything to prevent her from running.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

75. Considering the pathetic crew of 3rd Way'rs and Repugs she's compared with she should rate higher.

[Zorra]

76. Elizabeth 2016

[1StrongBlackMan]

77. I understand the sentiment …

But we need to be mindful that the constant critics of this administration (as you have described) are not a part of the Democratic Party (and, I suspect, are not even “liberal” … they only play one on the intertubes).

[cantbeserious]

80. Anyone But Hillary

eom

[closeupready]

85. Run, Elizabeth, Run!

K&R

[NCarolinawoman]

86. She's a female FDR.

[Hulk]

88. She's a saint....but,

...she would have NO CHANCE in a general election in this nation of ignorant butt holes. She could be the female version of Jesus Christ herself, and the KKKristians would have her crucified on a cross.

This woman is serving the country in the best place she can. She has a strong voice; she is on the right committee; and she'll be great in the future if we can support her and get our lame-ass Congressmen and women to do the same.

But if you ever thought, even for a moment, that Elizabeth Warren would gain a majority of this country, with all the ass-backward, red-necked, vile-propaganda spewers pouring their poison and lies about her; you are so ignorant to reality, you had better stop drinking the kool-aid you are working on, because she's get her innocent ass handed to her on a platter faster than sarah palin could be exposed for being an empty-headed bimbo.

NOT A CHANCE!

[Maineman]

98. Yes! Integrity. Not to be confused with tough talk and stubbornness.

[Not Sure]

90. Good for her, but Jesus Christ, why is Ted Cruz even on the radar?

What does it say that a complete putz like that even shows up?

[Enthusiast]

91. Kicked and Recommended! nt

[brooklynite]

100. Sorry, the problem isn't that she's being underestimated...

...it's that she's not running.

It's easy to say she has plenty of time, we're not even up to 2014, and in an ideal world that might be true. But in the real world, the prospective candidates (Democratic and Republican) are already laying the groundwork: talking to State delegations at the 2012 convention; going on speaking tours; reaching out to prospective funders. Hillary Clinton is; Martin O'Malley is; Briaqn Schweitzer is. Even Cory Booker is (likely angling for a VP slot). Elizabeth Warren is not. She is, amazingly enough, doing the job she was elected to less than a year ago: being a US Senator.

You're welcome to try and change her miond, but if that's your goal, better get your "Draft Warren" team organized, and figure out a way to convince people that a candidate from Massachusetts can get elected nationally (see: Romney, Kerry, Dukakis): you're late already.

[brooklynite]

120. Thought about adding that...

...yes JACK Kennedy got elected...53 years ago. And, now that I think of it, a Democrat who got us into a war in Asia and nearly got us into one with Russia might be just what DU is looking for.

Now, TED Kennedy? Not so much.

[tiredtoo]

103. Elizabeth Warren

is doing fine as a senator. She is not now ready to run for or be elected president. She may never be a viable candidate for president. We should all do what we can to support her and her efforts in the senate. Meanwhile we must continue in our efforts at dragging any and all potential candidates to the left. This is not a light switch action (on/off) this is a dimmer switch action, on and increasing brightness as we progress. The demonstrations in N.Carolina and Wisconsin are good examples of moves we all must support. Two senators, Harkin from Iowa and Begich from Alaska have started an effort to EXPAND social security. This is another effort we must support.
Working together we can move forward !

[ChiciB1]

118. All On Board For Warrren!!

She's my kind of REAL Democrat & I will support her all the way. SHE is the woman I WANT as the first woman to win the White House!

It may take some time, but boy do we need more like her!

I'm so not "into" the lame excuse for so many elected Democrats we have now. The control the RW has is astounding and growing every day. Now, they're working on dictating what news stations can and can not air. And, if I were a betting person... they'll probably succeed!

We have MORE DINO's & DLC types now, and they just can't stand up to Repukes. Everyone keeps saying the Repukes are fracturing themselves, but with the districts redrawn like they are, it seems unlikely that the House will change! I know Vern Buchanan will get re-elected where I live. The Democratic Party here is VERY LIGHT!