Warren made the mistake of actually advocating for workable progressive ideas. That's a bridge too far.
-
For our US members, be sure to check on your voter registration status and if you are not registered it will only take a second to do so!
New Hampshire Democratic debate, 8PM ET on ABC | Live Free or Don't
- Thread starter Wraith
- Start date
I disagree. Her medicare 4 all plan wasn't workable considering she wanted to pass to pieces of legislation. Also, she got waaaaaaay to specific on the campaign trail with that one.
Yep this is a pretty good summary.
The other thing is, her record just isn't as good as Bernies. I think some progressives have switched because of this.
Just a few days before the debate previous to this the media started reporting about a dinner between her and Bernie after which she apparently claimed that Bernie said 'a woman can't be president' during. She backed the story up shortly after it broke and during the following debate Bernie was asked whether he had said it or not. Immediately after he gave an answer denying it, Warren was asked a question that implied the claims were true and Bernie was lying. Then at the end of the debate when Bernie went to shake her hand she refused and said something to him. The day after CNN, the host of the debate 'leaked' a recording of her statement that was 'accidentally' recorded where she accused Bernie of calling her a liar. People did not respond to this well, many thought it was a clear act of collusion with aim to smear Bernie and this clouded any veracity of her claims. Bernie's suffered little to nothing from all this, and in fact his supporters were further galvanised in their support of him but Warren's numbers were damaged and never recovered
Her numbers cratered way before all this though. In fact in the minds of many that is precisely why she pulled off Bernie Women Can't Win maneuver in the first place.
Isn't being informed / specific on plans than saying "M4A well worry about details later"
I assume you mean better.
I don't think politicians should obsess about nitty gritty specifics on the campaign trail. I as a voter just want to know your vision
All facts point to that Warren did not leak the women can't win story. In fact when the story first appeared, Warren issued no comment. It was only after Sanders stated that it wasn't true that she rebutted his claim. Warren did not leak the story.
Bhahahahaha I can't believe there's possibly an actual origin story to this irrational hate
I missed the Chris Matthews part last night. How is he even allowed to still have a job after that Alex Jones-like rant? Dude seriously tried to suggest a President Sanders would lead to public executions.
This 100%. She didn't leak it. That being said, I wouldn't be surprised if that moment played a significant role in her numbers dropping, particularly when it became public knowledge by people she told the story to that Sanders' recollection of what he said was accurate.
I can't believe people still hold the "can't win" thing against either of them. It's clearly one of those questions of interpretation, where Bernie's intentions were "I think a woman would struggle in an election against Donald Trump," Warren heard "a woman couldn't win the election," and the actual words he used were somewhere in-between. It was such a tepid scandal between the two of them.
She was already dropping like a stone at that point, so I can't imagine it did anything more than speed up the inevitable. I just think it's a silly catalyst for it. Like, the electability of a female candidate has been on EVERYONE'S mind after Clinton, how is it absurd that he would make an off the cuff remark about it?
She was already dropping like a stone at that point, so I can't imagine it did anything more than speed up the inevitable. I just think it's a silly catalyst for it. Like, the electability of a female candidate has been on EVERYONE'S mind after Clinton, how is it absurd that he would make an off the cuff remark about it?
Does it not concern you that the concerned (even if they're wrong) would have enough voting power to keep Trump in?
so would I. The thought is making me feel genuine anxiety. Not only is he completely insufferable, but he would lose to Trump so fucking badly.
We spend so much of our economy on our healthcare it seems unwise to discount it.
Democrats have an advantage in the general + Trump's awfulness (he's gonna fuck up soon). Bernie isn't that bad when he goes up against Trump in the general despite the socialism scares.
Steyer wants to win in South Carolina. We'll see how this plays out.
What Democrats are going to not vote for the nominee if it's Bernie?
Trump would dismantle Pete if he became the nom, like "actually winning the popular vote" level of dismantling. I don't even want to imagine Pete doing his West Wing dumbshit platitudes in 3 debates vs Trump.
Her decline started as soon as she retracted her support of M4A. I think her attacks on Bernie just simply accelerated her decline.
Wish I could see Trump demolish Pete in a debate without giving him the nomination. Pete can't even stand up to a moderator.
There was a post or two around these parts about how Pete might lose some left votes, but could pick up more conservative ones. Man, that is not happening. Trump will beat Pete over the head with a disfigured club in the shape of our democracy and it will be horrible.
It doesn't get mentioned much at all, but being a great speaker is an extremely important quality that'll the Nominee will need to go against Trump. When you go up against him you won't be arguing the facts.
I'm watching it now, they only spent 5 mins on climate change 🤦♂️🤦♀️🤦♂️🤦♀️🤦♂️🤦♀️🤦♂️🤦♀️🤦♂️🤦♀️🤦♂️🤦♀️🤦♂️🤦♀️🤦♂️🤦♀️🤦♂️🤦♀️🤦♂️🤦♀️🤦♂️🤦♀️🤦♂️🤦♀️🤦♂️🤦♀️🤦♂️🤦♀️🤦♂️🤦♀️🤦♂️🤦♀️🤦♂️🤦♀️🤦♂️🤦♀️
This shit is disgraceful as fuck. Out of all the debates they have probably only spent 30 mins on climate change
This shit is disgraceful as fuck. Out of all the debates they have probably only spent 30 mins on climate change
I like a good origin story, but this is false. Kathleen Matthews also came in third in that primary. It wasn't a two person race like that tweet implied
Yes but as we saw, when Pete was pressed, he stumbled. When asked about race he couldn't invoke his rehearsed lines and looked completely helpless.
No disagreement there. That post wasn't in defense of Pete.
There's no dog in Pete.
You need a fighter who will attack and get dirty and press and press and needle and put Trump on the defensive, where his whiny victim complex overtakes his ability to do anything else. When that happens, he's unable to control the narrative because his impulse to lash out in anger keeps the story parked on the attacks against him.
Obama Coke Zero isn't going to get it done. Some of the others last night showed the requisite fight. Bloombito's attack ads show fight.
You need a fighter who will attack and get dirty and press and press and needle and put Trump on the defensive, where his whiny victim complex overtakes his ability to do anything else. When that happens, he's unable to control the narrative because his impulse to lash out in anger keeps the story parked on the attacks against him.
Obama Coke Zero isn't going to get it done. Some of the others last night showed the requisite fight. Bloombito's attack ads show fight.
This doesn't really line up with how Pete performed in other debates. Like when he cut down Warren when she came at him with the winecave attack.
Yeah haha I wasn't trying to point it to you specifically, just using your point to piggyback that.
I don't think anyone but Steyer or Klob showed that dog in them.
Look at Pete's support with black voters and you'll see there is very little possibility that he wins the nomination by plurality. What would be the likely result of winning NH is the delegates get split enough for a contested convention, which I cannot emphasize enough would be a clusterfuck and potentially shatter the Democrat party. If Bernie is in the lead by convention time but they give the delegates to Pete or someone else? The party would disillusion at least two generations of voters and depress turnout like nothing before. It would be an absolute disaster.
The GOP would salivate at a contested convention. Dems In Disarray at full force. It has to be avoided at all costs.
When did she retract her support? AFAIK she just added a transition period, which is 100% what would happen if it's actually implemented. We're not going to bed with private insurance and waking up with M4A sorted the next day.
What the Dems need is an edgy loud mouthed asshole, because that seems to be the only way to counter Scump. "Kill them with kindness" doesn't work in what has basically degenerated into a gutter war.
And with that orange piece of shit getting out of conviction, he has all but guaranteed a re-election and it makes me want to throw up.
And with that orange piece of shit getting out of conviction, he has all but guaranteed a re-election and it makes me want to throw up.
Well this isn't true because she never retracted support for m4a.
Steyer was surely moving past passion nearly into anger. I would like to see more of that from whoever gets the Nom.
Its a good reminder that although some of them talk the talk, US is still the biggest producer of oil and the heart of global capitalism that is very much and very quickly turning the whole planet into a hot steaming pile of shit
True, but how she handled the entire issue coincided with her decline