I think the lesson of Elizabeth Warren is not about sexism. It's about economic populism

[ProfessorPlum]

I'm seeing a lot of posts on other social media platforms about how it's a shame that such a talented, smart, woman couldn't win the nomination, emphasis on the woman.

I'm a huge fan of Warren and have been for years, well before 2012 and her senate win against Scott Brown. She was my number one choice in the current race, up until it was clear (to me) that she was changing her policies and messaging to put a stake into Sanders' chances. When I contemplate her rise and fall in this race, I see a clear pattern of being a strong, loud, and coherent voice for economic populism and fighting against wealth concentration and for healthcare, to muting, muffling, and muzzling those messages. The change in her rhetoric coincided with her drop in the polls, and also with her bringing on former Harris advisers and then former Clinton advisers. My guess is that those new advisers told her to tamp down her message of economic populism, fighting the fraud of the banks and financial institutions, and creating more economic equality and opportunity, but maybe it is just a coincidence.

The good news is, that I think she could have cleaned up at this point, despite her gender, by being a candidate who clearly was not afraid to promise to fight for economic justice. The bad news is that a lot of people seem to be mistaking her loss in the polls with sexism.

Just my 2 cents, your mileage may vary.

[LexVegas]

1. Bullshit. nt

[BeyondGeography]

25. Yes, total bullshit

[TwilightZone]

2. So, you entirely discount the role sexism plays?

Good luck with that.

Assertions like these are why many of us have difficulty taking Sanders supporters seriously. They seem to routinely discount all factors outside of Sanders' narrow focus and similarly dismiss the concerns of others if they don't fall into that narrow window.

[el_bryanto]

4. It kind of seems like maybe you didn't read the post. nt

[TwilightZone]

17. It kind of seems like you didn't.

Ignoring the concerns of others in yet another post complaining about how Bernie is actually the real victim here isn't a convincing argument.

[ProfessorPlum]

5. please don't strawman what I am saying

sexism plays a big role in a lot of what goes on in America, unfortunately. What I am saying is that Warren was beating everyone in this race, despite sexism, by sticking to her core economic message. She stopped beating everyone when that message changed.

I was a strong supporter of Warren until less than a week ago when it became clear that the moves she was making were designed to hurt the Sanders run.

[blm]

14. She didn't change her message, Joe-Pete-Bernie camps EXAGGERATED

in their political claims against her.

One side insisted she backtracked and that her numbers didn’t add up, then pointed to lazyminded articles making that claim, ignoring Krugman and other economists saying her numbers DID add up.

The other side claimed she is a liar who never really supported Med4All.

The truth was that she is all for Med4All and added a reasonable timeline that other campaigns distorted into a political opportunity for themselves.

[dansolo]

24. The numbers added up. They were just bullshit.

Her numbers relied on even more rediculous assumption than even Bernie's did.

[blm]

35. Krugman disagrees with your characterization.

[TwilightZone]

18. "Warren was beating everyone in this race"

Very briefly and months before voting started. In reality, she was never in a position to seriously contend once the voting started. Polls taken months before the voting starts are irrelevant.

You think it's because Bernie's always the real victim in everything. I disagree.

[PunkinPi]

7. Agree. nt

[Blue_true]

39. Sexism had something to do with it if Warren was going after Sanders

core supporters. The words that they used to describe her confirm that.

What really did Liz in is her not clearly delineating a capitalist alternative to the plans that Sanders inaccurately made his own. I contributed to her, but her failure to distance from Sanders caused me to drift around, kicking Bloomberg's tires.

[TwilightZone]

41. I agree that the lack of differentiation with Sanders was a tactical error.

My point was that there are many factors to every loss, and summarily discounting one that seems reasonably obvious like inherent sexism doesn't make a lot of sense. I think there's plenty of direct and indirect evidence that could support the argument.

It's certainly not the only cause, of course, and I agree that some of the issues were tactical like jumping on Sanders' M4A plan initially, then trying to create some distance by providing details. I think details are sometimes best left to after one wins since basically no plan survives Congress, but that's another discussion entirely.

[dlk]

3. Nice try, it was the sexism

If don’t think it was, you’re not paying attention.

[Cary]

6. "The bad news is that a lot of people seem to be mistaking her loss in the polls with sexism."

Agreed. It is unfortunate.

It is also gaslighting. Some people are just compelled to bash Democrats and those people tend to support a certain candidate still in the primary.

[doc03]

8. It wasn't sexism that took Warren down it was her pie in the sky programs and

a dozen multi-trillion dollar plans that have zero chance of passing. She also turned people off with her preachy I know it all
and got a plan to save us all attitude. The same goes for Sanders, with his pie in the sky programs that would bankrupt the country.
Sanders played a big part in getting Trump elected the last time. Middle class adult Democrats and used to be Democrats that I
know say the reason they voted for Trump was people like Sanders, Warren and some others that have gone too far left.

[ProfessorPlum]

9. your words don't seem very credible. See you later.

[doc03]

10. Look at what happened Tuesday, we ain't buying it. nt

[MrsCoffee]

15. Says the guy in denial.

[hay rick]

11. I think she was taken out by the medical/insurance industry complex.

And their minions in the media. Her fall in the polls did correspond with Bernie's rise, but that was 70 years after it was obvious she was female. I don't think people who deserted Warren switched away from her because they suddenly figured out she was a woman.

[ProfessorPlum]

19. good point

[obamanut2012]

12. No, it's sexism -- take your head out of the apologist sand

Am sick of people not acknowledging the sexism Hillary and the rest of women get.

[MrsCoffee]

13. Of course you do.

But we are fucking sick of it.

Quit burying your head in the sand and stop excusing sexism. It’s a really ugly look.

[Act_of_Reparation]

16. Disagree. Emphatically.

We could go back and forth about it, but what's the point, really? It's not like I can provide photographic evidence of sexism affecting millions and millions of uneducated white men as they voted in the primaries. All I can say is I am married to an educated woman, and I look at the insane standard she's expected to meet to attain a modicum of respect from her male colleagues, and I look at how Warren was treated by her colleagues and the media, and I see a lot of fucking similarities.

[blm]

36. ✔️

[LanternWaste]

20. The existence of more than just one 'lesson' is more than probable.

Also, one lesson does not deny, weaken nor threaten the existence of another lesson.

Additionally, you allege her message changed midstream (without providing any evidence as such), and followed that with an 'after-this-therefor-because-of-this fallacy.

You've predicated your entire opinion on a premise full of implicit flaws, lack of supporting evidence and logical fallacies, as is often the case when one is minimizing and trivializing actual concerns.

So if that's your two cents, you may want to think about trading up. It's ironic you indict someone else with "your words don't seem very credible..." But I get it-- hold others to a higher standard than we hold ourselves to, and we'll never be disappointed in our own actions or words.

[ProfessorPlum]

21. It's a good thing I didn't mark this as my opinion

and that there might be others

[dansolo]

22. I saw the exact opposite

Economic populism is what took down her campaign. Warren's strengths are her intelligence, her wonkiness, and her empathy. If she had played to her strengths, and stayed away from the populism, she would have had my full support. I wanted to see her come up with a novel approach to the issues being debated, not just repackaging Bernie's. As long as she was just being a proponent of Bernie's ideas, she was never going to peel away his support. As people are fond of saying, why vote for populist-lite when you could vote for the real thing with Bernie.

[loyalsister]

23. Inclusion is unpopular among traditionalists

and wealth worshipping voters.
Inclusion of people who are non-disabled, white, cis men, are okay when they like some among those "others" as long as they try to fit in.
Whiteness and the pursuit of wealth still rule the party.
Look at the reaction, from Democrats, Andrew Yang got when he proposed a policy that recognizes a baseline equitable starting gate.
People want to grab onto something to feel a sense of superiority. And I think they want a candidate who represents either that ideal or the next best thing. Unfortunately it's a Teddy Roosevelt inspired model of manly Americanism. Machismo, war and wealth worship, arm twisting, and whiteness all factor in. Warren wanted to be more inclusive of people who don't fit that mold.

[Squinch]

26. Another man saying it could not possibly be sexism. I lulzed

[walkingman]

27. Of course we all just love getting screwed by the Corporate Elite - nah, it is clearly sexism.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

28. Bernie is getting his clocked cleaned now for his so-called economic populism.

Warren was a far better advocate for it because she could at least explain how it could be paid for, while Bernie just keeps ranting about those evil billionaires. It was sexism, not economic populism.

[ehrnst]

29. Nope. Not at all. Sexism was a major factor.

To deny that is naive, and I think it's become a rationalization for Sanders supporters.

Sexism Sank Elizabeth Warren
https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/warren-sexism-2020/

It’s important to reckon with the role sexism played in the 2020 Democratic primary
https://www.vox.com/2020/3/6/21166338/elizabeth-warren-loss-2020-primary-sexism

Has gender bias helped Bernie Sanders outperform Elizabeth Warren with voters? Seems like it
https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-03-05/skelton-gender-bias-bernie-sanders-elizabeth-warren

[Botany]

30. She was frozen out as per coverage of her and her campaign

And part of that was out and out sexism. And her policies made the rich boys nervous.

[empedocles]

31. Appeal and charisma away from the college educated, would be my guess a factor

[Squinch]

32. Also, your point about how, if only she had pushed a more

Bernie- like message, she would have cleaned up? Despite ALL the evidence from 2018 and so far in 2020? I lulzed at that too.

[Fiendish Thingy]

33. Nope - it was a sexist media narrative about the "electability" of a woman

That many here regurgitated way before Warren “muted” her message.

The plain truth is Warren lost support because people were afraid that other people wouldn’t vote for her against Trump.

[Happy Hoosier]

34. Among progressives, you might be right.

Way too many of them would rather be lied to about what is possible than to embrace a somewhat less ambitious and more realistic approach.

In that case, maybe the the lesson is that if you are going to make unrealistic promises, you might as well make them HUGE unrealistic promises.

[Blue_true]

37. Her biggest mistake was not distancing herself from Sanders very early on.

She was content to be a mini-Me for his expounding of policies that they both feel are needed. She failed to hit hard that her solutions would ALL be crafted within a free market economic system, but that big players would not be allowed to use their size and economic power to smother innovation.

[diva77]

38. Agree 100%.

just saw your post after I posted an OP

[StarfishSaver]

40. People twisting themselves into knots trying to deny the obvious