-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Elizabeth Warren Will Forego Big Money Events If Nominated, She Announces
- Thread starter Deleted member 4346
- Start date
"I hope Bernie stays in the race so the candidates adopt more of his positions."
> Candidate adopts his positions
"fucking flip flopper"
> Candidate adopts his positions
"fucking flip flopper"
Hopefully this is just to get the nomination and she'll change course for the GE. Any Democratic nominee who foregoes big money going against fucking Trump is out of their mind. He's going to have like a billion dollars to pump out constant bullshit, can't fight that with small donations, throw your $50,000 a plate dinners Warren, I don't care.
When nominated? So convenient.
This is only after being criticized about it. Only willing to make a change to get your vote.
This is only after being criticized about it. Only willing to make a change to get your vote.
She hasn't done them during the primary, so it's not a real change in her fundraising strategy. Also, if it's a change for the better, who cares? You have to read the room while trying to get elected and see what can be shifted to work better.
well she won with me! I'd still rather Bernie won but increasingly happier with Warren, who I was already very happy with to begin with.
Candidates who change their policies for the better are a good thing. Stubbornness on wrong policies is foolish and destructive.
Listening to criticism is always good. However, it would be foolish to think this is not for pushing a positive image for getting your vote. Is this what people really want? I would rather have someone consistent than someone who adopts to comfort. Once they get to the White House, will they be willing to listen and change?
Yeah, trying to look like a good candidate is pretty necessary if you want to be a candidate. I'm not sure why this would be an issue for you. She's doing a good thing for her candidacy.
I'm thinking ahead for when the candidate is in the White House, doesn't fall back to the mentality they had and only changed for votes. Understand that if history serves well, a plethora of politicians have done this.
Nevertheless, this applies to all candidates. Hopefully she's listening for the long run and not just for being elected.
tbh every single person running has had controversial takes and stances before. People change and thats completely ok.
This seems like a mistake to me. She's already on pace to secure the nomination and her existing stance was stronger than most of the field on the issue. Now she can't do anything close to these kind of events which have traditionally been a major component of fundraising in the general election and risks being called a hypocrite in a gotcha moment if she does something like them. I don't see how this adds more value than risk to her campaign
Thought she was fairly disliked in corporate America. She may have been forced into this. Guessing her team felt that the amount of money they could have got from corporate america wasn't enough so might as well go full Bernie.
Eh could be a genuine change in principles.....
Eh could be a genuine change in principles.....
No, historically, politicians try to keep their campaign promises. When they fail it's usually due to outside circumstances (like how Obama was blocked from closing Gitmo), not because they do a complete 180 - and that doesn't apply here.
Consistency isn't automatically a good thing. I would be more open to Bernie if he didn't have such a consistently shitty view on the filibuster.
This hand-wringing from Bernie camps over consistency and "flip flopping" is some disingenuous gatekeeping bullshit. It's great that Bernie has been a champion for his ideals for fifty years, but to accuse Warren of just going with the current is preposterous. Yes, she was a Republican for a long time, but that was over true conservative economic policy. When she saw the realities of consumer bankruptcy and finance, she took in this new information and moved to the Democratic party. She's been a card-carrying Dem for over twenty years since. This kind of intellectual evolution is what you want in a presidential candidate -- it proves she can surround herself with experts, listen to the experiences of real Americans, and make the best choice based on the data. This history and evolution will be a real boon to her in the general, as she has first-hand experience that will help her wake up middle class Americans that vote against their interests by voting Republican. She learned to see beyond the lies and posturing by the GOP and promptly broke with them.
The move to not accept big money in the general is along the lines of responding to criticism and adjusting as necessary. The entire democractic process is based on picking a candidate that you feel will listen to your concerns and act accordingly, not just blindly follow their own will. Folks were worried she would be susceptible to lobbying and bribes, even though that's totally against her anti-corruption platform. So rather than insist she's above that, she decided to put her money where her mouth is and forego the donations.
Bernie may have a long history of leftism, but look at policies where he has been under legitimate criticism, like his stance on the fillibuster. He hasn't made a damn change in response to seeing how it is actually utilized in modern politics -- he's clinging to it as a theoretical concept. I'd much prefer a candidate who is able to respond to new information and who can fairly assess every side of an issue and come up with the best possible solution.
The move to not accept big money in the general is along the lines of responding to criticism and adjusting as necessary. The entire democractic process is based on picking a candidate that you feel will listen to your concerns and act accordingly, not just blindly follow their own will. Folks were worried she would be susceptible to lobbying and bribes, even though that's totally against her anti-corruption platform. So rather than insist she's above that, she decided to put her money where her mouth is and forego the donations.
Bernie may have a long history of leftism, but look at policies where he has been under legitimate criticism, like his stance on the fillibuster. He hasn't made a damn change in response to seeing how it is actually utilized in modern politics -- he's clinging to it as a theoretical concept. I'd much prefer a candidate who is able to respond to new information and who can fairly assess every side of an issue and come up with the best possible solution.
Why is Elizabeth Warren trying to so closely ape Kamala Harris's failing strategy?
Jesus, this shouldent be that hard. is the neoliberal pull that hard to manage Warren? I am overly anxious about any potential presidency of yours at this rate
You keep letting me down despite me being desperate to want to accept you as my number 2 choice if Bernie doesnt win.
Outside of Bernie, shes the one candidate I've really been paying attention to and liking what she has in mind for this country.
Got my vote.
Got my vote.
