Elizabeth Warren is out of touch with the Democratic Party.

[kentuck]

The Party is not enthusiastic about doing anything about the "too big to fail" banks. The Party is not ready to raise taxes on the wealthy. The Party is not ready to do anything about the trade treaties that keep destroying jobs in this country. The Party is not ready to cut defense spending by any amount. The Democratic Party is not ready to do anything about the great inequality in this country.

Those that support Elizabeth Warren should realize that they are at odds with the present Democratic Party. They should realize that one is part of the Democratic Party in name only. Choices will have to be made whether you support someone like Elizabeth Warren or whether you support the Democratic Party. You cannot have it both ways.

[NoOneMan]

1. Yep. That's why people like her

[Laelth]

13. Precisely. n/t

-Laelth

[GreenPartyVoter]

26. Yep.

[HarveyDarkey]

2. Saw this on FB a couple of days ago

[Pretzel_Warrior]

6. She's not running

[panader0]

21. Would she run for VP?

[Jackpine Radical]

27. Neither was Obama in 2006.

Said he had no interest in it, iirc.

[Cali_Democrat]

10. OK that is just creepy

[Marrah_G]

3. I'll support the person who best represents my views

Right now that would be Sen Warren. Unfortunately, she said she has no plans to run. I'd also support Sen. Sanders. Won't I will not do is support another corporation lackey.

[Scuba]

4. Zing!

Her popularity continues to soar.

[Ash_F]

5. I'm pretty sure if you polled Democrats they would agree with her on all those subjects but ok

Actually, if you polled Americans as a whole, they would still break towards her on all those subjects.

But don't let that stop you.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

9. Thanks for pointing that out

Always good to have reality check. However, I do think a lot of our Dem leadership would oppose action against big banks. Since they make so much money from them.

[LondonReign2]

42. That is precisely the OP's point

Yup, Democrats would, on the whole, agree with all of those positions. The Democratic Party (i.e., those running it)? Not so much.

[mike_c]

7. at this time, I agree with you....

But the democratic party left me behind years ago, so I've know the truth of what you've said for the last decade. The democratic party as presently constituted does not represent my political interests any better than the republican party does. That's the essence of the misnomer that the two parties are similar-- there are some significant distinctions between them, but neither represent the interests of the American middle class very well.

[Scuba]

16. The Democratic Party represents my interests on social issues.

It's the fiscal and military policy that leaves me cold.

[mike_c]

20. you mean like the war on drugs...?

Refusal to even discuss single payer or some other health management system that cuts profit out of care? Trade policies that promote erosion of the U.S. middle class? Education reform to minimize public investment in education while maximizing corporate profits? Slow motion on global warming? Refusal to even consider cutting corporate subsidies for some of the most profitable polluters in the nation? The national surveillance state? Protection of whistle blowers? Which democratic party social issues do you think the party does a good job on?

Seriously, the only ones I can come up with are civil rights issues, and arguably their best moves, such as undermining the DOMA and eliminating barriers to gay service, have come after prolonged and relentless public pressure. The democratic party should LEAD on social issues, not be dragged kicking and screaming by events. They should shape our vision of the future, not drag their feet just a little bit less than republicans, sometimes.

[Scuba]

22. While some of the issues you cite are clearly fiscal, you're correct that the Party ....

... really only throws us a few bones on social issues.

[Romulox]

35. There's no difference between "social" and "fiscal" issues. They're one in the same. nt

[Scuba]

37. I see a distinction, such as that between gay marriage and tax policy.

[Romulox]

40. One of the major implications of gay marriage is, in fact, benefits bestowed by the Federal Gov't,

in the tax code and elsewhere. The "social" issue naturally flows right into the "fiscal" issue, such that the idea of Federally recognized gay marriage that does not include the same tax benefits as other marriages is a non-starter.

There's no distinction. Another example: a choice not to tax the rich is a choice to affirm the inequality and poverty that is endemic in our society. The choice not to tax is "fiscal", but the resulting suffering is "social". There is no real distinction.

[Scuba]

45. I don't disagree that so called "social" issues have fiscal components.

But there are "social" issues, and this is where the two parties diverge.

I guess one could argue that the Democrats sole fiscal policy differentiator is to remedy the financial inequalities tied to social issues while mirroring the Republicans on non-social fiscal issues.

[Romulox]

46. No, I don't see it. Inequality is a "social" issue with a "fiscal" root.

I guess one could argue that the Democrats sole fiscal policy differentiator is to remedy the financial inequalities tied to social issues while mirroring the Republicans on non-social fiscal issues.

You've essentially got a tautology here. The phrase "financial inequalities tied to social issues" implies that there is inequality that is not tied to "social issues". There isn't, since inequality itself is a social issue.

[Scuba]

47. Hair splitting.

[Romulox]

49. I'm the one who said that they are one in the same. That's the opposite of "hair splitting". nt

[brooklynite]

8. And yet, she's Democrat

Democratic Nominee, Democratic elected Senator, member of the Democratic Senate Caucus.

[JoePhilly]

52. Will you SHUSSSH ... you're ruining EVERYTHING!!!!

Manufacturing outrage is hard work.

[Laelth]

11. Noam Scheiber, the Senior Editor of The New Republic, says this:

On one side is a majority of Democratic voters, who are angrier, more disaffected, and altogether more populist than they’ve been in years. They are more attuned to income inequality than before the Obama presidency and more supportive of Social Security and Medicare.1 They’ve grown fonder of regulation and more skeptical of big business.2 A recent Pew poll showed that voters under 30—who skew overwhelmingly Democratic—view socialism more favorably than capitalism. Above all, Democrats are increasingly hostile to Wall Street and believe the government should rein it in.

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/115509/elizabeth-warren-hillary-clintons-nightmare

No doubt, the party is divided, but Scheiber says the liberals are gaining strength and are likely to win.

Judging from recent events, the populists are likely to win.

<snip>

the party has changed far more over the last few years than is widely understood. Chris Murphy, the Connecticut senator, estimates that not too long ago, congressional Democrats were split roughly evenly between Wall Street supporters and Wall Street skeptics. Today, he puts the skeptics’ strength at more like two-thirds.

Make of that what you will. I think Elizabeth Warren is more in tune with the heart and soul of the party, as Scheiber argues.



-Laelth

[OnyxCollie]

12. "One of these days

thought Winston with sudden deep conviction, Syme will be vaporized. He is too intelligent. He sees too clearly and speaks too plainly. The Party does not like such people. One day he will disappear. It is written in his face." -George Orwell, 1984.

[Warpy]

14. Yes, a lot of dead wood needs to be pruned out of the leadership

and especially out of Congress for Warren to be successful as a president. While the electorate is with her, the party bosses are definitely not.

However, Attorney General Warren gives me shivers.

[truedelphi]

15. Well it's been said before and I'll say it again:

Many current day Democratic party subscribers are that in name only, and are really more like the Republicans of the 1970's (Without the concern for the environment.)

Sure, their parents supported John and Martin and Bobby, and their first political involvement was Eugene McCarthy.

Only that idealism was all years and years ago, and since then they have become "pragmatic."

So they eagerly filed a Chapter 11 on the company they inherited from their parents, and on their workers, so that the company pension went to pay off the company debts, while they got the Golden Parachute out. Did I mention that the workers got nothing, as the pensions were gone and used up by the company itself?

The only consolation that these Dems in name only have, and they wear this like some badge of honor, is
[h2][font color=red]
"We're not as bad as the Loonie Tunes RW women haters!"

[/h2][/font color=red]

[Le Taz Hot]

17. So . . .

all Baby Boomers became Reagan Democrats and we all inherited businesses from our parents. M'kay.

[truedelphi]

23. Not all, but a great many. And sadly, those people are the very people with the p[ower and money

And influence to make a difference. But now I actively keep hoping they don't make a difference because the difference they'd make is far too right wing for me.

[Le Taz Hot]

18. This schism has been a long time in the making.

There's been a deep division in the Democratic Party and nowhere is that more evident than on DU. There's got to be some sort of "come to Jesus meeting" or the Democratic Party will, in a very real way, begin to split apart, much like what is currently happening with the Republican Party.

Each and every one of us are going to have to decide if we want to continue to support the status quo, corporate, Third Way, which has completely lost the hearts and minds of most Americans, or if we will go back to what we're SUPPOSED to be and that is standing up for the poor and the middle class.

I made my choice long ago.

[cascadiance]

25. The Koch Brothers PAID the DLC in early days to make sure this happened!

... and to allow them to "buy the field" to protect 1%ers like the Kochs...

[Corruption Inc]

19. Sad but true except the current (D)s have made criminal banks even bigger

rather than not doing anything about them. The U.S. is a pathetic shell of a democracy that once existed, we traded civility for corruption over the last 30 years of "deregulation". "Deregulation" just removed all the regulations that were passed as laws to prevent criminals from ripping off the public.

We live in a criminal country now.

[Laelth]

24. I like your sig. line.

fyi, you can pick up a Warren 2016 banner for your sig. line, if you're interested, here.



-Laelth

[Laelth]

30. Whoops. Not quite.

You seem to have an extra space in the ht tp that needs to be deleted.



-Laelth

[bluedeathray]

32. Re-test W/O space. nt

[Laelth]

33. I can still see the space in the ht tp in your sig. line.

-Laelth

[bluedeathray]

36. Reeeediculous...

[bluedeathray]

34. No really...

[bluedeathray]

38. Last Shot

I've removed the space twice. Maybe my connection (in Kabul) is too slow to allow the fix.

Anyways...

[Laelth]

43. You got it! Nicely done.

It looks good on you.



-Laelth

[bluedeathray]

44. No really. I'm blaming the NSA! nt

[Laelth]

39. There are two ht tp(s), with spaces, in the link code.

You have to delete both of the spaces and then replace the parentheses with brackets. It looks like you've got the brackets, but you're still missing deleting one of the spaces in ht tp. Trun them both into http (with no spaces), and you should be good to go.



-Laelth

[BlueStreak]

28. I think you have that backwards

The Democratic Party will have to decide whether it is for the corporations or whether it is for the people. My principles are that flexible. I don't support Warren. I support my principles, and she happens to be in perfect alignment with my principles. The Party at large, well they are going to have trouble with the path they are on.

[Whisp]

31. ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024031848

JPMorgan hosted a Twitter chat and got epically trolled
"Some genius in the JPMorgan PR department decided that now, just after agreeing to pay $13 billion to settle the many federal investigations targeting it, was the time for the reviled bank to host a Twitter chat. And just like when Fix the Debt tried to have a Twitter chat, the trolls won the day."

[ananda]

41. I wish the party weremore in touch with her!

..

[Laelth]

48. Noam Scheiber says it is.

At least, rank and file Democrats are, as Scheiber argues here.



-Laelth

[polichick]

50. She's in touch with Dem voters...

Too bad the party no longer represents those voters.

[JoePhilly]

51. Then why is she part of the party?

If Warren is the leader you seem to be claiming, maybe she should leave the Democratic party ... since she is so at odds with the Democratic party.

Just another effort to keep Democrats fighting each other, instead of fighting the GOP.

[cascadiance]

55. Many of us who have more TRADITIONAL Democratic Party views feel the corporatist DLCers should leave

Just because they managed to take over the financing and control arms of this party through 1% corruption doesn't mean we all have to accept their corruption and "fall in line" with them. Many of us want leaders like Elizabeth Warren to take the party back to what it was for the constituency it USED TO represent but doesn't any more in its efforts to construct a corporatist one party system that has the illusion of being two parties to keep people happy with arguing about social issues that the corporatists don't care much about in terms of outcome.

[JoePhilly]

57. That's not what the OP suggests.

I understand some here on DU are very hung up on purity tests and so forth.

But clearly, Warren is not participating in that nonsense.

She is working from within the Democratic party, and not trying to push the "un-pure" out.

Again ... this is little more than an effort to keep Democrats fighting each other and NOT fighting the GOP.

[think]

53. K&R /nt

[rrneck]

54. Maybe the Democratic Party is out of touch with Elizabeth Warren. nt

[mmonk]

56. Good. I was starting to feel alone.

[Wounded Bear]

58. You say that like it's a bad thing.....

Sorry to be snarky, but Ms Warren seems to be the kind of throwback, anti-corporate Democrat we badly need.

I wish we could get 30-40 of her ilk, if not more, in the Senate.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

59. The "not as bad" wing of the Democratic Party is out of touch with Elizabeth Warren.

[adavid]

60. She has the support...

of pretty much all of the Millennials.......

[liberal_at_heart]

61. You bet she is, and so am I.