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 Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
16 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

bluestateguy

(44,173 posts)
1. Here's the thing
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 11:46 AM
Mar 2016

In lieu of Bernie, Warren would have been a far more viable candidate to win the nomination had she run against Hillary, and far more viable for November too.

Rose Siding

(32,623 posts)
4. I think she knows her limitations
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 11:51 AM
Mar 2016

While I've no doubt at all she'd be a better candidate in all ways than Sanders, she knows Hillary well enough to be aware of the breadth of Hillary's knowledge/experience/successes.

BlueMTexpat

(15,365 posts)
7. I totally concur.
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 12:26 PM
Mar 2016

Besides, she is doing an amazing job and is needed where she is. I really dislike prematurely moving someone who is doing an effective job in the Senate and who could use more time and experience in that position into a Presidential race.

This was one of my initial hesitations with Prez O's candidacy in 2008. I believed that he could use more time and seasoning in the workings of the DC political class before running for President. If he had received this, he might have made fewer missteps, e.g., naming Rahm Emanuel as Chief of Staff and shutting Howard Dean out of the HHS position.

But Obama has been a wonderfully fast learner. His appointment of Hillary as SoS was a stroke of genius, IMO. And he has been a remarkably effective President overall, especially in his second term. He did not receive enough support from Dems at the start of his first term when Dems had majorities in both houses, IMO. I hope that Congressional Dems have learned that very harsh lesson.

 

CalvinballPro

(1,019 posts)
6. After the way we saw the GOP go against her in MA's Senate race, I cannot believe...
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 12:15 PM
Mar 2016

...that Warren would make a better Presidential candidate.

It seems like wishful thinking because Warren appears to be an amalgam between Clinton and Sanders. People tend to forget (or just don't know) that Elizabeth Warren was a Republican well into her 40s. To this day, she refuses to answer whether or not she voted for Ronald Reagan. (If someone won't vote for a candidate who backed the Iraq bill in 2002, how could someone claim to support a Democratic candidate who helped put Reagan into office?) If Clinton is a "Goldwater Girl" for activities as a teenager, what does that make someone like Warren, who can't claim the excuse of being too young to know better, or being influenced by her father's politics?

Warren is a fine Senator, but that doesn't make her automatically Presidential material. I certainly don't consider her as much as expert in a broad range of policies as Clinton is. Warren may not be as one-note as Bernie Sanders is, but she's not quite a full chord just yet.

George II

(67,782 posts)
9. Do you realize that you're in the Hillary Clinton Group, bashing Clinton (i.e., that tired refrain..
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 02:55 PM
Mar 2016

...."Goldwater Girl" crap)?

If the republicans were to go after Clinton because of that, or Warren for being "one of them" (remember, they're REPUBLICANS so they won't criticize candidates for being REPUBLICAN supporters in the past!!!), how do you think they'll treat Sanders in a general election when they bring up the fact that Sanders honeymooned in the Soviet Union????????

Please read the SOP of the Hillary Clinton Group. Thanks.

 

CalvinballPro

(1,019 posts)
10. I wasn't "bashing Clinton." It's called a hypothetical argument, maybe you've heard of it?
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 03:22 PM
Mar 2016

I don't have time to teach you how debates or arguments work. I'm pro-Clinton, despite your inability to discern context.

StevieM

(10,500 posts)
12. I understand that you weren't Clinton-bashing.
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 11:28 PM
Mar 2016

Tensions are running very high due to all the hatred being spewed at Hillary and her supporters. This was just a misunderstanding.

We're all on the same side here.

StevieM

(10,500 posts)
11. I think you misunderstood CalvinballPro's post. He or she wasn't bashing Hillary.
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 11:25 PM
Mar 2016

Last edited Fri Apr 1, 2016, 10:59 AM - Edit history (1)

I understand that tensions are running high, with all the disgusting Hillary-hate that is going on here at DU.

I'll also post a reply to CalvinballPro's response to you.

StevieM

(10,500 posts)
16. I edited my post to state your name properly. If I had known your gender I would have just said
Fri Apr 1, 2016, 11:08 AM
Apr 2016

"he" or "she."

It wasn't auto correct. I actually typed in that name. And I remember being careful to spell it right, by capitalizing the "P" in Pro and not leaving a space between carnivall and pro. I also remember making certain to include both "L"s in carnivall, as I thought you had spelled it.

I have NO IDEA what I was thinking, LOL. For some reason, in my mind, I saw carnival. With two Ls. Maybe it was the late hour. Or maybe it was just one of those days.

Walk away

(9,494 posts)
5. I can't wait until she can finally endorse Hillary!!!
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 12:10 PM
Mar 2016

I bet she does a great job and get's right on board

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Hillary Clinton»Sen Warren is going to be...