• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

'We Can Win': Elizabeth Warren Outlines 2020 Presidential Bid

Dittohead not! said:
'We Can Win': Elizabeth Warren Outlines 2020 Presidential Bid





The middle class has been under attack for some time now.


"We can win," meaning Democrats. Can Warren defeat him? What do you think?


​
Click to expand...

I'm not convinced Trump will run again. But if he does, yes, Warren could defeat him. Whereas in 2016 Hillary Clinton was the one with the baggage, the well known, perhaps too well known candidate. The lesser known with out much known baggage won. Warren would come into the races with less baggage and with the independent voters having a dislike for Trump and his obnoxious behavior.

Warren I assume wouldn't be as lazy as Hillary Clinton was on the campaign trail either. There's no way she would let Trump both out work and out campaign her like Hillary did. I think Warren would realize that with a little work and attention, she could return Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin back into the Democratic fold.

Yes, Warren could win and I would say at this point in time, anyone the Democrats choose is the favorite. But there's a lot of time left until Nov 2020. Anything could happen.
 
Winston said:
I'll have to see who is in the race and what the debates look like. But, as of now, I'm still with Bernie. If Bernie doesn't run, Ojeda 2020 all the way!
Click to expand...

Oh yeah, Bernie is my man too, but Ojeda is the runner up at this point, hands down.
 
Cardinal said:
I know literally nothing about Ojeda.
Click to expand...

^will be his biggest problem Cardinal.

He's a helluva guy though. He has what it takes to beat Trump in a contest of machismo.
 
Rexedgar said:
Warren is punching over her weight class, here. Trump will run over her and it won’t be pretty, imo.
It’s not about her heritage anymore, again, imo.
Click to expand...

See, I have yet to hear Republicans attack her for anything but her heritage. And let's be fair, no matter who the Democrats put up to run against Trump they're just going to do the same nonsense to that candidate. It's going to be up to that candidate to manage the trolling, which will happen no matter who the candidate is.
 
Winston said:
^will be his biggest problem Cardinal.

He's a helluva guy though. He has what it takes to beat Trump in a contest of machismo.
Click to expand...

Ah, I see. Cultural ubiquity versus cultural anonymity. I haven't seen him in any debate or anything so I have no idea how he would fare.
 
Cardinal said:
Ah, I see. Cultural ubiquity versus cultural anonymity. I haven't seen him in any debate or anything so I have no idea how he would fare.
Click to expand...



He made up like 20 points in a WV house race.

*32 points, he made up 32 points
 
Last edited:
Cardinal said:
See, I have yet to hear Republicans attack her for anything but her heritage. And let's be fair, no matter who the Democrats put up to run against Trump they're just going to do the same nonsense to that candidate. It's going to be up to that candidate to manage the trolling, which will happen no matter who the candidate is.
Click to expand...

Not that I agree, but the electorate has a fixed or broken attention span. I have little information about her service to Massachusetts. I liked the idea of the Consumer Protection agency that Mulroney has neutered, but to me she comes across shrill and vulnerable.
 
Cardinal said:
Ah, I see. Cultural ubiquity versus cultural anonymity. I haven't seen him in any debate or anything so I have no idea how he would fare.
Click to expand...

I don't think it's any coincidence his opponent chose to avoid debate with him, even when her lead was getting precariously narrow, only to be saved by Trump's personal intervention later.

Definitely check him out sometime, the man has serious fire and integrity, and I feel is inspiring, layman oriented and big tent enough to really motivate the vast majority of the Dem base, get working class independents behind him and even make inroads in the south.
 
Winston said:


He made up like 20 points in a WV house race.
Click to expand...


32 points actually; in the most Dem hostile riding in the country; also the biggest gain made by any Dem candidate in the mid-terms by far.

It's mystifying how people celebrate Beto when this guy did several times better in terms of actual gains, and basically only lost because Trump got personally involved in a riding that adores him (because his opponent was in serious danger of losing which would have been a devastating precedent).
 
Last edited:
Winston said:


He made up like 20 points in a WV house race.
Click to expand...


He may be a decent guy but he comes across as stiff (as does Warren). The person who runs against Trump will need to be able to bend, to have a sense of humor, and to divert the barbs and redirect them toward his/her own preferred narrative. I think candidates like O'Rourke, Harris and Klobuchar have that temperament.

I hate that we have to select candidates for like this but the skill for managing a chaos monster must be there.
 
Cardinal said:
He may be a decent guy but he comes across as stiff (as does Warren). The person who runs against Trump will need to be able to bend, to have a sense of humor, and to divert the barbs and redirect them toward his/her own preferred narrative. I think candidates like O'Rourke, Harris and Klobuchar have that temperament.

I hate that we have to select candidates for like this but the skill for managing a chaos monster must be there.
Click to expand...

I don't perceive stiff.
 
Cardinal said:
Hey, I could be wrong. I've now "known" him for all of five minutes.
Click to expand...

You can find extended talks with him on the various left wing new media.
 
Cardinal said:
He may be a decent guy but he comes across as stiff (as does Warren). The person who runs against Trump will need to be able to bend, to have a sense of humor, and to divert the barbs and redirect them toward his/her own preferred narrative. I think candidates like O'Rourke, Harris and Klobuchar have that temperament.

I hate that we have to select candidates for like this but the skill for managing a chaos monster must be there.
Click to expand...

Yeah, per Winston, I'm not sure what you mean; by stiff do you mean hard-edged? Because in this context, I feel that's a good thing.

I see someone who comes off as strong, forceful and passionate, who can beat Trump at his own game several times over, and actually has the cojones and history to back it up. I don't think a diplomat would work all that well vis a vis Trump in all honesty, as the man doesn't really participate in battles of wit so much as he teflons usual approaches while throwing down in a mud wrestle, but a blunt, and direct force of will like Ojeda would.

Further, he's good at remaining on point; he's not purely about being an attack dog, though if he needs to, he absolutely can be, which is important.
 
Last edited:
Neomalthusian said:
I think there's a decent chance Warren and several others could defeat him, though I don't think anything is a foregone conclusion anymore.

I really have grown tired though of the anti-corporate rich-vs.-middle class victim-rhetoric the Democrats chant as the core of their platform.

Evil insurance companies deny patients life saving coverage.
Evil big banks rip off customers.
Oil companies destroy this planet.

"The whole scam is propped up by an echo chamber of fear and hate."

As the video goes on, she just sounds more and more like a divisive propagandist, yammering on about the dark billionaire conspiracies to enslave the country. Victim vs. oppressor. Rich vs. poor. I'm really sick of this Marxist sh**.

It's so repetitive and so inherently divisive and populist in nature, and I think after four years of Trump we could use a healthy dose of calm intellectualism and centrism.
Click to expand...


Love the meat of your post. (bolded)
And there is no realistic chance Lizzie will get the nomination.
Recycled Biden will make sure of this.
 
The upside of the Warren run now is we'll hear less about Clinton. The red hat brigade need a personality to hate on, they need a name. In the absence of a proper opposition candidate they could only turn their whataboutism back in time onto Clinton and Obama. Now they actually have an opponent in the here and now who will provide campaign promises and a platform and that allows some genuine, rather than hypothetical grounds for debate: rather than what would Clinton have done, it can be, what would Warren do (WWWD?).

Or of course it can descend into Pocahontas slurs...
 
Winston said:
although, I do agree Trump could be forced to resign amid damning evidence against him..

I do think you underestimate the conservative voting block.
Click to expand...

Well, what I DON'T underestimate is the laziness of the liberal voting block. So, anything is possible I suppose.
 
ecofarm said:
How is that baggage?

Trump attacked someone's claim of heritage. Science proved her claim 100% correct. And it's on her? Why isn't it on the guy that falsely attacked someone's claim to heritage and was proven 100% wrong in that attack?
Click to expand...

Repeating a lie multiple times doesn't make it correct.
 
Fishking said:
Wrong.
Click to expand...

Uh oh.

1024 is the end of the range, her claim is middle range. Funny how your ilk never uses the low end number.


Alternate reality incoming...
 
Fishking said:
Repeating a lie multiple times doesn't make it correct.
Click to expand...

Her claim was 5-6 generations away, one grandmother.

Let's review the range of the findings... 5-7 generations away, one grandmother.

You're like, "oh, but if it's 7 then she's wrong!" Asinine.
 
ecofarm said:
Her claim was 5-6 generations away, one grandmother.

Let's review the range of the findings... 5-7 generations away, one grandmother.

You're like, "oh, but if it's 7 then she's wrong!" Asinine.
Click to expand...



Surely a grandmother is only two generations away ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom