Elizabeth Warren announces 2020 run

[miniroller]

Dec 31, 2018 11:57:51 GMT -5 atexan said:

All I have to say is we better NOT nominate a white man. I think HRC came with unfortunate baggage that was of course rooted in sexism, but I don't think that will hold true for every woman. As much as I love Beto, I'd prefer him as a VP pick. Behind Kamala Harris, in my fantasy land.

Kamala/Beto is H & I’s DREAM D ticket

[aurora]

I am glad she is running for many of the reasons already cited (progressive values, normalizing the idea of female presidents, taking some wine* out of Bernie's sails, etc.). I don't know if she will end up as my top choice - of course it depends on who actually ends up running - but I just can't think it's bad that she's running.

Aside from that whole history of MA candidates losing. That's a scary trend.

*LOL autocorrect for wind but it's funny so I'm leaving it.

[kadams767]

Dec 31, 2018 12:00:42 GMT -5 spearmintleaf said:

Dec 31, 2018 11:09:52 GMT -5 NewOrleans said:

So we should continue to not empower women because patriarchy won’t like it, and therefore, we can support patriarchy and keep it intact?

It goes without saying you meant a white man, too, seeing as how you’re looking to placate bigots.

I did not mean a white man. Men have historically been trusted more than women regardless of race. One example would be that black men got the right to vote a long time before white women did. Also there’s Obama of course.

I don’t want to keep empowering the patriarchy. I actually ran for local office and won in direct response to Trump. I’m out there living all this, putting my money where my mouth is, because I strongly believe that women should be in office.

I think it’s a mistake not to look at the big picture of what got us here, how polarized and entrenched a lot of people are in their Trump beliefs, and what might break through those beliefs and convince them to vote for someone else. Maybe that person is a woman, but I do think it’s worth considering. What would a tepid Trump voter need in a candidate, to switch parties and vote D?

I’m sorry, but I don’t believe that, currently, a “tepid Trump voter” exists.  Anyone that is currently a supporter of him is all in, and the majority who voted for him last time were all in as well, they just don’t like admitting it out loud.  Pandering to these people is not the answer.  

[seeyalater52]

Dec 31, 2018 12:43:21 GMT -5 kadams767 said:

Dec 31, 2018 12:00:42 GMT -5 spearmintleaf said:

I did not mean a white man. Men have historically been trusted more than women regardless of race. One example would be that black men got the right to vote a long time before white women did. Also there’s Obama of course.

I don’t want to keep empowering the patriarchy. I actually ran for local office and won in direct response to Trump. I’m out there living all this, putting my money where my mouth is, because I strongly believe that women should be in office.

I think it’s a mistake not to look at the big picture of what got us here, how polarized and entrenched a lot of people are in their Trump beliefs, and what might break through those beliefs and convince them to vote for someone else. Maybe that person is a woman, but I do think it’s worth considering. What would a tepid Trump voter need in a candidate, to switch parties and vote D?

I’m sorry, but I don’t believe that, currently, a “tepid Trump voter” exists.  Anyone that is currently a supporter of him is all in, and the majority who voted for him last time were all in as well, they just don’t like admitting it out loud.  Pandering to these people is not the answer.  

Pandering to imaginary swing or crossover voters is my recurring annoyance every single cycle. This is not a thing! Do not run campaigns based on this mythology!

[miniroller]

Dec 31, 2018 12:45:00 GMT -5 seeyalater52 said:

Pandering to imaginary swing or crossover voters is my recurring annoyance every single cycle. This is not a thing! Do not run campaigns based on this mythology!

And (sadly) I think this needs to be repeated in every single 2020 thread in which it arises. We need to learn to automatically recognize the fabricated myth & memorize the defense to call it out for the BS that it is! (In Real Life, that is)
*totally not coming down on anyone personally in this thread, of course; just urging the repetition that, unfortunately, is still necessary
**Not At All that we’ll affect national campaigns, but I hope all people on here are getting prepared to talk politics with people that you formerly wouldn’t/ didn’t.

[NewOrleans]

Dec 31, 2018 12:00:42 GMT -5 spearmintleaf said:

Dec 31, 2018 11:09:52 GMT -5 NewOrleans said:

So we should continue to not empower women because patriarchy won’t like it, and therefore, we can support patriarchy and keep it intact?

It goes without saying you meant a white man, too, seeing as how you’re looking to placate bigots.

I did not mean a white man. Men have historically been trusted more than women regardless of race. One example would be that black men got the right to vote a long time before white women did. Also there’s Obama of course.

I don’t want to keep empowering the patriarchy. I actually ran for local office and won in direct response to Trump. I’m out there living all this, putting my money where my mouth is, because I strongly believe that women should be in office.

I think it’s a mistake not to look at the big picture of what got us here, how polarized and entrenched a lot of people are in their Trump beliefs, and what might break through those beliefs and convince them to vote for someone else. Maybe that person is a woman, but I do think it’s worth considering. What would a tepid Trump voter need in a candidate, to switch parties and vote D?

omfg

[Velar Fricative]

Dec 31, 2018 12:43:21 GMT -5 kadams767 said:

Dec 31, 2018 12:00:42 GMT -5 spearmintleaf said:

I did not mean a white man. Men have historically been trusted more than women regardless of race. One example would be that black men got the right to vote a long time before white women did. Also there’s Obama of course.

I don’t want to keep empowering the patriarchy. I actually ran for local office and won in direct response to Trump. I’m out there living all this, putting my money where my mouth is, because I strongly believe that women should be in office.

I think it’s a mistake not to look at the big picture of what got us here, how polarized and entrenched a lot of people are in their Trump beliefs, and what might break through those beliefs and convince them to vote for someone else. Maybe that person is a woman, but I do think it’s worth considering. What would a tepid Trump voter need in a candidate, to switch parties and vote D?

I’m sorry, but I don’t believe that, currently, a “tepid Trump voter” exists.  Anyone that is currently a supporter of him is all in, and the majority who voted for him last time were all in as well, they just don’t like admitting it out loud.  Pandering to these people is not the answer.  

ITA. Everyone who supports Trump right this minute (publicly or not) is not voting D. Let's not waste our time with that. Now, there are certainly people who did vote for Trump who haven't supported him since early on in his presidency, but even then, I suspect most of them will be more likely to vote third-party or not at all. The key will be voter turnout in the swing states, but that's not so easy since the GOTV effort will likely rope in some people who didn't vote last time who think Trump is doing swell, and it won't negate state laws and regulations that disenfranchise voters. 

What would also help is if there was some unicorn candidate who could run third-party and siphon away a significant chunk of votes from Trump to help the D in key swing states. But I don't think it's likely. A girl can wish though. ETA: Just checked Wiki and Ross Perot himself is still alive and kickin'...

[heyjude]

I actually think there are people out there who voted for Trump or for Johnson who regret it and may be persuaded to vote for the D candidate if it is “the right” candidate. But I really disagree that the Ds should be picking a candidate based on this tiny sample of people.

[msmerymac]

My in-laws like Warren as their senator, but they aren't super enthusiastic about a presidential run. Granted, they won't vote for Trump. But also, their state will vote for whoever the Dem nominee is anyway.

I will vote for a plastic bag caught in a tree if it was endorsed by the Democrats, personally, but I'm already hearing people say Warren is not progressive enough. LMFAO.

The next year and a half will 100% be about whether the future of the Democratic party is a moderate (read: white man) or a progressive. It's basically down to "who do we want to alienate less." That dichotomy is a terrible way to look at things. The messaging needs to be that progressive policies help the working and middle classes. But I guess that's too complex for the media to handle.

[nospaekae]

Warren will be 71 years old at the time of the 2020 election. Enough with this Bernie and Warren stuff. I'd like to see the Ds bring in someone younger and stir up the excitement that Obama brought. I like O'Rourke. If he could run that tight a race in TX, I think he really may be able to do it. Plus, his latest run really brought him some good national coverage.

[aurora]

Dec 31, 2018 13:28:06 GMT -5 heyjude said:

I actually think there are people out there who voted for Trump or for Johnson who regret it and may be persuaded to vote for the D candidate if it is “the right” candidate. But I really disagree that the Ds should be picking a candidate based on this tiny sample of people.

I also think there are people who voted for Trump who won't do so again, but I don't think most of them are his supporters anymore. His approval rating is staying pretty constant around 40%, but he got 46% of the vote, so I think his original tepid supporters have already left him. Who knows if they'll end up voting D, 3rd party, or staying home.

All of that said, I'm a bigger fan of the GOTV strategy with someone exciting than a compromise candidate.

[jigsy]

If its a long shot for a woman to win, why did Hillary get nearly 3 million more votes than Turd-n-chief?

[mbcdefg]

I know people who voted for Trump - mainly with the excuse But Abortion - but would’ve happily voted Democrat had Joe Biden been the nominee.

I don’t get the logic of people like this and I don’t know how to combat it in 2020.

[pixy0stix]

Dec 31, 2018 14:27:01 GMT -5 jigsy said:

If its a long shot for a woman to win, why did Hillary get nearly 3 million more votes than Turd-n-chief?

Related question - have the Ds done enough to rectify gerrymandered districts, or will this happen again?

[seeyalater52]

Dec 31, 2018 15:09:54 GMT -5 pixy0stix said:

Dec 31, 2018 14:27:01 GMT -5 jigsy said:

If its a long shot for a woman to win, why did Hillary get nearly 3 million more votes than Turd-n-chief?

Related question - have the Ds done enough to rectify gerrymandered districts, or will this happen again?

Most states where this is an issue have heavily GOP dominated state legislatures so I think the answer is a resounding no - although I’m not sure what they can really do about it.

This is one of the reasons I think focusing on winning back state legislatures should be a priority for the party. The gerrymandering and voter suppression issues won’t get better until we do, and the courts won’t save us every time (although nearly all the process that has been made on this front has been through court decisions.)

[Beeps (WOT?*)]

Dec 31, 2018 12:38:51 GMT -5 aurora said:

I am glad she is running for many of the reasons already cited (progressive values, normalizing the idea of female presidents, taking some wine* out of Bernie's sails, etc.). I don't know if she will end up as my top choice - of course it depends on who actually ends up running - but I just can't think it's bad that she's running.

Aside from that whole history of MA candidates losing. That's a scary trend.

*LOL autocorrect for wind but it's funny so I'm leaving it.

I initially thought of it as a misspelling for "whine" out of Bernie's sails. I have no idea why but it worked for me. lol.

[isabel]

Dec 31, 2018 9:48:27 GMT -5 pixy0stix said:

I just want all the announcements over with so we can get down to business.

I think Hickenlooper (former CO gov) is going to announce soon. I'm conflicted on him as well.

Oh, really? I feel pretty blah about him and do *not* like Warren.

I’m looking forward to others announcing and seeing how the field looks.

[isabel]

Dec 31, 2018 11:29:22 GMT -5 heyjude said:

EW is also helping to normalize a culture where women run for POTUS. This is a great thing in and of itself.

I do very much appreciate this about her run.

At present, I’m really crossing my fingers for Harris.

[seeyalater52]

Dec 31, 2018 15:28:10 GMT -5 isabel said:

Dec 31, 2018 11:29:22 GMT -5 heyjude said:

EW is also helping to normalize a culture where women run for POTUS. This is a great thing in and of itself.

I do very much appreciate this about her run.

At present, I’m really crossing my fingers for Harris.

Me too. As of right now keeping in mind every possible person who is rumored to be considering a run she is at the very top of my list.

[RoxMonster]

I would love to see Harris run (and win), but I am fine with Warren as well. I agree wholeheartedly that it's important to normalize women running for President, and I think she is a strong candidate.

I just would love for Bernie to sit this one out, but I am doubtful of that.

[Deleted]

Speaking of Bernie, workers on his ‘16 campaign want to see issues of sexual harassment and violence addressed prior to his potential ‘20 campaign.

www.politico.com/story/2018/12/30/bernie-sanders-campaign-harassment-1077014

[seeyalater52]

Dec 31, 2018 16:09:23 GMT -5 @bugginnine said:

Speaking of Bernie, workers on his ‘16 campaign want to see issues of sexual harassment and violence addressed prior to his potential ‘20 campaign.

www.politico.com/story/2018/12/30/bernie-sanders-campaign-harassment-1077014

Despite my intense Bernie hatred I feel compelled to say that I’m very very glad to see this conversation happening because it’s not an issue unique to that campaign or even to male candidates and solving it is going to require leadership from the top (ie the candidate.) I’ve never heard of a single staffed campaign where these weren’t issues (including at the state legislative level) but it’s time the culture shifted and people stopped acting like that’s just “the way it is” in politics. This is not a Bernie problem and while I’m annoyed he is running again this might be one good thing that comes of it and if he’s responsive I’ll give him kudos for that because these issues are rarely handled well by candidates and high-level campaign staff.

[eclaires]

I have age bias. I’d prefer not to vote for a 70yo because damn I am tired of boomers even if they agree with me on issues.

That said, I’d vote for my 8lb dog that is dumber and lazier than a box of hair if that’s who was running against the orange menace or any R for that matter.

[jigsy]

Dec 31, 2018 16:30:24 GMT -5 eclaires said:

I have age bias. I’d prefer not to vote for a 70yo because damn I am tired of boomers even if they agree with me on issues.

That said, I’d vote for my 8lb dog that is dumber and lazier than a box of hair if that’s who was running against the orange menace or any R for that matter.

The economic realities of Baby boomers versus Millennials


Trying to link the tumblr post, but, I can't....so, not trying to steal someones clever post. lol

[Velar Fricative]

Dec 31, 2018 15:16:53 GMT -5 seeyalater52 said:

Dec 31, 2018 15:09:54 GMT -5 pixy0stix said:

Related question - have the Ds done enough to rectify gerrymandered districts, or will this happen again?

Most states where this is an issue have heavily GOP dominated state legislatures so I think the answer is a resounding no - although I’m not sure what they can really do about it.

This is one of the reasons I think focusing on winning back state legislatures should be a priority for the party. The gerrymandering and voter suppression issues won’t get better until we do, and the courts won’t save us every time (although nearly all the process that has been made on this front has been through court decisions.)

I know it’s a pipe dream but just like conservative courts have been the long-term dream for evangelicals, the abolishment of the Electoral College is my long-term dream. I want the Ds to take this issue up as soon as they can when the federal and state governments are friendly to Ds because I expect more D POTUS losses with popular vote wins. There is no doubt in my mind that gerrymandering on the state level is what it is now because of the R fears of EC abolishment. It’s going to take a long time and a ton of work to undo what has been done though, but I am tired of the EC.

[eclaires]

Dec 31, 2018 16:42:52 GMT -5 jigsy said:

Dec 31, 2018 16:30:24 GMT -5 eclaires said:

I have age bias. I’d prefer not to vote for a 70yo because damn I am tired of boomers even if they agree with me on issues.

That said, I’d vote for my 8lb dog that is dumber and lazier than a box of hair if that’s who was running against the orange menace or any R for that matter.

The economic realities of Baby boomers versus Millennials


Trying to link the tumblr post, but, I can't....so, not trying to steal someones clever post. lol

Lol that’s great.

I just feel like even the most aware boomers are totally out of touch with my reality/needs as a millennial parent.

[morecoffeeplease]

In my opinion, hoping a man runs because you think they have a better chance, ignores all the work WOMEN did the last two years. I have been pretty politically active locally the last two years and the majority of people working their asses off are women, not men. So fuck anyone that won’t vote for a woman because she’s a woman.

[miniroller]

Dec 31, 2018 16:42:52 GMT -5 jigsy said:

Dec 31, 2018 16:30:24 GMT -5 eclaires said:

I have age bias. I’d prefer not to vote for a 70yo because damn I am tired of boomers even if they agree with me on issues.

That said, I’d vote for my 8lb dog that is dumber and lazier than a box of hair if that’s who was running against the orange menace or any R for that matter.

The economic realities of Baby boomers versus Millennials


Trying to link the tumblr post, but, I can't....so, not trying to steal someones clever post. lol

Just in case anyone else wanted this GEM of a link to share with others 😋❤️
(THANKS Jigsy!!!!)

[sparrowsong]

New: In Fox interview tonight, President Trump is asked whether Elizabeth Warren could win if she ran: “Well, that I don’t know, you’d have to ask her psychiatrist," he responds.

🙄

[suburbanzookeeper]

She's not my first fantasy choice but I'm happy she's throwing her hat in the ring, that was a great video to start with.

Honestly I have a number of acquaintances who pulled the "women aren't emotionally stable enough" to be POTUS and voted for Trump simply because of Hillary's lady parts. I think we've proven in the last two years that emotional stability isn't tied to having a uterus.