Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

WhaTHellsgoingonhere

(5,252 posts) Wed Apr 9, 2014, 02:55 PM Apr 2014

Jonathan Alter on Ed Schultz discussing readiness...

He believes Hillary is more likely to run because Elizabeth Warren isn't ready.

I understand Warren said she's not running (and politicians never change their mind), but if your argument is contingent on Warren, how was Barack Obama's readiness different than Warren's? I'd argue she's more ready than he was at this time.

Argh...

2 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Jonathan Alter on Ed Schultz discussing readiness... (Original Post) WhaTHellsgoingonhere Apr 2014 OP

Some people think it takes 2 to 3 times longer for a female to get ready. DURHAM D Apr 2014 #1

Obama wasn't ready. grasswire Apr 2014 #2

DURHAM D

(32,609 posts)

1. Some people think it takes 2 to 3 times longer for a female to get ready.

Reply to WhaTHellsgoingonhere (Original post)

Wed Apr 9, 2014, 03:02 PM

Apr 2014

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
In case you missed it -

grasswire

(50,130 posts)

2. Obama wasn't ready.

Reply to WhaTHellsgoingonhere (Original post)

Wed Apr 9, 2014, 03:40 PM

Apr 2014

Shoved from a single term senate seat into the presidency. We see the results of it every day. It takes years to build coalitions and personal relationships and to collect chits that can be used to leverage, later. Warren would face the same kind of meatgrinder.

Experience is currency in Washington.

Reply to this discussion