I know it’s a little early to be talking about 2016, but there is nobody I would rather see run for the Democratic nomination than Elizabeth Warren. As President she would offer all of the many positive attributes of the Obama administration with few, if any, of the shortcomings. There is no politician that Banksters fear more.
Ever since she formally decided to challenge Massachusetts Sen. Scott Brown (R), Elizabeth Warren has been a national Democratic phenomenon.
Harvard law professor and consumer advocate Elizabeth Warren shakes hands as she arrives in Lowell, Mass. Tuesday, Oct. 4, 2011 prior to the debate between six Massachusetts Democratic candidates for the U.S. Senate seat held by Republican Scott Brown. (AP Photo/Elise Amendola)She raised more than $3 million in just the first few weeks of cash collection, rang up more than 796,000 hits on You Tube for her pronouncement that “there is nobody in this country who got rich on his own”, and is regularly drawing large number of volunteers to her campaign headquarters almost a year before the 2012 election.
Even veteran Democratic strategists have struggled to explain the Warren phenomenon within the liberal base of the party. But over the weekend, Rebecca Traister — in the New York Times magazine — offered the best explanation we’ve read about why Warren has taken off so high, so fast.
“Even though she’s running for the Senate and not for the presidency, the early devotion to Warren recalls the ardor once felt by many for Obama,” wrote Traister, adding:
“Embracing Warren as the next ‘one’ is, in part, a way of getting over Obama; she provides an optimistic distraction from the fact that under our current president, too little has changed, for reasons having to do both with the limitations of the political system and the limitations of the man. She makes people forget that estimations of him were too overheated, trust in his powers too fervid.”
Warren is to the — for lack of a better word — “professional left” what they thought (and hoped) Obama would be when he was elected, a true believer not willing to compromise on core principles of the party.
But there’s more to it. Warren has an edge — rhetorically if not in her relatively unassuming personality — that Obama lacks and that some within the party crave.
“The Republicans have been waging class warfare for a generation at the very least and [Warren] is more willing to call them out on it,” said one senior Democratic consultant granted anonymity to compare the two politicians. “Obama spoke more to hope. She speaks more to anger.”… [emphasis added]
Inserted from <Washington Post>
Keith Olbermann interviewed Ari Berman on why Republicans fear her so.
The most important thing for now is to preserve the ability of American voters to choose who will represent us. That ability is now under dire threat, because Republicans learned from their failure to establish a 1,000 year one party regime under Bush. We see that in the Republican war on voting rights for groups that traditionally support Democrats. If they have their way in 2012, I doubt that anything could undo their stranglehold on power, whoever opposes them in 2016.
18 Responses to “Elizabeth Warren Next?”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Rove has hundreds of millions to spend…Rove has all of the fortunes of the Koch brothers in hs hands and they will die before they willingly will let EW take the seat from that jackass Scott Brown. That said they won’t die but every dollar they spend against a formidable opponent like Warren the less there will be to spend against the more vulnerable but still electable liberals and conservatives.
And who the fuck made Karl Rove and Grover Norquist the supreme allied commanders of a political party…take a step back and list their financing and how much money they personaly claim as income on their taxes and you will see why they are not ideologues but “I wanna be wealthy too” dogs.
Kudos, TWM! Fascists die hard and dirty. They will do anything criminal or otherwise to get what they want and then do unspeakable things to keep what they gain. They are sociopaths. I don’t know who ‘voted’ Turd Blossom and Grover Rover defacto Dicktaters but they sure have a lot of sway over their minions. They are whores for the likes of the Koch Bros, Trumps, Forbes’ of the world. Lap dogs licking their master’s pants for the crumbs they receive for being so loyal. Sick and disgusting.
I couldn’t have said it better!!!
Rove and Nordquist have one thing in common. Both are focused on the creation of a 1,000 year Republican Regime where elections are meaningless.
Great comment.
“liberals and conservatives.” Forgive me I meant liberal and progressives.
Funny thing, but I read it the way you meant it without noticing.
Now there’s an interesting thought! She’d certainly shake things up. And spending 2012-2016 in the Senate would give her plenty of visibility and let us all see how she handles herself in the political world.
It’s no surprise that she’s already attracting a lot of attention, when she’s one of the few people in politics who’s willing to articulate what the polls tell us the majority of the country is actually thinking.
Thanks Infidel. I agree.
The RepublicanT money holders will do everything in their power, including cheating to see her defeated. But, I think the people of MA are smart enough not to fall for their tricks.
I do hope so!
I hope she does run in 2016. But, first, we must see to it that see gets elected in Massachusetts, then she how she does with that! I am very leery of believing what comes out of any politicians mouth — I want to see what they do, or don’t do, for their constituency and the American people as a whole. But, I have a feeling she would be fantastic as both a Senator and as the President of this nation. I hope she does run for it.
Terrie, to date her track record is excellent.
EW represents a very real hope— We needed Pres Obama , first , to articulate the problem and provide direction as to what is needed ; she seems to have the energy as well as the intellect to carry on and do the job– She has the anger , that if he has it , he has been unable or unwilling to communicate—
We have an election coming up— that needs to be the focus of our attention , disarming the Repugs– retaking control– then we can really think in terms of a Warren presidency..after she has won her Senate position !!! Not yet a done deal is it ?
Phyllis, I agree. This was a pleasant break from that grind.
YES!!!! ELIZABETH WARREN AS OUR FIRST FEMALE PRESIDENT IN 2016!!! She is the real deal and has no connection to Wall Street whatsoever. Any ticket featuring her would be a dream ticket!
Amen, Pope Jack!
I totally agree with Patricia A.:
“I love Prof Warren – she is intelligent, practical and has principles – she cares for all the population! She also has a way of cutting to the root of the problem that very, very few people have – God bless and protect her in every kind of way – the R Wing are acting more and more as if it were Germany in the 1930s – and we must all, every day, peacefully, determindly, relentlessly oppose them – or it will get worse!”
Perhaps, Obama, in passing her over as the director of the new consumer protection agency did the country a favour. Had she taken that job, she probably would have stayed there for a few years. She is now free to run for the senate. Once there, after four years of experience, she could make a natural transition to POTUS. It certainly won’t be easy, and the Republican/Teabaggers will be after her with everything they’ve got, but she is a class act and more than capable, with backing, of putting the thugs in their rightful place — on the street unemployed.
Lynn, it would not surprise me at all if Warren behind the decision. She knew there was no way she could be confirmed, once Republicans started blocking recess appointments, and I bet she did not want to sit in limbo for another year.