Warren to People Magazine on 2016 Run: "I don't think so...There are amazing doors that could open"

[PAProgressive28]

From The Nation:

Senator Elizabeth Warren gave an interview to People magazine for this week’s issue and was asked for roughly the thousandth time if she planned to run for president. But her answer to this query was different than all the others:

But is the freshman senator from Massachusetts herself on board with a run for the White House? Warren wrinkles her nose.

“I don’t think so,” she tells PEOPLE in an interview conducted at Warren’s Cambridge, Massachusetts, home for this week’s issue. “If there’s any lesson I’ve learned in the last five years, it’s don’t be so sure about what lies ahead. There are amazing doors that could open.”

She just doesn’t see the door of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue being one of them. Not yet, anyway. “Right now,” Warren says, “I’m focused on figuring out what else I can do from this spot” in the U.S. Senate.

As a veteran Warren-watcher, I can say with certainty this is more ambiguous than she’s ever been on the subject. “I don’t think so,” “amazing doors that could open,” and “right now” are the traditional vernacular of a someone flirting with a campaign—-and someone who wants you to know it.

-Full article
This is definitely a change. Don't shoot the messenger! I want to see all of our best candidates in 2016.

[Mass]

1. Why does she interview on People Magazine ?

I do not need my senator to be a media darling. I need her to work for us in MA. Right now, we have a governor to elect and she would be more useful debunking Baker's BS.

[sabrina 1]

5. Well, if the President and First Lady can sit down with People, why not Warren?

President Obama I've Got ThreeOpinionated, Strong, Tall Women

Sitting down for their annual interview with PEOPLE Managing Editor Larry Hackett and Washington, D.C., correspondent Sandra Sobieraj Westfall, President and Mrs. Obama reflect on the year's difficulties, both in the political arena and the smaller challenges he encounters at home.

"I've got three opinionated, strong, tall women," says President Barack Obama. "If they get together, they can have fun about my ears or being too loud, or how I dress."

Otoh, I wish, like you, that our political system could get away from the 'entertainment' world and just focus on what is really important. But, that is the way it is I guess.

[lumberjack_jeff]

10. Democrats need more exposure of her to the popular press.

She has a lot of support among hard news junkies. Outreach to the rest of us is timely.

[MannyGoldstein]

16. FDR had more than one press conference each week

Keeping a good relationship with the media is very, very helpful. Even with People.

[Scuba]

17. Name recognition.

[A Simple Game]

18. Not sure you know how this works, she is a United States Senator from, not for, Massachusetts.

She is first and foremost to do what is good for the United States with maybe a little leaning towards Massachusetts. At least that's how it is supposed to work and the good ones like Warren seem to adhere to that philosophy. Representatives on the other hand...

Why, what is the problem with Warren, you don't like the messages she is putting out. Don't think she should be spreading her ideals?

Why are you so selfish? When Hillary was a Senator from New York we happily shared her. Heck, even now you can have Schumer; even trade for Warren. Remember Chuckie has a lot more seniority!

[MADem]

40. Huh? Who sends her to the Senate? The voters of Massachusetts, that's who.

She is there to represent the interests of the people of Massachusetts in the United States Senate.

She's not a gift from Massachusetts to the nation.

If she fails to represent the interests of the people of Massachusetts, she will be removed, and replaced.

Ask Scott "I'm From NH Now!!!" Brown about how that works.

There's nothing wrong with a Senator having a national profile--many do, usually as a consequence of their assignment to specific committees--in Warren's case, banking. Any Senator leading the "jazzy" committees, or serving as ranking member, will get that kind of play. HASC, Judiciary, Banking--all of those get some serious air time, because they deal with issues of interest to us. These issues often do transcend parochial interests, and resonate across the nation. The issues Warren deals with as chair of Banking do resonate exactly thus.

But the bottom line is this--if Senators doesn't work in such a way to support the goals of their constituents, they get tossed out on their asses. They answer to the voters of their states.

[demwing]

41. Because she can

and it's a great way to get your message out to people who might not otherwise hear it.

[unblock]

2. she'd make a great fed chair or treasury secretary

i'd first nominate her for commerce secretary just to watch heads explode then say, just kidding, it's treasury!

on edit: ooooh, attorney general! omg! never happen but just imagine how her haters would react!

[peacebird]

3. Good, let's hope we get her as a candidate for Pres in 2016!

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

4. 'I don't think so' certainly does sound like a change from

the prior 'no'. Interesting.

[pa28]

6. That seems like quite a turnaround.

If she was trying to steer her supporters away from the idea of a run she said all the wrong things.

[pnwmom]

7. I would love to see her on the Supreme Court. n/t

[Initech]

9. I'd personally like to see Bernie Sanders as president and Warren as Chair of the Fed.

They could seriously clean up some of the damage that Wall Street has done to our economy that way.

[Aerows]

8. I'd carry a bucket of gasoline

through hell to get Elizabeth Warren elected if she decided to run.

[MannyGoldstein]

14. And I'd drink that bucket of gasoline

At least it sounds good on paper. Er, pixels.

[Aerows]

15. Hey Manny

Couldn't find the fist bump one, but I agree with you!

[MannyGoldstein]

26. !

[A Simple Game]

19. Careful Manny, that whoosh sound was a lot of people on DU rushing out to buy matches. n/t

[MannyGoldstein]

27. That's not funny.

Oh, OK, actually it is. And likely true.

[A Simple Game]

52. You scared me for a minute there. n/t

[MannyGoldstein]

11. LOL

Quelle surprise!

Nobody could see this coming.

[Hutzpa]

13. Nope, I was well fooled by this

honest.

[sadoldgirl]

12. Not very surprising

I think. She found out, while helping with reelections of colleagues, that people are asking her and begging her to run. Her speeches during her travels are very well received. Still, she has to be careful at this point. She might keep on testing the waters until January or February.

From older elections I have learned that "I am not running for President" will be the beginning of testing the person's strength for a while.

Let's give her cheers and time.

[elleng]

20. VERY interesting!

I want to see all of our best candidates too, and one thing I DON'T want to see is Hillary locking horns with Elizabeth Warren during that time.

I was in the car yesterday, listening to C-Span radio, and happened to hear Christie speaking before some chamber of commerce (I think.) The guy is FULL of facts, and consequently could be very challenging. We need a candidate who can, easily, go head to head with a repug candidate such as that, with SUBSTANCE, and its clear that Eliz could do that. Could/would Hillary? Anyone else?

[PAProgressive28]

21. Is "facts" what they call it these days?

.

[elleng]

24. What he was talking was facts, no hyperbole,

which they don't always do. We'll have to recognize this, when we're confronted with it, and counter it SUBSTANTIVELY.

[sadoldgirl]

22. How about Bernie?

I would like him to run too as a Democrat.

[PAProgressive28]

23. He's going to

The only thing that will stop him, at this point, is Warren running. He's all over the country campaigning right now. I wish DU, TYT and others would notice!

[fbc]

25. Why not? Is the Dem. party so center-right that two progressive candidates would be shocking?

Probably, but why not aspire to a future where ALL of our candidates are progressives?

[elleng]

28. I like him a lot,

but I think his 'socialist' label would be a huge negative, nationally. And I don't know how he'd be received by the D party. They're not so smart, sometimes, for example vis a vis Howard Dean's 50 State strategy. http://www.governing.com/blogs/politics/gov-democrat-howard-deans-fifty-state-strategy.html

[Octafish]

29. She'd make a great President of the United States.

Now that I think of it, she'd be the first female President. But that wasn't why I thought she'd make a great President. She's got the brains, backbone and heart for the job, and the compassion for the People -- the nation, to do great things.

[rgbecker]

30. I've been reading the Goodwin book "Team of Rivals"

Lincoln set himself up as the go to guy in case the first ballot didn't yield the winner.

How ready are you for Hillary and all the old stuff being brought up again and dragged through the mud?

Warren brings a fresh face with real progressive ideas.

I like the possibility of "amazing doors that could open."

[KoKo]

31. Recommend...Her Voice Should be Heard in the Primaries.......

[brooklynite]

32. You have four months...

....before candidates begin announcing their candidacies. If Clinton announces, most of the other names and a lot of the money is going to disappear. I trust that -WHEN- Elizabeth Warren doesn't run , you won't come back whining that "TPTB" wouldn't "let" her run.

[MannyGoldstein]

33. I can feel you wiping your brow from here

Getting a teensy bit nervous?

How do you think a Warren presidency would affect real estate prices in NYC? I suspect that prices will plummet once all of the cash gets sucked out of Wall Street.

[Cali_Democrat]

35. And how exactly would a President Warren suck the cash out of Wall Street with a GOP House?

[joshcryer]

36. That's not how it works.

If Warren was President real estate prices would go up because the markets would be strengthened by regulations and oversight.

[brooklynite]

38. I'm talking about sucking the money out of the campaign...

...Clinton will lock up most of the resources needed to run successfully.

[reddread]

45. netroots, word of mouth, burgeoning support

the money will follow the leading candidate, it wont be tied up in IRA's and CD's.
no matter how good they suck the resources, theres more where that came from.

[brooklynite]

48. So, if the money DOESN'T show up, you won't be complaining thet "THEY" stopped it, right?

BTW - you're aware that Warren has already disavowed the efforts of "Ready for Warren"?

[reddread]

50. yeah, I sure wont

all that money never bought a working person representation.
not in this century.
Obviously, you can trace a parallel between campaign costs and conservativism over the last thirty years.
all the controls and checks and opportunities for public interests have been undone.
to participate in a process so clearly and completely corrupted by money?

sort of like paying extra for Fox News and letting them get you excited one way or another.
Honest votes cant be bought.
the money is for something else, altogether.

[brooklynite]

51. Fair enough, but under the current rules, you can't campaign effectively with out.

[brooklynite]

39. In which case you clearly misunderstand economics and New York City...

Last edited Thu Oct 23, 2014, 08:05 AM - Edit history (1)

...are you under the impression that, under Glass-Steagal, Wall Street financiers lived in Public Housing? New York has always been prosperous, and will continue to be.

And as I've said before, I'm happy to have Warren and Sanders get into the race (would it surprise you to know that Warren took campaign contributions from "Wall Street Lawyers" including my wife?). I just don't believe they seriously will (based on direct experience, not wishful thinking) and want to avoid the annoyance of people complaining that they didn't have a real choice when they wasted all the time they could have spent finding a serious candidate rather than dreaming of fantasy ones.

[MannyGoldstein]

42. My dad bought a sweet place in Greenwich Village about 20 years ago

A bunch of Wall Street people live in the building.

Compared to what he paid for it, it's now worth several times what he paid even after accounting for inflation, because the Wall Street people have gotten fantastically wealthier during that time and are bidding prices into the stratosphere.

Wall Street never wants for money, but Clinton, Bush, and Obama have focused 20+ years of government policy on showering them with even more cash.

If we return to government of, by, and for the people, and we elect honest and tough leadership, then the Washington/Wall Street cash pipeline will close. I don't expect bankers will go hungry, but they'll no longer be princes given the legal privilege of cheating working Americans out of their savings. I'd imagine that high-end real estate will take a good hit when that happens.

Hopefully we'll have the opportunity to see!

[brooklynite]

43. Not as long as the Russians and Chinese are buying as well...

I think that, at best, you'll see moderation in the growth of value; your fantasy of prices dropping has no basis in reality.

[LawDeeDah]

34. They didn't disappear in 2008, why would they this time?

Anyway, it sounds disgusting that Hillary supposedly has this power of deciding to punt others out of the race. Vomitous in fact.

[joshcryer]

37. It is almost certain that is what will be said.

That's what they said about the CPFB when her book indicated that she had to almost be forced to do it by personal request from Obama, and her since going on to become a much more powerful Senator.

[Orsino]

44. Brain-dead media trying to stir up controversy. n/t

[reddread]

46. what controversy? n/t

[Orsino]

47. A Clinton-Warren catfight. n/t

[brooklynite]

49. Good thing that nobody HERE would fall for that.....