Progressives, If You Want A Democrat To Win In '16, Drop This Non-Existent Elizabeth Warren Campaign

[KamaAina]

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2015/04/13/progressives-if-you-want-a-democrat-to-win-in-2016-drop-this-non-existent-elizabeth-warren-presidential-campaign/

Even before she announced her candidacy, everyone knew Hillary Clinton was going to run. Her candidacy has been dubbed the “worst kept secret in Washington.” She is confirmed, she is doing it, and she is in it to win it. Do you know who is NOT running for president? Elizabeth Warren. Yes, I know, it may come as a shock to some, but the senior Senator from Massachusetts has been extremely adamant that a 2016 run is not what she has in store. She even turned down a million dollar offer from Bill Maher to run. If you want, vote for Bernie Sanders if he decides to run and you like him. He hasn’t made a decision yet, so that’s still a possibly. But, again, Warren is not.

So, with Warren definitely not running, why are so many progressive Democrats abandoning support for Hillary Clinton or even Martin O’Malley in hopes that Warren will change her mind (even though it’s not going to happen – 2020, maybe, but not in 2016). I cannot tell you the amount of people I have seen on threads, blogs, and social media saying they won’t support a Clinton 2016 ticket (even though they’re Democrats) because they want Warren to be the candidate.

I have a GREAT BIG NEWS FLASH for any progressive Democrat who chooses to abandon support for Clinton or “sits this one out” because Warren isn’t running: if you do that, you will potentially ruin the future of this country. Your intentions are great, and they speak volumes about the positive change in discourse in this nation, but they are so unrealistic because the stakes have never been higher. Consider the following:...

Drop the Elizabeth Warren 2016 hopes. It’s not happening. Hillary is going to get the nomination. Progressives, if you want a Democrat in office on January 20, 2017, you need to at least go out and vote – not “sit this one out.”

[Capt. Obvious]

1. Even if they don't sit out

claims that they did will live on forever.

[onehandle]

2. Elizabeth already dropped it. With clear, concise words. nt

[gotj90]

3. I agree that Warren is not going to run.

But I'm going to fight like hell for Bernie Sanders until Hillary wins that nomination officially.

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

54. Me too, but I love the way you word that as Hillary will win over Bernie, but the

good thing about Bernie is if he can get ANY media attention he can wake some people up.

Do they even know about the Social Security cap?

Hillary wont tell anybody about it unless she has to, Bernie will scream it.

[zappaman]

4. Sorry but Warren has yet to use the past tense when saying

she is not running.
That leaves open the possibility she can go back in time and declare.
Never give up hope!

[brooklynite]

6. That's the spirit...

Remember, until the Electoral College votes are counted, there's still a chance she'll change her mind...

[ChisolmTrailDem]

19. "I'm not running. I'm not going to run." on the

Today Show...

[zappaman]

23. She hasn't said "I did not run"!!!

It could totally happen!!!

[NCTraveler]

33. So she isn't into that form of exercise.

She will make up for it when she enters the primary. That will keep her cardio going.

[Politicalboi]

5. I would rather see Warren run

But I will get in line if it's Hillary, "sniper fire" and all. We're 18 months away, lots of time for things to change and candidates to announce or not.

[mmonk]

7. As someone who contributed to Warren's campaign to the Senate I agree.

I also see nothing wrong with getting behind O'Malley or Sanders if you are worried about Wall Street influence on government or the growing inequality. Same message, just a different messenger. Time lost is time that could have been gained.

[MannyGoldstein]

8. Resistance is futile.

Got it.

[KamaAina]

9. We will be assimilated.

[daredtowork]

26. I am 7 of 9 nt.

[KamaAina]

28. So you're married to Jack Ryan?

[BrotherIvan]

16. Quit dreaming of your foolish pony and get in line!

We don't care about your opinions or principles, we just want your money and your vote.

It's an awesome way to win friends. TBH, the more I see the lashings from the HRC camp, the less attractive the candidate becomes. I'm not sure if it's intentional.

[upaloopa]

42. Th OP says your wishes are valid but not going to

happen. If you need to blame someone for how you feel look in the mirror.

[BrotherIvan]

48. Proving my point beautifully

[upaloopa]

51. You are in total denial

[BrotherIvan]

52. another example

[Pooka Fey]

36. ROFLMAO

[url=http://postimg.org/image/pe71lkm6f/][img][/img][/url]

[LanternWaste]

43. You gave us a double-- both the bumper sticker and the pretense.

Bumper-stickers are often the most accurate representation of depth of mind. But it's certainly not as dramatic as pretending someone said something other than what they said.

But you, good sir! You gave us The Double-- both the bumper sticker and the pretense!

Depth of mind, breadth of wit. "Got it."

[Donald Ian Rankin]

50. Unfortunately, that's probably not true.

Opposing Hillary may well actively contribute to her not being the next president of the USA.

[Autumn]

10. I accept she's says she's not going to run. I also accept that organizations are pushing her to run.

I never did take to well to anyone but my Mamma and Daddy telling me what to do. Since they have been dead well over 20 years and there's not another living soul I answer to I guess I'll think for myself. Hillary is not the nominee yet.

[okaawhatever]

11. +100 nt

[Hell Hath No Fury]

12. Ah, the "Get the fuck in line!!!" --

articles are already hitting the Democratic/"liberal" outlets.

Yeagads, there hasn't even been an opportunity for another potential Dem candidate to announce and we are already being told to sit down and shut up.

I love the smell of authoritarianism in the morning...

[Autumn]

14. Plenty of shiny new cudgels to beat us over the head with

fuck that, I think for myself. I'm a Democrat.

[Xithras]

13. I have to agree with abandoning the Warren thing.

I like Warren, and truly believe that she'd be the most progressive and liberal American President since FDR, but she's made it plain as day that she's not running. Sanders is also a nonstarter, as he has virtually no chance at securing either the party nomination or the general.

If progressives genuinely want to challenge the DLC/PPI Clinton power grab, we need to either start rallying behind people who WANT the job and have a shot at it, or try to find a new progressive to draft. Warren isn't running.

As of now, O'Malley appears to be the best potential candidate who is both showing interest in running AND who has a shot at actually winning.

[bunnies]

15. This fucking shit ALREADY?

Gezus! Condescending garbage like this will *totally* win people over. Yep.

[markpkessinger]

27. +1

Thank you!

[whatchamacallit]

44. Same old noxious swill

[DJ13]

17. Abandoning Warren as a possibility is to abandon forcing Hillary to adopt many of Warren's positions

Sorry, we need Warren as a template for our party.

[jwirr]

18. Why is there such a panic over who we do or do not support in the primary. I thought that was

what we had primaries for? No one is helping Hillary by asking others to shut up.

[brooklynite]

20. Nobody says you shouldn't support an alternative to Clinton if you want to...

...just find one who actually wants the gig.

Personally, I'd like to avoid a lot of whining down the road that somehow you weren't "given" a choice, when you had plenty of time to find one who was willing to run.

[Dawgs]

22. We have every right to encourage someone to run.

And, she has every right to change her mind.

It's still early, and telling people that "Hillary is going to get the nomination." is not helping.

[brooklynite]

24. Point me to a post by a Hillary supporter that says her nomination is "inevitable"...

...(or the platitude of your choice).

In the meantime, let me suggest that while you of course have the right to encourage anyone you want, I'm suggesting you be realistic about your opportunities. Warren has been emphatic about not running; DFA and MoveON haven't been able to budge her; what makes you think things are going to change? Meanwhile, the time to find someone else is running out, given the necessities of raising funds and getting organized in the political system we actually have to work in.

[Dawgs]

39. I know what Warren said and I can think for myself.

She may not run, and that's fine. That doesn't mean we can't try to convince her.

As far as the "inevitable" quote, read the OP.

[jwirr]

38. You know that this type of political action (organizing to encourage a candidate to run) has been

happening for decades. Teddy Kennedy was often the subject of this kind of pressure in the hopes that he would run. Often right up to the convention. Let democracy run its course.

[whatchamacallit]

46. Judging by the way he's come out swinging for Hill

Seems like Skinner wants to start the purge early

[jwirr]

60. Oh, I wouldn't worry about Skinner - he has been through this many times. I trust him. And I also

want him to have his choice.

[jeff47]

61. Because their chosen candidate has decided on an inevitability strategy

and that strategy falls apart very quickly if that candidate loses any of the early primaries/caucuses.

[rhett o rick]

21. This is wrong on so many levels. We all have to bow down and support H. Clinton because why?

Democrats don't play that game. First of all we must go for it and try to get someone other than the Wall Street choice as our candidate. Telling progressives that they need to give up and support Clinton is a laugh.

Now here is a load of crap. See if you can follow this aparent thinking by the Centrists (or whatever they like to be called):

"We are going to nominate Clinton in spite of the warnings by the progressives that we need someone progressive. And yet if Clinton loses, we will blame the progressives." If you nominate Clinton then you own the failure.

I have a great idea, NOMINATE SOMEONE THE LEFT CAN SUPPORT. Then we will defeat Bush. Don't pull another 2000 and look for scapegoats.

Are you blind to the manipulation by Big Money to offer a choice of Corporate Thing 1 vs. Corporate Thing 2? We must support Corp-Thing 1 because she is so much better than Corp-Thing 2. We don't care that all our tax dollars will go to Goldman-Sachs and the MIC. We don't care that the poverty rate for American children goes from 22% to 30% as long as the wealthy get their profits.

[KamaAina]

25. It's not telling us to bow down and support HRC

just to give up on Warren. We've still got Bernie, and I'm hearing good things about Martin O'Malley of Md.

[rhett o rick]

49. It's not like we can't do both. nm

[bvar22]

29. Its NOT the Person. Its the ISSUES.

Even if Warren disappeared to the 5th dimension,
I would carry her banner and her issues forward through out the Primaries.

Hopefully, Hillary will have her eyes opened to traditional Democratic Policy
that includes the Working Class and the Poor.

[Adrahil]

30. I don't mind folks pushing for competition, or...

... someone that they view as better. Fight like hell for your candidate until the nomination.

I DO mind the dim bulbs that say asinine crap like they won't vote if Hillary gets the nomination. That's fucking stupid.

[NCTraveler]

31. I think a good portion of the die harders aren't really into Warren.

They are into the fictional caricature of Warren. Within a week of Warren announcing they would simply label her a Reagan Democrat worse than any republican. Others are for more honest reasons even if the person they are supporting is really fictitious by way of how they think of her. . Hope goes a long way. Being against something is much easier than being for something. Therefore the anti crew must stand for something that will not be born out in reality.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

32. It's counterproductive to browbeat folks into voting for somebody they aren't inclined to...

It's also counterproductive to filet a candidate of your own party if you have no one to replace him or her...

[Cali_Democrat]

34. Why don't the Warren 2016 folks just get behind a candidate that actually wants to run?

She doesn't want to run. I'm sure there will be an alternative to Hillary in the primaries, but it won't be Warren.

Rule #1: Don't hire somebody for a job if they don't want the job.

[MattSh]

35. Regressives, If You Want Wall Street To Win In '16...

well, you can figure out the rest of it.

[fairplay]

37. Voted for the war

Voted for the war then agreed not pay for it. I will not vote for a war monger. Same goes for ol' fokesy Biden.....votes for the war! I just won't be complicit in moving the Democratic party more to right!

[jwirr]

41. Then you just voted for an R - the perpetual war party.

[fairplay]

40. Not voting for Pepresident

Not voting for Hillary!!!!! I'll vote Democratic down ticket. But never for another Clinton.

[DeSwiss]

45. That's right dammit!!! Now fall in line!!!

We won't have any of this, this.... thinking!!!! If the American government has wanted people to think we would have let you pick you own leaders!!!! Now you stop this silly Warren Love Affair cause it ain't happening. You're acting just like Bill used to act!!! The inconsiderate oaf. Never mind the consequences, just as long as it feels good right now! Idiot.

Well, you can't have her! Now it's my turn goddamn it. You hear me!?!?! I waited 8 years to get my office and I won't have some little school 'marm from Massachusetts stealing my show!!!

- Now is that clear @$@#%@%#^!?!?!?!?!?!

[center]{This message was brought to you by the Elect-Another-Clinton-Campaign.}

We are amazed but not amused
By all the things you say that you'll do
Though much concerned but not involved
With decisions that are made by you
But we are sick and tired of hearing your song
Telling how you are gonna change right from wrong
Cause if you really want to hear our views
"You haven't done nothing"!

It's not too cool to be ridiculed
But you brought this upon yourself
The world is tired of pacifiers
We want the truth and nothing else
And we are sick and tired of hearing your song
Telling how you are gonna change right from wrong
Cause if you really want to hear our views
"You haven't done nothing"!

We would not care to wake up to the nightmare
That's becoming real life
But when mislead who knows a person's mind
Can turn as cold as ice un hum
Why do you keep on making us hear your song
Telling us how you are changing right from wrong
Cause if you really want to hear our views
"You haven't done nothing"!

~Stevie Wonder
[/center]

Satire by ~DeSwiss

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

47. I have a 'GREAT BIG NEWS FLASH' for the author of the quoted piece.

So, with Warren definitely not running, why are so many progressive Democrats abandoning support for Hillary Clinton or even Martin O’Malley in hopes that Warren will change her mind (even though it’s not going to happen – 2020, maybe, but not in 2016). I cannot tell you the amount of people I have seen on threads, blogs, and social media saying they won’t support a Clinton 2016 ticket (even though they’re Democrats) because they want Warren to be the candidate.

They aren't refusing to support Clinton (or O'Malley) because they want Warren to run. They're refusing to support people they see as supporting corporate rights over human rights, war over peace, surveillance over the 4th amendment. It doesn't actually matter if Warren runs or not, even if they'd love it if she did. They still aren't going to support Clinton.

[fredamae]

53. Warren ...to....SCOTUS

under Clinton presidency?
I'd rather either have her on the SCOTUS OR Senate Majority Leader, personally.

That said...If she was running for real..I'd vote for her. Period.

[KamaAina]

55. Nice!

Although the confirmation hearings would be... um.. interesting. Almost as much so as if the nomineee were an obscure constitutional lawyer from Chicago named Barack Obama.

[fadedrose]

56. Gees, thanks for reminding me

Warren sent me a form to donate to Dems running for the Senate, and I shoved it aside.

I'd better go and look at it - didn't read it all the way through yet.

[Paulie]

57. Hello 2008

Nice to see you again.

[fadedrose]

58. You mean, Progressives are important??

All I've been hearing is that we're not Democrats, and yet you say:

"if you do that, you will potentially ruin the future of this country. "

insofar as our sitting out the election.

You should be nicer to us, doncha think? It's your country too.

[Orsino]

70. Go, Team Whatever-It-Is-We-Stand-For! n/t

[Phlem]

59. Yep. Cause blaming the voter has worked like a charm

all these years.

Ryan Denson looks like he just got out of high school but he has all the wisdom of people who have been following politics and voting for the last 50 + years.

[jeff47]

62. The point is not to get Warren to run. The point is to drag the party to the left.

The groundswell of support means Clinton has to move left from where she ran in 2000 and 2008.

[Chan790]

63. ...only if Hillary withdraws.

The campaign to draft the strongest not-Hillary isn't going to stop just because some pundit on the internet tells us to.

Personally, I'm still backing O'Malley but I'd welcome other not-fake Democrats to run. This primary is too important for Hillary to win.

Not-Hillary 2016: Because he, she, or it is not Hillary Clinton.

[olddots]

64. you can't make me loose my dream

[Eleanors38]

65. Well, if a campaign is "Non-existent," why worry?

[redstateblues]

66. This type of thread is

so exhausting.

[mike_c]

67. I don't want a "democrat" to win in 2016....

I want a liberal progressive to win, preferably a kick ass lion of a liberal progressive who will pursue a reform agenda like we haven't seen since FDR.

It'd be really nice if that was a democrat, but recent history suggests this is not a good time to hold my breath.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

68. If we want a Democrat to win...

We need somebody who isn't running on collecting their perceived birthright, that worked really fucking well for Mitt Romney.

Hillary reeks of entitlement, that resonates with nobody.

[cascadiance]

69. The Democrats NEED to nominate a POPULIST (that I'd like to think also has progressive tendencies)

To get out of the "corporate servant 1" vs. "corporate servant 2" elections we've been having for so long now, the first and foremost quality that I and I think many want here is a candidate not afraid to take on the moneyed interests, and with ideas on how to change the system to empower more like that person. To me, that person could be progressive, but that person would DEFINITELY be what I consider "populist" by that definition.

Though many of us here called "the left" of the party want more progressive legislation to be pushed forward, that includes both social legislation (that corporate servant candidates have been "allowed" to champion if they are democrats one way in a progressive direction) as well those issues that have been ignored that have been more populist and favoring the needs of the 99%.

I think the reason why many of us want someone like Warren is that we see that she's a strong populist, unlike so many other politicians out there. She's not emphasized social issues as much, though I think when she does she shows herself leaning towards progressive stances. I think that's smart, because it helps draw independents and even some Republicans that also feel the need for more populist legislation to be put in place, and who also feel they've been abandoned by both parties on this.

If we have a populist, I think that person has an even BETTER chance at winning than a corporate candidate that just happens to lean towards out progressive viewpoints on social issues. That person has a chance of drawing many of those independents and Republicans that are also looking for populists too. The corporate media tries to depict such candidates everywhere as "far left" in order to try and marginalize them, but I think on a national stage, a decent populist candidate will rise above those corporate media efforts to try and propagandize us and will reach many more than they claim is possible.

So many of us will keep pushing for Warren, in the hopes that either she reconsiders, or someone else tries to take on the role of being a real populist candidate that we can get behind as well. She's the template, and still showing our support for her shows that there are many out there that need a populist candidate to be who we nominate.

So even though I might feel at the end I still may need to vote for Hillary over an insane Republican, I am going to still be loud throughout the campaign of the need for Warren, or someone like her to run in the primaries. And I don't want to hear the claims that we need "unity", when it is those in charge that have been throwing away this unity when they throw away so many of our values and still expect us to stand in line behind them.

That's just the way it is.

You know one piece of legislation that someone like Hillary or another candidate could propose on tax day is a bill to find ways to expand means to get rid of the 10% and other tax penalties taking early distributions out of their 401k, IRA or other retirement plans, which many don't have a choice any taking out early withdrawals in this environment that many years back when they invested in them they felt they would have if their wealth hadn't been STOLEN so much by what has been going on in our economy since then with unemployment and housing foreclosures. Those that are victimized the most by the financial crisis shouldn't have to pay penalties like this. It certainly is affecting me this tax year, and I think many others who are struggling in getting money lined up to pay their taxes today.