Elizabeth Warren Not Interested In Running For President

[Beacool]

Source: The Huffington Post

By Amanda Terkel
9/30/13



Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) insisted in a recent interview with The New York Times that she does not plan to seek the presidency.

"In the interview, Warren, 64, said twice that she had no interest in running for president, a point her aides amplify privately," reported The Times. "But she said she would continue to focus on economic fairness, saying it is the signal issue of the day."



Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/30/elizabeth-warren-president_n_4016319.html

---

I think that, if she doesn't choose to stay in the Senate, she would be a terrific Treasury Secretary in any Democratic administration.

[MADem]

1. I like her in the Senate--it's where she can do the most good.

She can school the rest of that crew, and they need the lessons.

[Beacool]

3. Yes, I think that she would have a more lasting influence in the Senate.

But if by some chance she chooses to leave it, I think that she would be an awesome Secretary of the Treasury.

[jwirr]

12. That is what we learned from Ted Kennedy. A good Senator is worth a lot.

[winter is coming]

37. +1. I'd be happy to see her anywhere she chooses to serve. n/t

[JDPriestly]

49. I thought that about Kerry and have been more than pleasantly surprised at the strength and

peace-oriented view he has brought to the job of Secretary of State. At least thus far I don't think he has been corrupted by the politics in the State Department.

I would like to see Elizabeth Warren run for president. It is too early for her to have made a definitive decision not to run.

It isn't just her stances on things. I think she has a wonderful personality. She has a unique capacity for talking with people, showing respect, but wrenching the truth out of them. She is not fooled by flattery as far as I can tell. She has a healthy mid-western humility and concern for outcome rather than for her own aggrandizement.

That is also true of Kerry although he is not from the Midwest. He has a humility that makes him effective in managing and dealing with people. Same for Obama and Biden.

On the other hand, Hillary can be extremely arrogant. I have seen videos of her in which she really was strident in an unattractive, difficult way. You can read her feelings of anger and impatience on her face.

Elizabeth Warren would be the better candidate. Hillary will be trouble. There is a reason that she lost to Obama in spite of her name recognition and the affection voters felt for Bill Clinton. She has some big problems. Her history, her personality. I don't want Hillary Clinton to run. My friends who are Democrats remind me that she has the money. But she had the money in 2008. She did not win the primary for very good reasons.

It would be a huge mistake for Democrats to get on a bandwagon for Hillary Clinton. And the Republican alternative could devastate and divide the country.

I want Elizabeth Warren to run. Our country really needs her.

[MADem]

59. The only person in the Senate who wanted SECSTATE more than Kerry used to be Joe Biden.

Kerry has been training to be SECSTATE for his entire Senate career. Everyone knew he had that ambition.

For HRC it was a consolation prize, but she did exceedingly well. I most certainly wouldn't call her "strident." Would you call a man who was assertive "strident?" You might want to check yourself--that's a gender-laden term and it is suggestive of bias towards women.

She's a Take No Shit, Large And In Charge, I Know What I'm Doing, decisive leader. Lucky John Kerry took over a State Department that is running like a finely oiled machine--HRC took over one that was fucked up and dysfunctional, and she fixed it--ask anyone over at State, especially the careerists, they'll tell you. After Powell left, the place went to shit--there was no loyalty and no morale, and it got worse and worse until HRC arrived and turned it all around. It wasn't Little Red Riding Hood who laid all that groundwork from which Kerry is benefiting over the last several years.

I DO want Clinton to run, and I want her to kick ass and take names. She's the smartest person in the nation and uniquely qualified to do the job. I LIKE her personality. I LIKE her brains. I'll work my ass off for the woman.

Elizabeth Warren is a cipher. You think you know her, but you don't. She struggled during her Senate campaign--in fact, she became flustered easily on more than one occasion when challenged about her heritage. She flagged when she needed to surge. She benefited from a huge influx of national money and help, and it was her financial expertise re: the whole Wall Street business that won the day, to say nothing of the fact that MA recognizes now that they're way overdue for some top tier female leadership --it was starting to get embarrassing, and Scott Brown's ham-handed gender bashing helped drive the point home.

EW was also able to overcome a lot of her obvious campaigning weaknesses because her lightweight opponent was a shitty debater. You think she'd have a lightweight opponent in a Presidential contest? Chris Christie would wipe the floor with her. Also, her spouse would be No Damn Help to her, and in a Presidential contest, you need the spouse to give you double coverage. The poor guy looks like the third Nazi from the left in Mel Brooks' Springtime For Hitler number in The Producers. No, I am not joking:

Now would be the time for the oppo researchers to really dig into her past, too, that mystery first husband (why did she keep her first husband's name, they'd whisper? And why did she run off to get married so YOUNG?), and they'd slime like hell and make her deny any nastiness they threw at her. I'm sure the fundies would have a field day with her early years--that kind of history is only ok if you're a Republican. And she would be crucified by the NRA on the gun issue, and she'd take shit from the libertarians and the Gimme Mah Weed crowd owing to her stance on pot--quotes like the ones you see in this article would come back to bite her hard in the ass: http://blog.norml.org/2013/03/19/sen-elizabeth-warren-takes-dig-at-pro-legalization-senate-candidate-dan-winslow/

She's not "vetted" on a national level. What sells in MA doesn't sell coast to coast. HRC is vetted, she knows how to play the game; there's nothing you can say about her that isn't Old News.

Most importantly, Elizabeth Warren has spoken on this issue-- she's not interested in the gig. She looks young and fresh faced, but she's HRC's vintage (HRC is a year and a half older), and she doesn't have 1/10th of HRC's experience. She's also just not as "lefty/liberal" as people here seem to think. She voted for Ronald Reagan, fachrissake.

Finally, MA has had five Senators since Ted died. We need some stability. I LIKE Warren in the Senate. I want her to continue to excel there. EW is the most junior "Senior Senator" in the Senate, and she needs to grow in the job, and do some good work in the whole consumer protection/bankruptcy arena. If she leaves, her expertise leaves--and it is needed where it can do some good, in the Senate, where LAWS are made.

[JDPriestly]

61. Yes. I would call a strident man strident.

It's worse than aggressive. Aggressive can be the result of determination, persistence. Strident is argumentative and harsh. That's worse than aggressive.

And I would call Hillary Clinton strident. Also her laugh is arrogant.

And her political positions in recent years have been pretty bad especially with regard to the use of military force. She sat on Walmart's board while they kept women in their places. Serving on a Walmart board is bad enough but serving as they discriminated against women? No, thanks.

I don't think that Elizabeth Warren's husband looks bad at all.

And what was Hillary doing while her husband fooled around? That is a question that will be asked.

Elizabeth Warren was very young when she first married. Who cares why she married so young? I suspect you are suggesting that she was pregnant. So what. Who in the world would care. Especially since, as you point out, she is around the same age as Hillary.

Elizabeth Warren does understand budgeting and finance. And that is precisely the kind of person we need today.

Does Hillary? Not like Elizabeth Warren does. And Hillary will continue to rely on advice from the likes of folks like Robert Rubin and Larry Summers and that ilk. Uggh. They led the country in the wrong direction economically during the 1990s and they will do it again.

We enjoyed a lot of prosperity or at least thought we did during the Clinton presidency. But the fact is that the dot.com boom was a disaster and it was during Clinton's presidency that the seeds were sown for the economic disaster of 2008. Bush tried to stave off the recession with two wars and a housing boom assisted by easy lending. He didn't manage to do that. But the seeds for that recession were sown when the Clinton, Rubin crowd ended Glass-Steagall.

And the dot.com boom was an even more obvious disaster than the housing bubble. Clinton did nothing to try to stop it in time.

So that is why in spite of Elizabeth Warren's seeming lack of experience (I disagree on that point. She taught Harvard law school and therefore probably some of the other people now serving in the government in various positions) does not trouble me. It is easy to find good advisers for a person who is extremely intelligent but needs to learn about some areas in a field. It is impossible to change a person's basic character or to impart to a sitting president the importance of not taking personal favors (such as huge amounts of money for speeches to corporate leaders over and over and over), and of not becoming corrupt. So I think Elizabeth Warren is way ahead of Hillary when it comes to character and lack of corruption.

[Beacool]

65. Her laugh is arrogant????????

Pardon me if I laugh at that remark. LOL!!!!!!!

What the heck kind of political analysis is that?

What Hillary has forgotten about politics, Warren still has to learn it. I think that she's fine where she is, but getting elected senator was her first time in politics. There's a lot more to running a country than speaking against Wall Street.

[JDPriestly]

68. What kind of the heck political analysis is that?

What kind of political analysis cost Gore a lot of votes because of his stiffness.

Gore is a great guy. I supported him strongly. But his reserve was interpreted by many, many voters as a sort of stiffness, distance, just not folksy enough.

I think that Hillary's laugh, voice, etc. would make it hard for her to be elected. I said that last time around, and she was not nominated.

These very personal characteristics are what make or break a candidate who will have to submit to hours and hours of TV coverage and ridicule.

That's just the way this system works.

[sheshe2]

52. Thank you MADem!

I keep saying that! She can do more lasting damage to the GOP and Wall Street in her present position. That's why we all voted for her.

[NYC_SKP]

2. Oh good! That opens up the field for Michelle Obama!

I keed, Beacool, I keed!

[Beacool]

5. Listen, you........

Give a hug to the furry friends.

[inch4progress]

6. Oh wow, that never crossed my mind. THAT WOULD BE AWESOME!

[Beacool]

11. You do realize he's joking, right?

[NYC_SKP]

13. She needs to be a senator first. She could be the Senator of AWESOME!

[Beacool]

14. I think that she's smart and talented enough to run for office.

But I don't get the feeling that she's interested in politics, at least not in running herself. I think that once she leaves the WH she will remain involved, but not in an elective office.

[Jamastiene]

26. Or a governor.

Or a Rep.

Isn't it true she was the one who talked President Obama (along with their children) into changing his views on gay marriage? I seem to remember hearing something like that.

I'd vote for her.

[inch4progress]

23. No I didn't actually.

There is no requirement that you have to have served in the senate. Nixon, bush, and Lincoln weren't senators.

Imagine it, the FIRST FEMALE PRESIDENT, AND SECOND CONSECUTIVE BLACK PRESIDENT.
Man, I'd be proud to call her Mrs. President Obama!

Realistically though, I think we might have a chance with Bernie Sanders with Warren as Vice President or vise versa. Maybe with Alan Grayson as Secretary of State?

[OmahaBlueDog]

41. ..ummmmmm

Richard Nixon did, indeed, serve in the Senate.

In 1949, Nixon began to consider running for the United States Senate against the Democratic incumbent, Sheridan Downey,[54] and entered the race in November of that year.[55] Downey, faced with a bitter primary battle with Representative Helen Gahagan Douglas, announced his retirement in March 1950.[56] Nixon and Douglas won the primary elections[57] and engaged in a contentious campaign in which the ongoing Korean War was a major issue.[58] Nixon tried to focus attention on Douglas' liberal voting record. As part of that effort, a "Pink Sheet" was distributed by the Nixon campaign suggesting that, as Douglas' voting record was similar to that of New York Congressman Vito Marcantonio (believed by some to be a communist), their political views must be nearly identical.[59] Nixon won the election by almost twenty percentage points.[60]

In the Senate, Nixon took a prominent position in opposing global communism, traveling frequently and speaking out against the threat.[61] He maintained friendly relations with his fellow anti-communist, the controversial Wisconsin senator, Joseph McCarthy, but was careful to keep some distance between himself and McCarthy's allegations.[62] Nixon also criticized President Harry S. Truman's handling of the Korean War.[61] He supported statehood for Alaska and Hawaii, voted in favor of civil rights for minorities, and supported federal disaster relief for India and Yugoslavia.[63] He voted against price controls and other monetary restrictions, benefits for illegal immigrants, and public power.[63]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Nixon#Congressional_career

Nixon, of course, went on to become VP under Ike, but was never a governor --he lost the race for CA governor to Pat Brown (Jerry's Dad).

[inch4progress]

46. I stand corrected:)

Still, I was sure there was no requirement. It sure does seem like there might be though after looking at the records of previous presidents.

[24601]

54. Since 1933 - Not Senators: FDR, Eisenhower, Ford, Carter, Reagan, GHW Bush, Clinton, GW Bush

Former Senators: Truman, JFK, LBJ, Nixon, Obama

Former Governors: FDR, Carter, Reagan, Clinton, GW Bush

Neither Senator Nor Governor: Eisenhower, Ford, GHW Bush

Former Vice Presidents: Truman, LBJ, Nixon, Ford, GHW Bush

Presidency was only elected office: Eisenhower

[inch4progress]

58. Thanks for taking the time to post that:)

[24601]

67. You're welcome.

[tarheelsunc]

8. Maybe you're kidding about that...

but she could realistically run for Senate against Mark Kirk in 2016 if she wants.

[Politicalboi]

53. I think Michelle would be good

Where ever she went, but the Supreme Court would be great too IMO. But after all her husbands been through, I know I wouldn't want to stick around and run. Not till the more teabaggers die off. Perhaps their daughters may run, hopefully we'll be a better place to live.

[Rowdyboy]

4. The decision is strictly hers to make. Not everyone is interested in running....

She's an exceptional public servant who can choose her ticket and she has my respect and support.

[Turbineguy]

7. Her intelligence, while sorely needed

is the kiss of death to conservatives.

[dotymed]

9. We REALLY NEED an honest,

Progressive reformer as POTUS. Sen. Warren fits the bill, my only hesitation has been her lack of long-term experience. IDK, that could work in her favor...

I wish that Bernie Sanders would commit to running. He has withstood the long term, corporate pressure in the House and Senate, while still being our voice.
Bernie is for the people.
I fear that unless we have a real peoples advocate as POTUS soon, we risk a civil war.
The people cannot withstand much more corporate rule without a fight.

We need this fight. Hopefully it is one of massive civil disobedience, otherwise it would be a bloodbath.
That, we do not need.

[KamaAina]

21. Bernie is not a Dem

you don't really want him to go the third-party route, do you? *cough*Nader*cough*

[dotymed]

33. I want him to go the peoples way.

No more corporatists *cough, cough.
He is a Progressive American who is not afraid of the elite...It is no longer about party ...

[NorthCarolina]

50. Who cares if Bernie is a Dem or not? He'd have my vote if he ran.

Just because someone calls themselves a Dem doesn't mean they really are. You have an entire slate of DLC members as proof of that.

[KamaAina]

51. True dat.

But as a non-Dem, he'd have to go third-party. Many of us are still smarting from when R-lph N-d-r did it in 2000.

[NorthCarolina]

56. Well then hopefully the Dems will be smart enough to not field another third-way DLC

candidate in 2016. If they do, I for one am ready to start looking elsewhere, and I don't think I'm alone in that sentiment.

[Scuba]

10. I'll support EW for whatever role she chooses to undertake. She's one our finest.

[Liberalynn]

17. Agreed

[Jackpine Radical]

15. I'm not taking this well. And you can pry my Warren for President sticker from my cold, dead

bumper.

[Beacool]

16. That's cool, we all have our favorites.

[FailureToCommunicate]

28. Senater Warren is great. We worked to get her elected here in MA, met her several times, however,

firm as she is on many issues, and nice as she is personally, I didn't get the sense of the kind of 'fill the room charisma' that winning recent candidates have shown...

Again, she's great and will make her mark on politics. Just not from the oval office IMO.

(P.S. BTW did you recently change your sig line to the one I've been using? 'Great minds' and all that.)

[Jackpine Radical]

30. I've been using that sig line for some time. At least a year, I think.

As for Warren & charisma--I dunno. I'm a bad judge of those things. I like to think I'm turned onby evidence of competence, comprehension & compassion, none of which can generally be reduced to soundbytes.

[MADem]

60. That's it, exactly.

We don't need "fill the room charisma" in MA when a person is right on the issues. We readily look beyond it when someone is saying things with which we agree.

On a national level, though, that kind of electricity is needed to run a WH campaign. I think her repeated "I'm not interested" replies are also suggestive of her feelings re: a run.

[bunnies]

34. This will make you feel better:

Im sure you can guess who made all these statements.

"I am not running for president. I am not running for president in four years. I am not running for president in 2008." - Nov. 3, 2004

"I will serve out my six-year term. You know, Tim, if you get asked enough, sooner or later you get weary and you start looking for new ways of saying things. But my thinking has not changed. I will not. [run for president in 2008] - Nov., 2004 on "Meet the Press"

"Ridiculous" - Dec. 6, 2004

"I will not be running for president in '08" - Jan.3, 2005

"People have asked me this, and I'm sincere when I say it's not on my radar screen." - Jan. 19, 2005

"It's not something that I'm focused on right now, but it's not something that I would foreclose in the future." - Dec., 2005

"My attitude about something like the presidency is that you don't want to just be president. You want to change the country. You want to make a unique contribution. You want to be a great president." - Aug, 2006

"The day after my election to the United States Senate, somebody asked me, am I running in 2008. I said at that time: 'No.' And nothing so far has changed my mind." - Aug., 26, 2006

"But it's fair to say you're thinking about running for president in 2008?" "It's fair, yes." "I would say that I am still at the point where I have not made a decision to, to pursue higher office, but it is true that I have thought about it over the last several months."- Oct., 2006 on Meet the Press.

"When the election is over and my book tour is done, I will think about how I can be most useful to the country and how I can reconcile that with being a good dad and a good husband. I haven't completely decided or unraveled that puzzle yet." - Oct., 2006

"I don't want to be coy about this. Given the responses that I've been getting over the last several months, I have thought about the possibility." - Oct. 26, 2006

[tularetom]

18. I'd like to see her take Harry Reid's Majority Leader job

I'd love to see what she did the first time there was a thread of a filibuster or even a publicity stunt like the one Ted Cruz pulled the other day.

[Zorra]

19. Rats. nt

[closeupready]

20. Darn it. Not the piece of news to turn around a crappy Monday.

[Ash_F]

22. Nooooo! /nt

[brooklynite]

24. Now that their fantasy candidate is gone, whatever will the anti-Hillary people do?

[Whisp]

35. Maybe it's too early for her to commit, like it is for Hillary.

*gasp!

[brooklynite]

39. Another part of the fantasy...

...that since the Election isn't until 2016, there's plenty of time to launch a campaign.

There isn't.

Other candidates, announced and prospective, have been using this period to reach out to potential funders (myself included), "help out" State Parties in places like Iowa and New Hampshire and opine on a broad range of policy issues to establish their bona fides. The Election, for better or worse, started at the Charlotte Convention.

[olddad56]

25. I love her being in the Senate, even if she does have too much integrity to be in politics.

[leftyohiolib]

27. EXCELLENT we need her where she is or on scotus - president is pretty power-less

[bluedeathray]

29. I wonder if the Hillary camp got to her? nt

[Beacool]

38. Please..........

[Art_from_Ark]

64. Why the rolling eyes?

That sort of thing does occasionally happen in politics, even presidential politics (TR, Chester Arthur and Rutherford Hayes come immediately to mind). In fact, it just recently happened in Arkansas, where the more liberal Democratic primary candidate for governor, Mike Halter, bowed out of the race "for the good of the Party" shortly after his primary opponent, the more conservative Mike Ross, got an endorsement from General Wesley Clark.

[Beacool]

66. The eye-roll was for the implication by the previous poster that the Clintons pressured Warren

not to run for president. Hillary tops the polls by double digits against any Democrat and most Republicans too. If she's interested in running, her camp doesn't need to pressure anyone. I think that Warren was being honest when she said that she's not interested in running for president. The presidency is not every politician's goal.

[Art_from_Ark]

69. Hillary has the name recognition

That's why her numbers are so high at this early stage of the game, when few people besides political junkies and Massachusetts voters know a lot about Elizabeth Warrren. It's a lot like in 1989, when Mario Cuomo was the odds-on favorite to get the 1992 Democratic nomination. I believe that Senator Warren could certainly give Hillary a run for her money, and it is entirely plausible to me that she was pressured to keep her hat out of the ring.

[Beacool]

71. You're entitled to your opinion.

But that's not how I see it.

[Art_from_Ark]

72. Hillary was the first lady of my state for 12 years

During that time, her attempts to "improve" Arkansas's educational system really ticked off a lot of teachers, including my former super-diehard Democrat history teacher, a man who took me to a Jefferson-Jackson Day picnic so I could meet Dale Bumpers (one of Arkansas's two Democratic US Senators at the time) and who reveled in having our history class watch, live on TV, the Watergate hearings that were skewering then-President Nixon.

When Hillary and Bill came to Arkansas in August 1993 for their first visit after entering the White House, I was there at the Springdale airport to wish them well. As soon as he got off the plane, Bill immediately went to the crowd and started shaking hands (including mine), sometimes reaching two or three people deep into the small crowd who had gathered and waited in the hot August sun for his arrival. Hillary followed, meekly trying to explain why she couldn't do what her husband, the President, was doing (that is, shaking hands with the locals). I actually have that on videotape somewhere. At any rate, I got the impression that she was uncomfortable around the common people.

I really don't think that the 2016 Democratic nomination should just be handed to Hillary. I would much rather have a choice of candidates, and if Hillary gets the nomination on her own merits, then fine. But personally, I would much rather see a Democratic nominee with more fire in his (or her) belly than Hillary.

[geek tragedy]

31. Warren's not enough of a politician to run for President. nt

[Whisp]

32. If that's true, that's a shame.

Warren would be the right candidate to continue the good policies Obama has set, and move forward.

Clinton will drag everyone back what with her chomping for wars and forgetting which skeletons she has in which of her closets. She kinda a Mr. Magoo that way.

[MannyGoldstein]

36. And she's supposed to say... what?

Maybe she's not interested, but even if she is I'd expect her to say she's not interested at this point.

That's her style.

Also, no use in getting the Hillary juggernaut riled yet.

[Beacool]

40. I think that she says what she means.

She tends to speak frankly.

[MannyGoldstein]

42. I suppose we'll find out! nm

[Tx4obama]

44. Her 'actions' show she is NOT running. See Comment #43

[JI7]

62. her style is being pretty clear about what she wants/intends to do

so it would not be like her to say she is not interested if she is.

if she was seriously considering it she would have said something about keeping her options open.

[Tx4obama]

43. It has been obvious all along that Warren is NOT going to run

because she is NOT doing anything at all to add any 'foreign policy' background/knowledge/experience to her résumé
Warrens BIO: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_warren


Senator Warren's committees:

Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, Special Committee on Aging
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_warren#Committee_assignments


Compare Warren's committees above to those of Obama's below when he was a U.S. Senator...

Senator Obama's committees:

Obama held assignments on the Senate Committees for Foreign Relations, Environment and Public Works and Veterans' Affairs through December 2006. In January 2007, he left the Environment and Public Works committee and took additional assignments with Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions and Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. He also became Chairman of the Senate's subcommittee on European Affairs. As a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Obama made official trips to Eastern Europe, the Middle East, Central Asia and Africa. He met with Mahmoud Abbas before Abbas became President of the Palestinian National Authority, and gave a speech at the University of Nairobi in which he condemned corruption within the Kenyan government.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obama#Committees

[MannyGoldstein]

45. After 8 years of a depression for the 99%...

I don't think voters will be thinking much about foreign policy. The Syria escapade also indicates that.

They'll be thinking about stopping the ability of the big banks to commit bipartisan-backed economic sodomy against us little folks. Do we know any elected Democrats on the side of the 99% on this? Hmm...

[Calculator Alligator]

47. politicians seldom answer affirmatively to that question

Even if they are planning to run.

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

48. Progressives should draft Sherrod Brown

He's won re-election decisively in a battleground state numerous times and has more Senate time than Warren did, anyway.

[Hekate]

55. Can you blame her even one tiny bit?

As a presidential candidate she can look forward to being chewed to bits, and worse as President in this climate. Four years, 8 years tops.

As a Senator, OTT, she can look forward to gaining power, influence, and knowledge every year for as long as she stays in office. At her age she could easily stay as long as she ever-lovin' wants to keep doing the work, in 6 year increments.

[Qutzupalotl]

57. That's too bad, but of course she's great in the Senate.

She comes across well on TV and clearly frames issues important to working people.

But if you need a glimmer of hope, "not interested" is not the same as ruling out entirely. A Draft Warren movement could happen, and that might change her mind.

[Kablooie]

63. I think she will be more effective focussing on economics from the Senate.

She is such an expert her energies are best spent exercising her expertise.
A president has to handle so many things that they can't focus on their specialty.

[lonestarnot]

70. Well ok then. :(

[Decaffeinated]

73. She doesn't want to lose...

She doesn't have the support, money or machine to make a legitimate run...