• The GiftBot 2.0 Launch Giveaway Extravaganza has come to a close with an astounding 8073 games given away to the community by 696 members, a huge success thanks to you! The gifting now continues with more official prizes in the new Gaming Giveaways |OT|. Leftover Steam codes are also being given away to the PC Gaming Era community.

Elizabeth Warren Will Forego Big Money Events If Nominated, She Announces

xbhaskarx

Member
Oct 27, 2017
4,789
NorCal
Unilateral disarmament works right?


If this plays a non-zero role in getting Trump re-elected can we thank Bernie and his folks for “pushing the Dem field further to the left”?
 
OP
OP
Apharmd

Apharmd

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,230
Unilateral disarmament works right?


If this plays a non-zero role in getting Trump re-elected can we thank Bernie and his folks for “pushing the Dem field further to the left”?
This is a dogshit take but I'm not surprised you posted it. One of the biggest criticisms of Warren from the left was her acceptance of corporate/PAC money for the general election. Reversing course and joining Sanders on this issue is definitely going to appease his supporters. Most of who would vote for her in a general election anyway.
 

xbhaskarx

Member
Oct 27, 2017
4,789
NorCal
This is a dogshit take but I'm not surprised you posted it. One of the biggest criticisms of Warren from the left was her acceptance of corporate/PAC money for the general election. Reversing course and joining Sanders on this issue is definitely going to appease his supporters. Most of who would vote for her in a general election anyway.
I guess we’ll have to wait and see.
 

JABEE

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,631
This is a dogshit take but I'm not surprised you posted it. One of the biggest criticisms of Warren from the left was her acceptance of corporate/PAC money for the general election. Reversing course and joining Sanders on this issue is definitely going to appease his supporters. Most of who would vote for her in a general election anyway.
I was going to vote for her anyway in the general, but this is a good precedent to set.
 

TheLostBigBoss

The Fallen
Oct 26, 2017
9,414
They better have some internal numbers to back this up, because if this fucks over down tickets it's going to be the dumbest fucking move to just say no to free money.
 

tommy7154

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,109
Good.

Now fix your imperialist foreign policy.
I really don't mind her (I'm a 100% Sanders supporter) and she's firmly my number 2 choice as she has been since this race started... but her foreign policy stances and her love of the giant defense budget for who knows what reason is utter trash. She should be pressured on these issues and if she changed her stance on them I could get behind her much more easily.
 

Christian

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,505
Where does all the money for a presidential election go?

Assuming ads are targeted to battleground areas, does it not reach a saturation point long before a BILLION dollars is necessary?

TV must be unwatchable in purple states in election years
Decent people - so not Trump - also reimburse the cities/states where they hold rallies for security/police, emergency services, and venues, plus there’s travel and other expenses that quickly add up, as well. It’s more than just advertising.
 

tommy7154

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,109
so, she is okay with losing
I dont necessarily disagree here. IMO once the democratic nominee is chosen...you should do what it takes to win regardless of most anything else. For example if Sanders won and then decided to suddenly start taking all this big money...he'd have a lot of pissed off supporters, but to me it is the smart play. At that point you do what it takes to beat Trump.

Buttt on the other hand they can also do it with the power of the people like you and I. I believe that.
 

tommy7154

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,109
Money is part of the game, even if we don't like the rules.

So she is okay with entering the World Series with Little League money
Honestly I think what she's doing here is saying this now and she'll change her mind if she does win. Again it'd just be the smart play. Align with Sanders now and decide later after you've won something like "welll you know we really just have to beat Trump and I don't think I can do that without all the help I can get".
 

Double 0

Member
Nov 5, 2017
2,181
I think there is a misunderstanding on what her stance is.


This isn’t a “OFA” bankrupt the DNC and downballot type of deal. She is still going to do events for the DNC and downballot candidates. She just won’t do those shitty private fundraising events that led to stuff like the deplorables and 47% comments.
 

Inuhanyou

Member
Oct 25, 2017
12,210
New Jersey
Good. Let's see you stick to that considering your previous history in taking big money.

However, if you are serious about it, it should not have been something you even started your campaign with to get to this point. Absolutely ridiculous when we're at the 4th debate already.
 

i love tacos

Member
Oct 27, 2017
14
Awesome. This is the right thing to do. I'm a bit wary of the cash gap, but if she is doing fundraisers for down ballot where it really counts... that helps to temper my fears.
 

SolarPowered

Member
Oct 28, 2017
831
This is a big one for me. Really glad Bernie ran so hard all these years. It'll make Warren the best 2020 candidate we could possibly get. Now we need her to shift just a bit more on foreign policy and we're in a great place.
 

Ichthyosaurus

Member
Dec 26, 2018
8,260
This will actually help her win.

The idea that you need to take bribes to win big visible elections is propaganda by the people paying the bribes
Don't get complacent, remember what happened in '16. Everybody thought Hillary had this, including Donald Trump.

Nope, having access to money is why 9 times out of 10 the candidate with the higher funding wins.
 

Xx 720

Member
Nov 3, 2017
2,251
If she gets the nomination she needs to fucking win, this do goody shit fills me with despair. Maybe she wont get the nomination.
 

Mewshuji

Member
Nov 11, 2017
3,422
She continues to prove her honesty in wishing to improve things. I disagree with her methods but it's clear she has a pure heart with good intentions for the American public first and foremost, unlike the vast majority of the Democratic nominee field.

People poo-pooing her for doing this (as in doing it at all, as opposed to being suspicious of intention) really don't understand what a corrupt system we have on our hands. Corporations should not have influence on politics at all. And if they insist on maintaining their influence by backing monstrous fascists and alleged literal child rapists like Trump, then they're monsters we'll have to find a way to get rid of.
 

mescalineeyes

Member
May 12, 2018
3,416
Vienna

hmmmmmmm, curious that this guy is now concern trolling about the DNC's finances.
 

shinra-bansho

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,194
I'm not sure what the link to the Washington Times is supposed to show, and I kind of refuse to go there...

Anyway, I mean I'm fine with her not going to closed door high dollar events. However, I'd still like to see her set up a Joint Fundraising Committee (something Sanders did in 2016 too) that enables a single donation that covers maxing out to her campaign, as well as the DNC and state parties.
 

3bdelilah

Member
Oct 26, 2017
1,092
So once again she flips stances? What a surprise. Talk about going where the current takes her. This time for the better, granted, but she doesn't really inspire confidence this way, and as a result, I don't know if I should put a lot of faith in her as a politician and as a potential President of the United States. I mean, just a few months ago she said she'd only forgo big donations during the primaries, but would accept them in the general election against Trump. Now all of a sudden she swears it off altogether? As easily she decided to recant that decision, just as easily she could go back to her original stance. She's an opportunist, a pragmatic. And while that may resonate with some people here on Era, and apparently a lot of other people if the polls are to be believed, she really isn't the "leftist champion" a lot of people here are claiming her to be.
 

kitress

Member
Oct 27, 2017
317
She should do everything she can to distinguish herself from "corruption in the flesh." It's hard to deliver that message if she's accepting big money, which, to the surprise of noone, is the source of corruption in politics.
 

ZackieChan

Member
Oct 27, 2017
5,023
Is there any significant number of people who wouldn’t have voted for her before, but knowing this will now vote for her in the General? Seems needless.
 

mescalineeyes

Member
May 12, 2018
3,416
Vienna
I'm not sure what the link to the Washington Times is supposed to show, and I kind of refuse to go there...



it only took me 2 seconds of googling to find all these sources. this is some childish shit.
 

Nevin

Member
Oct 25, 2017
469
the desert
Its the right decision, but she shouldn't have had to reverse her position in the first place. There's another candidate in the race who doesn't have to waffle like this.
 

shinra-bansho

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,194
the thing i quoted when I posted the first link it's really not that hard
You're confusing different things? The person in the tweets ran finance for Obama's re-election campaign.

Obama still raised a lot during election years via a Joint Fundraising Committee, to transfer to the DNC and state parties.


The critique or Obama is his having a parallel organisation in OfA to the detriment of the DNC, DSCC, DCCC both organisationally and in fundraising.
 
Last edited:

Ichthyosaurus

Member
Dec 26, 2018
8,260
In local elections.
In the general you have free media coverage.
Media coverage is never free unless you're Donald Trump, and the money is not solely for the media. Someone has to pay the bills for the buildings they use, the materials for posters and placards, food for volunteers etc. It's not cheap to run for office.

Its the right decision, but she shouldn't have had to reverse her position in the first place. There's another candidate in the race who doesn't have to waffle like this.
The candidate who's not winning this election.
 

Nevin

Member
Oct 25, 2017
469
the desert
Media coverage is never free unless you're Donald Trump, and the money is not solely for the media. Someone has to pay the bills for the buildings they use, the materials for posters and placards, food for volunteers etc. It's not cheap to run for office.



The candidate who's not winning this election.
Have any votes been cast? The answer is no. You cannot say who is winning or not winning this election until we're able to count delegates that candidates have acquired from primary and caucus elections that begin next year. It's cool I guess to be confident as to who is winning, but its all mere speculation at this point.
 

HStallion

Member
Oct 25, 2017
29,775
So once again she flips stances? What a surprise. Talk about going where the current takes her. This time for the better, granted, but she doesn't really inspire confidence this way, and as a result, I don't know if I should put a lot of faith in her as a politician and as a potential President of the United States. I mean, just a few months ago she said she'd only forgo big donations during the primaries, but would accept them in the general election against Trump. Now all of a sudden she swears it off altogether? As easily she decided to recant that decision, just as easily she could go back to her original stance. She's an opportunist, a pragmatic. And while that may resonate with some people here on Era, and apparently a lot of other people if the polls are to be believed, she really isn't the "leftist champion" a lot of people here are claiming her to be.
No offense but I'd rather someone who can actually admit their mistakes and implement change. Obama also wasn't for gay marriage at the start of his term but he changed his mind on that. Does that make him a lesser person? No I think not.
 

Ichthyosaurus

Member
Dec 26, 2018
8,260
Have any votes been cast? The answer is no. You cannot say who is winning or not winning this election until we're able to count delegates that candidates have acquired from primary and caucus elections that begin next year. It's cool I guess to be confident as to who is winning, but its all mere speculation at this point.
Yes, it is speculation. Speculation based on fact, Bernie was fading before now and his heart attack isn't a promising sign before the voting starts. The real work hasn't begun.