Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Why wasn't this woman on the Democratic ticket in MA last Tuesday?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-24-10 12:40 PM
Original message
Why wasn't this woman on the Democratic ticket in MA last Tuesday?
Edited on Sun Jan-24-10 12:42 PM by BurtWorm


Ethan Porter makes an excellent case for her being on the ticket in 2012.

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2010/01/24/the_woman_democrats_need/

The woman Democrats need


By Ethan Porter
January 24, 2010

ON THE day after Tuesday’s electoral loss, the Obama administration brought an unfamiliar face to the White House - Elizabeth Warren, the Harvard Law professor noted for her staunch advocacy on behalf the middle class and fierce criticism of the bank bailouts. Perhaps the administration will take a more aggressive approach to Wall Street, along the lines of what Warren wants. But for Democrats to truly take ownership of the economic crisis, Warren will need to play a more prominent role. Not just her ideas, but the force of her personality is needed.

Warren and the Democratic Party need to think seriously about her prospects for higher office. Going into 2012, Massachusetts Democrats will have no shortage of candidates to choose from, eager, party-trained politicians ready to take a run. Republican Scott Brown’s victory to the US Senate last week made clear that voters crave something besides the norm: someone from outside the traditional political structure who can speak to their everyday, bread-and-butter concerns in a credible way. Warren fits the bill.

Warren has spent her career laying the groundwork for what might be called progressive populism. From her perch in Cambridge, she’s excoriated the unfair credit and lending practices that, in part, gave rise to the current crisis. She was the architect of the Consumer Financial Protection Agency, which, if created, would regulate credit cards and mortgages in the same way home appliances are regulated now. (Full disclosure: Warren once wrote about the agency in the publication I help edit.) And well before the bubble broke in the summer of 2007, when America was still riding high on George W. Bush’s economy, Warren was speaking out against the incredible pressure the 21st century economy was putting on the middle class. She was derided as a Cassandra, but she was right.

If all this made Warren a household name among progressives, it was the economic crisis that catapulted her onto the national stage. As chairwoman of the TARP Oversight Committee, she’s been responsible for examining the bank bailouts and the regulatory response. Warren has vocalized the concerns of many Americans - but not many politicians - who are outraged by the rampant greed that led to the crisis, and the refusal of Wall Street to take responsibility. “I think the problem has been all the way throughout this crisis, that the banks have been treated gently and everyone else has been treated really pretty tough,’’ said an exasperated Warren last fall, echoing what so many others - in both parties - have come to believe.

These people need someone of Warren’s stature. The timing is perfect: her term at TARP Oversight will come to an end in the spring of 2011, just as a Senate candidate would have to be ramping up. She’d have a base of support on the Internet as soon as she announces. Sure, a Warren campaign would provoke guffaws from the right: What does a Harvard professor really know about an economic crisis? Yet underneath the polished pedigree is a teenage bride from Oklahoma. She’s as much an everyday person as Scott Brown; she just happens to be a brilliant scholar as well. When she’s championing the middle class, she’s not doing so because it’s politically expedient, but because she feels connected to it in a way few politicians are. And she has the intellectual chops to convert that connection into dramatic policy change. Sadly, few politicians can say that, either.

The wisdom of a Warren candidacy is about more than just one race or one candidate. As Scott Brown demonstrated - and, yes, as Barack Obama demonstrated only last year - we’re living in an age that rewards candidates who can generate real enthusiasm on the Internet; who can credibly distance themselves from the party apparatus; and who offer populist but “post-ideological’’ politics. Warren meets all three criteria.

Ethan Porter is the associate editor of Democracy: A Journal of Ideas.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
dkf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-24-10 12:42 PM
Response to Original message
1. I could go for that.
Count me in.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eleny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-24-10 12:43 PM
Response to Original message
2. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RB TexLa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-24-10 12:46 PM
Response to Original message
3. Perhaps because she didn't win the Democratic primary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sanity Claws Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-24-10 12:47 PM
Response to Original message
4. I think she's great but
politics is not her strong point. Her talents would be better used in an appointed position.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
peace frog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-24-10 12:47 PM
Response to Original message
5. What, and put a REAl candidate of the people
in a position of power, where she would have an opportunity to effect meaningful change?

Never happen. Our current Senate will embrace Brown as a brother.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CTyankee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-24-10 12:48 PM
Response to Original message
6. She's fabulous. Despite being a Harvard professor, she is down to earth and immediately
comes across as credible and very LIKABLE.

However, if she had run and said she'd vote for the Senate hcr bill, she might be viewed as a "Washington insider."

The best place for her to be is viewed as "outside" not "inside." She adds real value to political conversations...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 18th 2024, 11:57 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC