I believe that the best place for Senator Warren is in the Senate...

[MrScorpio]

She, herself, doesn't feel as if the White House is where she can do the most good and I don't blame her.

Regaining a Democratic majority and reorienting the leadership to a more progressive stance is going to take a lot of work and will have to be done with a long range vision if it's going to be effective.

Personally, I think that, if she desires so, she can serve in the Senate for 20-plus years. She has the leadership qualities that fit well in the legislative body and skills enough for sure. Dare I mention temperament as well?

Frankly, I would love for her long term goal would be to achieve the rank of Senate Majority Leader.

Quite simply, I'm not too keen on seeing her leave Congress, which needs a lot of work in the long run, simply for the attempting to reach for the glory and thanklessness of trying to become a president. She's weighed those options, I'm quite sure, and doesn't believe that it's worth it. I serious doubt that drafting an unwilling Senator Warren is anything else other than a flight of fancy.

Congress is fucked up. What I would love to see is more people like Senator Warren elected to it in order to un-fuck it up.

I spent some time in DC years ago and I took it upon myself to achieve a politcal education. My focus isn't always on The White House. It's glitzy and glamourous and it distracts from the importance of the other two branches for most other people. Legislating is a dirty, thankless job that requires a lot of moral fibre. Senator Warren is one of those rare people who's up to the task. I wouldn't want to lose her.

The White House is also the place where bad decisions are all you're left with at any given time and that there's no way to avoid them. If you want to sacrifice someone's good name and political clout, for any ordinary person, there's no better place to send them than to the Oval Office. You may like the idea of a Warren presidency now. But trust me, it's guarnteed that a President Warren will do or say something that will piss you off. It's a hazard of being president.

The Senate is where she wants to be and where she has the most freedom to say what she means and do the most good. A President Warren would be hamstrung beyond belief and subject to more political whim by the electorate than what it's worth.

Now, would I'd like to see a larger Democratic field and a more progressive one as well? Yes, I would. At this point, I'm not concerned with who the nominee should be. That's another debate and it's much too early for that for my blood. But beside that point, regarding Senator Warren and her service in the Senate, that is the place where she can do the best for all by working with or against any president, Democrat or (hopefully not) otherwise, as a Senate leader.

I like her where she is and I hope that the Senate will eventually come around to her way of thinking. That could never happen if she's sitting in the Oval Office against her will and best judgement.

[SheilaT]

1. I will politely disagree.

In the Senate she is just one of 100 Senators, and here actual ability to influence very many other Senators is limited. Right now far too many in Congress, in either house, are right wing ignoramuses, or theoretical moderates who are terrified of losing the next election, of the NRA, of what might be said about them on Fox News.

If she were to run, if she were to become President, that would indicate a real change in the greater world outside the Beltway.

Warren, for all that she is only two years younger than Clinton, both looks and behaves like someone a decade or more younger. Plus, Warren is not in bed with Wall Street or the major corporations.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

2. What about Supreme Court? nt

[SheilaT]

4. What about the Supreme Court?

I don't think that Obama has nominated shining examples of liberal judges. The last remaining true liberal on the court seems to be Ginsberg, and yes, she was appointed by Bill Clinton, but it feels as though Sotomayor and Kagan are somewhat less than full on liberals.

Hillary Clinton's appointees would be, if we're very lucky, moderate. But I fear they would be at best center right, and over the years the center has moved more and more right.

I'd far rather someone like Elizabeth Warren making the appointments.

The real problem is that the Senate confirmed Clarence Thomas. As well as Scalia, Kennedy, and Roberts, with barely a mention that they might not be the most wonderful of all possible nominees. I watched some of the hearings when Thomas was nominated, and it was appalling, the way he was praised, the way Anita Hill was treated is beyond shameful.

In any case, I am completely underwhelmed by Hillary Clinton's supposed liberal credentials, and I don't think it's a very good idea to be electing members of the same political family in turn. It makes us look like a third-rate banana republic.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

6. To clarify, if Elizabeth Warren were to be nominated for the SC,

do you feel it would be better for the country if she accepted, or if she stayed a Senator?

[SheilaT]

7. I would want her on the Supreme Court, if that were the choice.

She would be vastly more effective there than in the Senate. But I think that anyone, least of all Hillary Clinton, nominating her is pure fantasy, right up there with the fantasy a decade ago that John McCain was going to switch parties and run for President as a Democrat.

Elizabeth Warren may be an attorney, but she does not have experience on the bench. I don't have the patience to do the research, but it's been a while since a non-judge has been nominated to the Supreme Court. That experience is apparently an unwritten qualification, even though I believe the President can nominate anyone, including a non-lawyer.

Nonetheless, my first preference is for Warren to be President.

[Art_from_Ark]

3. It's like saying "Obama could have been more effective in the Senate"

And even if Warren runs and loses, she's still in the Senate.

[SheilaT]

5. Right. I don't recall the Hillary supporters back in 2008

saying Obama should stay in the senate. Of course, they'd have had to say that about her also, so maybe that's why they didn't bring it up then, but are bringing it up now as an argument against Warren.

[okaawhatever]

8. I agree. Senator Warren knows what is best for her. She may be thinking of a future run

but she knows what she can do best right now.