Elizabeth Warren was the only female Democratic senator that did not show up for Hillary's big event. Given that she and Bernie Sanders are very similar in rhetoric and platform, do you predict Warren will come out in support of Bernie later in the campaign?
Sanders and Warren are ideologically on the same spectrum. Warren is possibly the most powerful Democrat in the party. She could break Clinton and make Sanders, but somehow I think she'll play it lowkey and exert power from the sidelines.
A definite possibility. I don't think I'd respect her in the same way I do now if she were to do so, however. She talks a good game about real change and this is her chance to help make it happen. A Sanders nomination would greatly empower the progressive movement within the Democratic Party, a Clinton nomination would solidify the hold of conservative Dems/warhawks/centrists on the party's general right-ward trend (the right-ward trend is clear when you compare and contrast past Democratic presidents like FDR to more recent presidents like Bill Clinton and Obama). If she sits this election out, it will convince me (and likely others) that she's all talk and no walk.
I get your point, but I'm not sure if that's entirely fair. Warren may be able to do more good from the sidelines, as a party influence rather than being in the driver's seat (POTUS). I think Hillary has moved more to the left (even though she is center-right) because of Warren, rather than Sanders. Hillary fears Warren, and she is right to fear her.
Fair point, and I agree to an extent. I still maintain, though, that someone with immense political power that constantly talks up messages of "progress" and "change" should be using that political power to the best of their ability to prevent an establishment candidate like Clinton from strolling up and running off with the presidential nomination. I believe 2016 is an extremely vital election to the progressive movement, and if Warren pockets her influence for this election then she will be missing a chance to be a part of that progress and change she preaches.
I basically agree. Fortunately or unfortunately, I think Warren has taken a cue from Obama. Which is that incremental change is better than no change. As an outsider looking in, I would prefer a massive redirection towards legit solutions rather than half-measures designed to appease and compromise (e.g. Obamacare). Obama is late to the game in realizing that being a centrist has gotten him nowhere. At the same time, I think a president should IDEALLY try to work with both sides of the isle. The problem is that other side of the isle is currently driving around in a clown car wearing beanies with propellers.
Liz is a nobody she had her moment in the sun and now it's all hands on deck for Hillary. Neither Liz or Bernie can win for the Democrat party and it's Hillary or bust If it even matters, she will climb aboard the Clinton train and might even get a cabinet position in the Clinton admin where she can do greater damage to this country.
The pantywaists are in as much of a tizzy over Warren as they are over Clinton, and will snivel even more when Warren endorses her. That's just what they do. An endorsement is a political statement, not a philosophical one. Warren's certainly savvy enough to know that her agenda is furthered by backing a winner, especially one over whom she has demonstrated influence in establishing priorities. Rushing to do so does not strengthen that influence.
Between Clinton grabbing to women vote and Sanders the leftist vote, she'd be polling like every other also ran. Now in a race without a woman or leftist (and especially if neither), totally different story.
A winner? You can't mean Hillary Clinton lol. Bernie Sanders has the record of being a winner. The man was an Independent senator for crying outloud. And an openly socialist one at that. Representing Vermont. The fact that he won a senate seat and has kept it as long as he has is a testament to his winning nature. The fact that he went from a nobody at 2% to 30%+ and even neck in neck or ahead in some early primary states in a couple months is damn impressive. And Bernie raised just as much money as major Wall Street candidates with individual, $30 donations. The man is running laps around everyone for the Time People of the Year poll. Hillary was a token wife for an impeached President, a sellout senator, ran for President already...crashed and burned...losing to some nobody community organizer who barely showed up to vote in his single political seat as state senator, and ended up serving as secretary of state under the mediocre administration that turned out to be....and has had nothing but scandal and controversy following her since. So, if Elizabeth Warren is going to be politically savvy and choose a 'winner' hopefully she has the common sense to know which of the two that actually is.
If Sanders take Nevada (Iowa and NH are locks for him) it's over. If not then that's still 2-2 with Sanders having the advantage of being the populist and it won't be until Super Tuesday that the race will be decided. And yet with the race a toss up people still just assume it's Hillary. I get why the Repubs say that, the Dems choosing Hillary would be like the Repubs choosing Trump but everyone else? Did people forget the last time Hillary fought a populist in the Dem primary?
Wake up on the wrong side of the bed? Is that a strong sentiment of disillusionment I smell? I agree with you though. Warren is going to wait until someone is nominated to fully endorse them. Hillary will win the nomination no matter how many politically aware liberals/liberal moderates dislike the idea. She is well known and has never been successfully labeled a "socialist". Unless something strange happens the democratic primary is just a formality.
Point taken. I like Sanders well enough, but I can't see him winning a national election. Obama is/was way more centrist, by the publics view anyway. I think Sanders may appeal to many democrats, but not enough know him, and fewer have faith he might win the presidency. I never would have guess Obama would win either though, at least at this point. Ya got me there.
Sanders would do better in a general election than Clinton. And polls taken reflect that. Check RCP. Sanders may not be a run of the mill centrist Democrat like Clinton, but he also doesn't have a several decade long career of controversy trailing behind him. He didn't name "The Republicans" as his biggest enemy in the Dem debate. And he is seen by most, even those who staunchly disagree with his ideas, as authentic and honest. Contrasted with the general view of Clinton as dishonest and corrupt. I wouldn't write him off so easily.
If that proves true it will completely blow the top off the conservative narrative. As is I have quite a few reservations about everyone leading the polls, democrats and republicans, but none of them completely freaks me out. (Well... if Ted Cruz moves up much more... but lets not go there.) If Clinton has the money to make enough noise I think she will move up quickly. Sanders seems energized at this point, but once the big contributors start kicking in I think Clinton will get the lions share. And that will start her momentum. Curious to see if any of the big guys will put much money on the GOP candidate. They haven't yet, and won't if its a sure loser for the presidency. It will be a funny turn if our democrat, (nazi/socialist/communist), candidate gets the most from corporate sponsors. A lot of sour grapes on the right I'm sure. I'm watching as it goes though and your predictions may prove better than mine. 18 months ago I was convinced this would be a dismal Clinton-vs-Bush scenario by now, and look what we have now!
Not really. Pretty near every Democrat knew Hillary would be the 2016 nominee prior to the 2012 election. It was a concession made by Obama to bring the Clinton on board for his campaign. Some states had to change their primary laws as they stated only a registered Democrat would be allowed be on the ballot in the Democratic primary. Sanders is for show, to give the Democratic nomination process an air of legitimacy. The Democrats can't admit a backroom deal some 4 years ago had already decided their nominee for 2016. There is nothing illegal about that, in fact deals like that had been made in the past before the current primary system began. Back in the day when the nominees were chosen in smoke filled rooms and not via the ballot. No, Warren will not upset that boat. Only 2 Democratic House members have endorsed Sanders, Clinton as of today has 122 Democratic house members endorsement out of 188 Democratic House members total. Clinton has 38 of the the 46 Democratic Senators endorsement if one counts both King and Sanders as Democrats which both caucus with and vote the Democratic party line. If not, then that is 38 out of 44. Clinton also has the endorsements of 12 out of the 17 sitting Democratic governors. There will be no rocking the boat by Warren.
It's fun to watch the Democratic Party coalesce in their staid, traditional deportment whilst a vocal segment of the disenchanted GOP rage against their Party's customary stalwarts - soporific stability in one camp and dissident novelty in the other.
