Re: Elizabeth Warren 2020

76
Adlai Stevenson was another nominee who didn't have the common touch, found it hard to connect with ordinary people but he gave great speeches. Eleanor Roosevelt picked up on it. And Democrats nominated Stevenson twice to run against Eisenhower and he lost badly both times.

"Warren, for now, cannot seem to appeal outside of her base of very liberal and white college educated base. She leads or is close to ahead with both groups, but well behind in others." She really needs to broaden her base.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: Elizabeth Warren 2020

77
It is too early. She reminds a lot of white women of their mom, grandma, or friend, I hear. That isn't a bad group to start with in this race. Others will come along if she wins the nomination. She has traveled to the South and isn't ignoring anyone. That is a good sign. She has a lot of time.

Who knows? Maybe she was just raising money and profile to run for Gov of Mass? Now, she could be President or VP nominee.
It is an unfortunate human failing that a full pocketbook often groans more loudly than an empty stomach.

- Franklin D. Roosevelt

Re: Elizabeth Warren 2020

78
I like to see a ban on spending government money for a dip like Trump to go play golf almost every weekend. Make hime do like Obama and play on the local military courses. But in Trump's case only when the military personnel and their dependents aren't using them.
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.-Huxley
"We can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both." ~ Louis Brandeis,

Re: Elizabeth Warren 2020

79
TrueTexan wrote: Mon Aug 26, 2019 1:13 pm I like to see a ban on spending government money for a dip like Trump to go play golf almost every weekend. Make hime do like Obama and play on the local military courses. But in Trump's case only when the military personnel and their dependents aren't using them.
Now the crooked dipshit wants next year's G7 to be held at his Doral club near Miami. He was asked about it today at the close of the current conference and CLAIMED that being President has COST him $3-$5 BILLION in revenue and wouldn't make a DIME at the Doral!

Everyone who believes his blatant fabrications do 3 back flips with a double twist better than Simone Biles! :angry:
"Even if the bee could explain to the fly why pollen is better than shit, the fly could never understand."

Re: Elizabeth Warren 2020

80
TrueTexan wrote: Mon Aug 26, 2019 1:13 pm I like to see a ban on spending government money for a dip like Trump to go play golf almost every weekend. Make hime do like Obama and play on the local military courses. But in Trump's case only when the military personnel and their dependents aren't using them.
I'd rather pay him to play golf every fucking day...
Image


"Person, woman, man, camera, TV."

Re: Elizabeth Warren 2020

81
senorgrand wrote: Mon Aug 26, 2019 3:03 pm
TrueTexan wrote: Mon Aug 26, 2019 1:13 pm I like to see a ban on spending government money for a dip like Trump to go play golf almost every weekend. Make hime do like Obama and play on the local military courses. But in Trump's case only when the military personnel and their dependents aren't using them.
I'd rather pay him to play golf every fucking day...
Well when he's playing golf at least he's too occupied to make idiotic suggestions like nuking hurricanes, so there's that...

Re: Elizabeth Warren 2020

82
senorgrand wrote: Mon Aug 26, 2019 3:03 pm
TrueTexan wrote: Mon Aug 26, 2019 1:13 pm I like to see a ban on spending government money for a dip like Trump to go play golf almost every weekend. Make hime do like Obama and play on the local military courses. But in Trump's case only when the military personnel and their dependents aren't using them.
I'd rather pay him to play golf every fucking day...
That would let his goofball staff and Pence run the country. Leave him in the WH demanding soft drinks, keeping people busy explaining his tweets, and annoying people with ignorant requests (e.g. bombing hurricanes). They probably want him out on the golf course with no twitter or microphones.
It is an unfortunate human failing that a full pocketbook often groans more loudly than an empty stomach.

- Franklin D. Roosevelt

Re: Elizabeth Warren 2020

83
kronkmusic wrote: Mon Aug 26, 2019 3:32 pm
senorgrand wrote: Mon Aug 26, 2019 3:03 pm
TrueTexan wrote: Mon Aug 26, 2019 1:13 pm I like to see a ban on spending government money for a dip like Trump to go play golf almost every weekend. Make hime do like Obama and play on the local military courses. But in Trump's case only when the military personnel and their dependents aren't using them.
I'd rather pay him to play golf every fucking day...
Well when he's playing golf at least he's too occupied to make idiotic suggestions like nuking hurricanes, so there's that...
Great minds... :roflmao:
It is an unfortunate human failing that a full pocketbook often groans more loudly than an empty stomach.

- Franklin D. Roosevelt

Re: Elizabeth Warren 2020

85
I think that is why they are going so far anti-gun... California primary. What else explains it? It explains why Swalwell thought he had a chance and ran on Cali platforms.
It is an unfortunate human failing that a full pocketbook often groans more loudly than an empty stomach.

- Franklin D. Roosevelt

Re: Elizabeth Warren 2020

86
K9s wrote: Mon Aug 26, 2019 4:12 pm I think that is why they are going so far anti-gun... California primary. What else explains it? It explains why Swalwell thought he had a chance and ran on Cali platforms.
As discussed here before, being anti-2a allows dems liberal cred without upsetting their donor base.
Image


"Person, woman, man, camera, TV."

Re: Elizabeth Warren 2020

87
I just spent another $15 bumping up Warren's total numbers. I also signed up for the tiny $5 per month donation - all just to improve her stats. So far, I am in for maybe $200 between Warren and Pete - but I have quit donating to Pete - he cannot turn the corner. Not sure I want him to.

Is Warren my "favorite" candidate? Nope. They are not running. But she is my top pick to encourage at the moment. I also like Bernie, but I am very concerned that much like the last election, Bernie wants to be a winner or a spoiler.

Interesting that Bernie and Warren seem to have a non-aggression pact. Smart move for both of them.

As I have said before, I am more of a fan of Warren/Sanders than Sanders/Warren, but I could vote for either.

What about the 2A issues? I think there will be some kind of major shift on what guns and ammo are legal if any Democrat wins and we take the Senate as well.
Image

Re: Elizabeth Warren 2020

88
max129 wrote: Fri Sep 13, 2019 5:19 pm What about the 2A issues? I think there will be some kind of major shift on what guns and ammo are legal if any Democrat wins and we take the Senate as well.
I swallow "assault weapon ban" for what I want to believe Warren or Sanders can do for climate change and health care. If they start in with the confiscation bullshit, it will be a lot harder.

Re: Elizabeth Warren 2020

89
I think both Warren and Sanders are too smart to go as far as anything like "confiscation" - they don't need it to get ahead of Biden and they both likely know it could cause more negative than positive.

IMO Beto is pushing confiscation just to drag his ass upwards from single digits.
Image

Re: Elizabeth Warren 2020

90
I like Warren and Sanders because they focus on important issues and not gun confiscation.
It is an unfortunate human failing that a full pocketbook often groans more loudly than an empty stomach.

- Franklin D. Roosevelt

Re: Elizabeth Warren 2020

91
Sen. Elizabeth Warren has jumped to a significant lead in the Democratic presidential race in California, solidifying her position as a front-runner for the party’s nomination, according to the latest UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies poll, conducted for the Los Angeles Times. The contest in California has shifted in important ways since June, when the Berkeley IGS poll last surveyed the state’s voters for The Times. At that point, the race here had no clear front-runner. Although Warren was among the top candidates, her support was heavily concentrated among college-educated white voters and those who described themselves as “very liberal.”

The new poll shows Warren has widened her base of support and begun to separate herself from her rivals. She’s the first choice of 29% of likely Democratic primary voters, up from 18% in June, the poll finds.“We appear to be at an inflection point in the Democratic presidential campaign,” said Mark DiCamillo, the director of the Berkeley IGS poll. “The changing voting preferences of California Democrats may be a harbinger of things to come elsewhere across the country.” As Warren has risen, her two closest rivals, former Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, have remained stuck in place. The poll finds the two essentially tied for second, with Biden at 20% and Sanders at 19%, both only slightly different from their positions in June. California Sen. Kamala Harris has slipped to a distant fourth, at 8%.
Other recent surveys have shown Warren gaining ground nationally and in states that hold the earliest contests in the nominating process. A Des Moines Register poll on Saturday showed her leading in Iowa, and a poll from Monmouth College on Tuesday showed Warren and Biden essentially tied in New Hampshire. The new California poll, however, is the first public survey to show Warren leading in the type of large, diverse state she would need to win in order to capture the nomination.

The reverse is also true — failure to do well in California would present a formidable barrier for some other candidates. Sanders, for example, took 46% of the vote in the California primary in 2016, and his advisors have seen the state as a key part of their road to the nomination, a path that now seems significantly steeper. The path would be even harder for the state’s junior senator. Harris has slogged through a difficult period in her campaign nationally and has suffered at home, as well. Her 8% support in the poll is down from 13% in June. Although she remains close to her rivals in the Bay Area, which is her political base, Harris trails badly in Southern California and the Central Valley.

Statewide, Harris stands just slightly ahead of Pete Buttigieg, the mayor of South Bend, Ind., who receives 6%. No other candidates receive more than 3% support, and 8% of likely voters say they have no preference. Another California candidate did far worse: Tom Steyer, the billionaire political activist and philanthropist, received roughly 0.1% support. He was one of eight candidates with less than 1% support of the 20 tested by the poll. Steyer has spent heavily to try to build support in some states that hold early primaries and has hit 2% in enough polls of Iowa and New Hampshire to qualify for the next candidate debate.

The poll indicates that Warren “has emerged as the clear alternative to Biden,” said Berkeley political science professor Eric Schickler. Until recently, “the question was whether she and Sanders would divide the vote on the left of the party,” and give Biden a clear path to win. “The answer from this poll is no.” The poll shows a few weak spots for Warren, but more signs of strength, including several indications that her support could grow over time. She is the candidate most often named as the second choice among voters who back each of her top rivals, and nearly 7 in 10 primary voters say they are considering her — significantly more than any of the others. Nearly half the voters say they are considering Biden and Sanders; 43% say they’re considering Harris and 33% say they’re considering Buttigieg.

Warren also has by far the most positive image of all the candidates, with 77% of Democratic voters viewing her positively and only 10% negatively. Democratic voters’ impression of her has grown more favorable as the campaign has gone on. By contrast, both Biden and Harris have seen their images worsen since June. Finally, although Warren has taken positions on the party’s left on many major issues, her support shows signs of straddling some of the major divisions among Democrats.
Each of the candidates in the race draws from a different base of supporters. Warren still does best with college-educated white voters, who make up just under a third of the Democratic electorate in the state. She gets support of 39% of them, far out-pacing Biden and Sanders, at 14% and 12% respectively.

But the poll showed Warren gaining ground among non-college-educated whites, a slightly smaller group than college graduates in the California Democratic electorate, but a larger one in many other parts of the country. Among that group, she now gets support from 29%, compared with 20% for Sanders and 18% for Biden. That’s a notable increase from 17% support in the June poll.

Biden still leads among black voters, who form a core part of his support nationwide. He has the support of 32% of African Americans, with 24% for Warren. Harris, who is black, comes in third, with 18%. Warren has a large lead among Asian American voters, at 33%, with 19% for Sanders and 14% for Biden.

Among the main ethnic and racial groups in the state, Warren does least well among Latinos. She trails both Biden and Sanders with Latino voters.

That deficit stems from a very low level of support from Latinos whose primary language is Spanish, only about 4% of whom said they support her. That group, however, has significantly more undecided voters than most others, and about half said they don’t know enough about Warren to have an opinion of her, indicating that her deficit may have more to do with unfamiliarity than any firm opposition.

Among English-speaking Latinos, Warren more closely holds her own, essentially tied for second place with Biden, behind Sanders. Warren’s biggest weak point remains a relative lack of support beyond the party’s liberal base. That’s less of a problem in California, where Democratic voters tilt left, but could handicap her in other parts of the country if the nomination contest becomes a prolonged fight.

One-third of the likely Democratic voters in California describe themselves as “very liberal” and 37% call themselves “somewhat liberal,” the poll found. Warren leads both groups. She gets support of 40% of the most liberal group, compared with 31% for Sanders, who is in second place. Among the somewhat liberal, she has 32%, ahead of Biden, who has 21%.

Biden leads among the 3 in 10 Democrats who call themselves moderate or conservative. Second place in that group goes to “undecided,” and the votes of almost 1 in 5 moderate or conservative voters are scattered among candidates beyond the top five, indicating that moderate voters who don’t support Biden have not coalesced around an alternative.

Support for Warren is strongest in the Bay Area, which accounts for about a quarter of the likely vote in the primary. She leads there with 35%. Biden, Sanders and Harris are closely bunched in second place, with 16%, 14% and 13% respectively, all close to the 15% threshold for receiving delegates from individual districts. The Massachusetts senator also leads in the state’s other big Democratic stronghold, Los Angeles County, but by a smaller margin, 27%, compared with 21% for Biden, 20% for Sanders and only 7% for Harris, who lives in Los Angeles.
https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/ ... ornia-poll

Shift in some polls and we'll see more.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: Elizabeth Warren 2020

94
I could support a Sanders Warren ticket better than a Biden Sanders ticket. As for Beto he should have dropped out and run against Cornyn in the Texas Senate race.But he screwed himself in Texas with the AR-15 statement. Even though he did back off some.
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.-Huxley
"We can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both." ~ Louis Brandeis,

Re: Elizabeth Warren 2020

95
Bankers ‘confirm Warren’s whole worldview’ by saying they’ll donate to Trump to defeat anti-Wall Street Senator in 2020

Wall Street continues to make campaign ads for Elizabeth Warren.”

For the second time in three weeks, Sen. Elizabeth Warren embraced Wall Street executives’ fear of her potential presidency after CNBC reported Thursday that several anonymous bankers threatened to back President Donald Trump in the 2020 election if Warren becomes the Democratic nominee.

“I think if she can show that the tax code of 2017 was basically nonsense and only helped corporations, Wall Street would not like the public thinking about that.”
—Wall Street executive

CNBC spoke to one executive who said they were considering supporting Trump in the general election fundraising cycle to keep Warren from winning.

“You’re in a box because you’re a Democrat and you’re thinking, ‘I want to help the party, but she’s going to hurt me, so I’m going to help President Trump,'” the executive said.

The executives’ comments illustrated the very political system that the Massachusetts Democrat aims to tear down as president, Warren suggested in a tweet Thursday night.

@ewarren
I'm fighting for an economy and a government that works for all of us, not just the wealthy and well-connected. I'm not afraid of anonymous quotes, and wealthy donors don't get to buy this process. I won't back down from fighting for the big, structural change we need. https://twitter.com/CNBC/status/1177262095819300864

@CNBC
Wall Street Democratic donors warn the party: We'll sit out, or back Trump, if you nominate Elizabeth Warren https://cnb.cx/2m1TPR6

Another executive said a Warren administration approach to taxation could plainly illustrate the injustice of Trump’s $1.5 trillion tax cut for corporations and the wealthy.

“I think if she can show that the tax code of 2017 was basically nonsense and only helped corporations, Wall Street would not like the public thinking about that,” the banker told CNBC.

Warren plans to require the wealthiest Americans to pay a two percent tax on any assets over $50 million in order to help fund a universal childcare program, investment in rural healthcare and community services, and affordable higher education.

The executives’ comments came weeks after CNBC anchor Jim Cramer said many on Wall Street are afraid of a potential Warren presidency and believe “she’s got to be stopped.”

The senator tweeted “I approve this message” at the time, while supporters observed that the Warren campaign could benefit from a campaign ad using Wall Street’s own words.

On Thursday, political observers again said big banks are advertising Warren’s strengths as they share their concerns over her plans to rein in Wall Street’s power—not just with her tax plan but also her proposals to limit executive compensation, force private equity firms to pay the debts of the companies they buy, and hold executives accountable for their firms’ wrongdoing.

@daveweigel
Did... did the Warren campaign pay for this https://twitter.com/schwartzbCNBC/statu ... 4993733632

@schwartzbCNBC
NEW: Wall Street donors are privately warning: We'll sit out, or back Trump, if you nominate Elizabeth Warren. “You’re a Democrat and you’re thinking, ‘I want to help the party, but she’s going to hurt me, so I’m going to help Trump,’” an executive said. https://cnb.cx/2m1xPG1


@matthewstoller
Wall Street continues to make campaign ads for Elizabeth Warren. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnbc.c ... nated.html

Wall Street Democratic donors warn the party: We'll sit out, or back Trump, if you nominate...
Democrats on Wall Street are bracing for a potential Elizabeth Warren nomination if she surges to become their party's nominee and possibly beat President Donald Trump.
cnbc.com

The bankers’ suggestion that they would rather back Trump—days after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced she was pursuing an impeachment inquiry following a whistleblower’s revelation that the president asked the Ukrainian president for help winning the 2020 election—”confirms Warren’s whole worldview” and approach to Wall Street, economist Paul Krugman tweeted.

@paulkrugman
This sort of confirms Warren's whole worldview, doesn't? Big Finance, given the choice between treason and a wealth tax, chooses treason https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/26/wall-st ... r=sharebar

Wall Street Democratic donors warn the party: We'll sit out, or back Trump, if you nominate...
Democrats on Wall Street are bracing for a potential Elizabeth Warren nomination if she surges to become their party's nominee and possibly beat President Donald Trump.
cnbc.com

Warren’s response to the CNBC article was juxtaposed by reports of former Vice President Joe Biden’s appearance at a fundraiser in Los Angeles Thursday night.

While the senator was pledging not to “back down from fighting for the big, structural change we need,” Biden was telling a donor that while the wealthy shouldn’t expect a tax cut from his administration if he wins in 2020, there will be “no punishment, either.”

Dave Weigel

From the pool report of Thursday night’s Biden fundraiser in LA:
“Biden again joked that they shouldn’t expect a tax cut from him.
‘It ain’t comin’, it ain’t gonna come,’ Biden said, locking eyes with one donor. ‘But! No punishment, either.’”

The New York Times reported Thursday that—growing wary of recent positive polling for progressives Warren and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who has also pledged to get big money out of politics—Biden allies are considering forming a super PAC on his behalf.

Biden has said he opposes super PACs, but news that his supporters may rely on unlimited fundraising in an effort to propel him to the nomination served as a contrast to Warren’s approach and comments about her from Wall Street.

“The Democratic nominee should be chosen by voters, not millionaires and corporate special interests,” End Citizens United president Tiffany Muller told the Times.
https://www.rawstory.com/2019/09/banker ... r-in-2020/

Wall Street and the wealthy are running scared.
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.-Huxley
"We can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both." ~ Louis Brandeis,

Re: Elizabeth Warren 2020

96
TrueTexan wrote: Fri Sep 27, 2019 4:20 pm Bankers ‘confirm Warren’s whole worldview’ by saying they’ll donate to Trump to defeat anti-Wall Street Senator in 2020
Well, I guess that means Warren and Sanders were the right choices all along.

The GOP always has more money to spend. They have no ideas. They have money and lies.

My guess is that they will spend the money on more anti-soshulism and anti-AOC attack ads. What a surprise. :rolleyes:

Image
It is an unfortunate human failing that a full pocketbook often groans more loudly than an empty stomach.

- Franklin D. Roosevelt

Re: Elizabeth Warren 2020

97
Harry Enten at CNN analyzing polling data.
Poll of the week: A new Quinnipiac University poll out this week finds Sen. Elizabeth Warren with a 74% favorable rating and a 10% unfavorable rating among potential Democratic primary voters. Her favorable rating is up significantly from 61% in May, while her unfavorable rating is down from 16%. This poll is one of many that suggests Warren's favorable rating has climbed since the beginning of the year.

What's the point: Warren seems to have the hot hand in the Democratic presidential primary. She's challenging former Vice President Joe Biden for the lead in Iowa, New Hampshire and nationally. These numbers show that at least part of her rise is because she's become more popular.

However, her growing popularity does not seem to be extending to outside the Democratic base. Quinnipiac was kind enough to provide me with a crosstab of how non-potential Democratic voters (i.e. those who are not Democrats or Democratic-leaning independents) feel about Warren. This month, she comes in with an 11% favorable rating and a 70% unfavorable rating among this group. That shouldn't be too surprising, given that, while some of this group are independents who don't lean toward either party, much of it is made up of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents. We simply should expect Warren (or any Democrat) to struggle with this group.

What's interesting is the trendline. Back in Quinnipiac's May poll, Warren's favorable rating with non-potential Democratic primary voters was 8%, compared to an unfavorable rating of 66%. A CNN poll a month later put Warren with an 11% favorable and 66% unfavorable rating with this group. Put another way, Warren has not really seen any improvement with non-potential Democratic primary voters over the summer, even as she has dramatically improved with Democrats.

Now compare Warren's numbers with that of her chief Democratic rival, Biden. He's become considerably less popular with Democrats. His favorable rating with potential Democratic primary voters from May to now has gone from 79% to 72% and his unfavorable has gone from 14% to 19%. Among non-potential Democratic voters, the fall off has not been as dramatic. Biden's favorable rating remains steady at 22%. His unfavorable rating is up from 63% in May to 70% now.

Biden maintains a clear edge in net favorability (favorable - unfavorable) rating of -48 points versus -59 points for Warren among non-potential Democratic primary voters. Biden's advantage here may explain why he does better in polls against Republican President Doanld Trump than Warren. A recent Fox News poll, for instance, had both Biden and Warren beating Trump -- but Biden more than doubled Warren's margin over the President (14 points vs. 6 points). He did so, in large part, because he did significantly better than Warren among non-Democratic primary voters.

Of course, we'll have to see how this week's impeachment news may shift these numbers. Biden's numbers could slink southward as Republicans attack him. But for now, Biden's maintaining his electability edge over Warren.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/28/politics ... index.html
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: Elizabeth Warren 2020

99
Warren is currently my top preference. But I do worry that she is quite polarizing. When I talk with Republicans, they have her pigeonholed to the left of Bernie Sanders. It is not clear at all what she could do to appeal to non Democrats.
Marlene said:

Saw stuff about Warren’s questionable claims of Native American ancestry starting to percolate on Twitter this morning.

And this Native American ancestry thing, as trivial as it is, will be like gum she cannot get off her shoe.
Image

Re: Elizabeth Warren 2020

100
Marlene wrote: Sun Sep 29, 2019 10:20 am Saw stuff about Warren’s questionable claims of Native American ancestry starting to percolate on Twitter this morning.
But her emails...
It is an unfortunate human failing that a full pocketbook often groans more loudly than an empty stomach.

- Franklin D. Roosevelt

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests