Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Shrek

(3,970 posts)
Thu Dec 18, 2014, 05:24 PM Dec 2014

Why Elizabeth Warren won’t run and Jeb Bush won’t win

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2014/12/_2016_election_jeb_bush_won_t_win_the_republican_nomination_elizabeth_warren.html

For Democrats, clarity means the picture is still static. Hillary Clinton still towers over every potential competitor, the most popular person in the Democratic Party not named Barack or Michelle. Need proof? In a survey released this week, 50 percent of Americans said they could support Clinton in an election. And in a hypothetical primary—drawn from an average of available polls—almost two-thirds of Democrats support Clinton over everyone else in the field, from Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren to Vice President Biden. And, contrary to some observers, this isn’t like 2006 or 2007. Then, Clinton was a modest favorite in the field. Now, she’s the undisputed leader.

Where things have changed are in the internal dynamics of the party. A year ago, the left of the Democratic Party didn’t have an ideological leader. Now, it arguably does in the form of Warren. Many see this as a prelude to a presidential run, but it’s just as likely that she tries to institutionalize her influence as a party broker, someone who speaks for liberal Democrats and can claim concessions in return for support. Or, as Dana Milbank argues for the Washington Post, a left-wing analogue to former South Carolina Sen. Jim DeMint, who now serves as president of the conservative Heritage Foundation.

If that’s true, then the ambiguity of Warren’s status in the presidential race—“Is she running?”—is a strategic choice. The more Clinton, or anyone else, is worried about a Warren insurgency, the more likely it is that that person will try to adopt her positions or assuage her concerns as an ideological leader. No, the eventual Democratic nominee won’t be Elizabeth Warren, but she might sound like her.
20 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Why Elizabeth Warren won’t run and Jeb Bush won’t win (Original Post) Shrek Dec 2014 OP
If Hillary thinks sounding like a progressive is what's needed to win that's what she'll sound like. Scuba Dec 2014 #1
Not sure what "policy history" you are referring to but here's some of that reality ... Persondem Dec 2014 #8
Pro war, pro Wall Street, pro TPP, pro Keystone XL, pro H-1B visas, member of "The Family". Scuba Dec 2014 #10
Seems like your "idea" is a bunch of generalities. You could put "Some people say ... " in front ... Persondem Dec 2014 #12
Yeah, just a bunch of generalities ... Scuba Dec 2014 #13
still not very convincing Persondem Dec 2014 #14
"2001 was a tricky time. A lot of dems voted for war." Scuba Dec 2014 #16
That's alright. The vote for war is really the only thing you've got. Persondem Dec 2014 #18
I also dislike the infographic, lots of loose connections on it. Agschmid Dec 2014 #17
The issue was Hillary's support for it, not whether Obama did/will approve it. Scuba Dec 2014 #19
All Hillary would ever do is "sound" like Warren. And - 50% of the people in that poll did NOT pick djean111 Dec 2014 #2
Look a little more closely at Warren, too Warpy Dec 2014 #3
If Warren was showing those same numbers, I'm not sure we'd be hearing that excuse... brooklynite Dec 2014 #4
Not an excuse at all. Just playing with the numbers. A poll two years out, before djean111 Dec 2014 #5
Hillary should win but I fear she will figure out a way to lose. ... spin Dec 2014 #6
Perhaps some who are ask in the polls just happen to think Hillart is the strongest, most experience Thinkingabout Dec 2014 #7
I think anyone who writes Jeb Bush off is foolish davidpdx Dec 2014 #9
posted to for later. 1StrongBlackMan Dec 2014 #11
another bush in the white house would be disastrous tosoris Dec 2014 #15
To bad Hillary doesn't sound like Warren 4dsc Dec 2014 #20
 

Scuba

(53,475 posts)
1. If Hillary thinks sounding like a progressive is what's needed to win that's what she'll sound like.
Thu Dec 18, 2014, 05:28 PM
Dec 2014

But her policy history shows that she's no progressive.

Persondem

(1,936 posts)
8. Not sure what "policy history" you are referring to but here's some of that reality ...
Thu Dec 18, 2014, 11:28 PM
Dec 2014
Here's the reality ...

She has very low ratings from business and conservative organizations. Civil liberty groups, reproductive rights, entitlements and environmental groups all rank her rather highly. Her Education and employment ratings are erratic.

Sounds rather progressive to me.
 

Scuba

(53,475 posts)
10. Pro war, pro Wall Street, pro TPP, pro Keystone XL, pro H-1B visas, member of "The Family".
Fri Dec 19, 2014, 07:49 AM
Dec 2014

There's more, but you get the idea.

Persondem

(1,936 posts)
12. Seems like your "idea" is a bunch of generalities. You could put "Some people say ... " in front ...
Fri Dec 19, 2014, 01:51 PM
Dec 2014

... of it and run it on Fox. Not impressed.

 

Scuba

(53,475 posts)
13. Yeah, just a bunch of generalities ...
Fri Dec 19, 2014, 02:13 PM
Dec 2014
While Hillary was SOS, this happened ...

State Dept. Hid Contractor's Ties to Keystone XL Pipeline Company

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/03/keystone-xl-contractor-ties-transcanada-state-department



She lead State while it hired her associates, who previously worked for Keystone, to write the State Department's report on the pipeline.






Much is known about the TPP, almost all of it all bad. Hillary is a supporter of pushing this through, and in fact helped draft it..

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-01-10/hillary-clintons-business-legacy-at-the-state-department#p1

(Clinton's) also taken a leading part in drafting the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the free-trade pact that would give U.S. companies a leg up on their Chinese competitors.



Most of us not in the US Senate knew the war in Iraq was a total sham back in 2001, just as it proved to be. Millions of us marched in the streets.

Here here's Hillary on the topic ...




Pro-H1B.

Caught on Tape: "Hillary Clinton Pushes For More H1B Visas and OutSourcing"



Pro-GMOs.






Hillary's sucking up to Wall Street's money spigot is well documented. Here's a sample ...

Goldman Sachs Gives Hillary Clinton Almost Half A Million Dollars In Less Than A Week

http://jonathanturley.org/2013/11/01/goldman-sachs-gives-hillary-clinton-almost-half-a-million-dollars-in-less-than-a-week/



Hillary Clinton's Goldman Sachs Problem
She talks populism, but hobnobs with Wall Street.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/06/hillary-clintons-goldman-sachs-problem

Persondem

(1,936 posts)
14. still not very convincing
Fri Dec 19, 2014, 11:31 PM
Dec 2014

You forgot to link to Kevin Bacon in that scrambled poster which doesn't have much to do with HRC at all. It even throws Quaddafi in there to make it look worse.
Your TPP link has zero to with TPP. The article does show her advocating for US businesses in other countries, creating or safe guarding thousands of US jobs in the process. As for TPP, she may have started that process but it has been out of her influence for years so she can't be faulted for the final product.
The GS articles show that the Clinton Foundation made some nice bucks, not HRC. The CF does some really good things with that money. I doubt the thousands of women they help around the world care that the $ came from GS.

2001 was a tricky time. A lot of dems voted for war.

Thanks for trying but still doesn't beat her actual voting record and organizational ratings over her years in the senate IMO.

 

Scuba

(53,475 posts)
16. "2001 was a tricky time. A lot of dems voted for war."
Sat Dec 20, 2014, 08:34 AM
Dec 2014

Yet I and millions of others knew what was really happening. The complicity of "a lot of Dems" does not excuse Hillary.

Sorry if facts are disrupting your preconceived notions.

Persondem

(1,936 posts)
18. That's alright. The vote for war is really the only thing you've got.
Sat Dec 20, 2014, 12:46 PM
Dec 2014

And after 30 years in the public sphere, that ain't so bad. I bet you voted for Kerry, didn't you? Twice. Or did you vote for that slime ball Edwards in the primary? So you must have forgiven their war votes.

I also bet that I spent more time examining your links than you did examining her Project Vote Smart info. What was that about facts and preconceived notions?

Agschmid

(28,749 posts)
17. I also dislike the infographic, lots of loose connections on it.
Sat Dec 20, 2014, 12:13 PM
Dec 2014

And realistically it didn't get approved so even with all that "inside dealing" nothing was accomplished.

 

djean111

(14,255 posts)
2. All Hillary would ever do is "sound" like Warren. And - 50% of the people in that poll did NOT pick
Thu Dec 18, 2014, 05:31 PM
Dec 2014

Hillary! 51% or 52%, actually! All it is, is name recognition at this point.

Warpy

(110,913 posts)
3. Look a little more closely at Warren, too
Thu Dec 18, 2014, 05:39 PM
Dec 2014

She's been in bed with the bankers more than she's been on the outs with them.

I'm beginning to think the major choice we have in 2016 (and had in the last few elections) is whether this country is run by Big Oil (R-fascist) or Big Banking (D-not as fascist). That seems to be driving the economic policy of the last several presidencies.

I make most of my living from income from Big Oil. I'd rather take my chances under the less fascist in other areas Big Banking.

 

djean111

(14,255 posts)
5. Not an excuse at all. Just playing with the numbers. A poll two years out, before
Thu Dec 18, 2014, 05:43 PM
Dec 2014

candidates declare, before candidates state their policies, is just a name recognition contest.
I guess that's all we really are going for, though, right?

spin

(17,493 posts)
6. Hillary should win but I fear she will figure out a way to lose. ...
Thu Dec 18, 2014, 05:53 PM
Dec 2014

She's not a very charismatic person and she sometimes suffers from foot in mouth disease. Joe Biden also has this problem too but he gets away with it because he is so likable.

The Democratic Party needs to get out the youth vote to win which is one reason Obama won twice. I'm not sure that Hillary can get the support she needs from younger voters. "Vote for Grandma" may not work well. Also the fact that she can say, "I'm Bill's wife and if you elect me you will get two for the price of one" may not work either. She might say, "It my turn and I will be the first female President" and that should get some votes from women.. That may be her biggest selling point.

I personally don't want to see anymore Clintons or Bushes in the White House. Surely there are qualified people in both parties who might run and win and be good presidents. We don't need to turn our presidency into a dynasty.

Thinkingabout

(30,058 posts)
7. Perhaps some who are ask in the polls just happen to think Hillart is the strongest, most experience
Thu Dec 18, 2014, 06:32 PM
Dec 2014

And able to do the job as president.

davidpdx

(22,000 posts)
9. I think anyone who writes Jeb Bush off is foolish
Fri Dec 19, 2014, 07:27 AM
Dec 2014

If he gets in the race (as it appears he will) and wins the nomination, yes he will have an uphill battle because of his last name. However given the resources and the involvement of Karl Rove it will be one fucking nasty GE. Obama had a good grassroots organization, the resources, and smart people to win both the primary and GE in 2008. Also that was pre-Citizen's United. In 2012, Obama had the power of incumbancy with a crackpot Mormon that had an incompetent campaign running against him. The next time we may not get so lucky.

 

4dsc

(5,787 posts)
20. To bad Hillary doesn't sound like Warren
Sun Dec 21, 2014, 10:38 AM
Dec 2014

The more I hear from Hillary or lack there of these days the more I like what I hear from Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders. I don't want concessions from Hillary camps but rather a complete change of programs for her.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Why Elizabeth Warren won’...