Hillary has more than 200 economic advisors. Why doesn't Warren?

[joshcryer]

48. I think that this is a great thing Manny.

I think it means that she's really taking into consideration every possible route and narrative. She seems to be going after a fully policy oriented approach, one that takes everything into consideration, the upsides, the downsides.

Obama has acted as a transitional candidate, winging it, trying to get things done with the disaster that Bush left us. Would it be that we had a candidate that had a fully coherent policy approach that figured out everything that needed to be done. I remember saying that I was disappointed Obama didn't light a firecracker and usher in the change he spoke about. It's because I don't think he spent enough time actually doing the policy work, but rather focused on winning and messaging. That's why so many people are disappointed with Obama because he made a rather calculated, brilliant, messaging campaign while actually proposing little of significance (contrasted with his competitors, of course, the ACA was no doubt significant, but Clinton and Edwards proposed essentially the same thing and it was in the works for years before it became possible).

A centrist left leaning person, a totally and completely bureaucrat type is the type of person the country needs. Someone who cares about all of the utterly boring policy issues that doesn't excite a damn person, that is what we need. 90% of posts here are about single issue hot button issues. No one cares about the underlying policy that makes the government run. There are hundreds of thousands of people in the Federal government who are busting their asses to get stuff done. They need to be able to be approached as though they matter and their function as part of the Federal government meshes.

Incrementalism is literally the definition Democracy. Democracy is good in that change happens slow, nothing huge happens overnight and when it does it's rare. Our candidates have always run on this idea of changing everything. "Hope and Change" is quite possibly the most dishonest campaign message that we've ever had to have (and that's why I thought it was brilliant, mind you, it worked, didn't it?). Clinton needs to run on the pragmatist approach, and say, "the government gets it done." Don't shame the government as the Republicans are so fond of doing, bring out a celebration of policy wonks and people sitting in cubicles reading over random studies and surveys to figure out what needs to be done.

Because in reality that's how the government works, a government that just gets shit done, and doesn't play with the BS that the media and the right wing likes to conjure.

Would it be that Clinton had 10000 economic advisers and built an institution solely run by hundreds of managers and policy wonks to get her own policy narrowed down. Because once elected President she'll have access to something like that. "Flailing?" I don't think so, I think it's great. It's utterly great. Bring in another couple of hundred and set up some management system so all the ideas can be digested. Because when the government works together, it works fucking great.