Warren's rising star - a sunset for Hillary

[TGHusker]

I'm beginning to think that as Obama was the new flavor in the Dem ice cream store in 2008, Warren will be in 2016. I think we are setting up for a real cat fight. If so, I don't think Hillary (the very old flavor of the month) makes it out of the convention as the nominee. 2nd fiddle once again. Warren has the platform with the Senate. With Reps taking over the Senate, she will be free to speak her mind and grab the air out of the democratic room (no longer constrained by holding true to the party line of supporting Obama and Reid). Hillary will be looking for ways she can be relevant while Warren has the ready made position for it.

With all of that, it ultimately may be hard to overcome the Clinton machine but Obama did it.

 

What say you.

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/12/14/elizabeth-warren-is-changing-washington-without-giving-up-her-outside-status/

[carlfense]

Nah.

[tschu]

Why is it a "cat fight?"

 

It it because they're both women?

[Abdullah the Butcher]

I'd vote for her.

[Moiraine]

Why is it a "cat fight?"

 

It it because they're both women?

 

Ya... I don't get offended very easily but in this context it's kind of annoying.

[Sub-Husker]

In 2008 Barack Obama was a nobody, whose claim to fame was a pretty anti-war speech during the 2004 convention. Then he was backed by George Soros' money and dictates on finance, and who brought in Zbigniew Brzezinski to dictate to him on foreign policy.

 

Elizabeth Warren has done much more than Obama in the senate, and has made a name for herself in progressive circles by advocating for financial reforms.

 

Hillary Clinton has done more and has more experience than just about anyone considering running in 2016. Some people love her, some people hate her, and very few are indifferent. As a progressive/libertarian, I oppose just about everything she stands for. I voted for Gary Johnson in 2012 after voting for Ron Paul in the state primary. I would vote for in order; Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, any Republican (if Hillary was the opponent), Hillary Clinton (never).

[TGHusker]

Why is it a "cat fight?"

 

It it because they're both women?

Could have called it a dog fight. My take is that It will be a fight (dog, cat, or Zebra) just because the Clinton machine will fight against what they believe is theirs and entitled too and Warren will fight back because I think she is more 'principled' then Hillary. For Hillary it is about entitlement - something she has built for & tried to obtain since running for the Senate. Warren I believe has different values. If I was a dem and was of that political persuasion and had to choose, I'd go wt Warren as a person driven more by principles then a thirst for power.

[knapplc]

Sub!!! You're back!

 

I like Bernie Sanders, too. And I would never vote for Hillary. Just have never liked her.

[carlfense]

For Hillary it is about entitlement - something she has built for & tried to obtain since running for the Senate.

Is trying for something/building something generally what you think of when you say "entitlement"?

[BigRedBuster]

Sub!!! You're back!

 

I like Bernie Sanders, too. And I would never vote for Hillary. Just have never liked her.

Well, I didn't know Sanders so I had to go do some reading.

 

After reading his beliefs on trade, I'm willing to listen to more.

[TGHusker]

 

For Hillary it is about entitlement - something she has built for & tried to obtain since running for the Senate.

Is trying for something/building something generally what you think of when you say "entitlement"?

 

No, it just seems to be the image that they give off and the press as well - the next in line.

[carlfense]

 

 

For Hillary it is about entitlement - something she has built for & tried to obtain since running for the Senate.

Is trying for something/building something generally what you think of when you say "entitlement"?

 

No, it just seems to be the image that they give off and the press as well - the next in line.

 

Polling seems to support the idea that she is the next in line.

[Sub-Husker]

 

 

 

For Hillary it is about entitlement - something she has built for & tried to obtain since running for the Senate.

Is trying for something/building something generally what you think of when you say "entitlement"?

 

No, it just seems to be the image that they give off and the press as well - the next in line.

 

Polling seems to support the idea that she is the next in line.

 

 

Early polling said the same thing in 2008. Unfortunateley it takes a lot of money to run a national campaign, which Obama had thanks to George Soros. Neither Elizabeth Warren nor Bernie Sanders will have nearly the money, making Hillary unopposed cash-wise. The Koch brothers and/or Sheldon Adelson will pick the Republican candidate. Big money will only put garbage into the office, so we will get more of the same. Or worse.

[carlfense]

Early polling said the same thing in 2008.

Not like this. For example:

[Sub-Husker]

Yeah, there's that,

 

And there is very unlikey to be a big money opponent to oppose her, so right now she has all the money and the attention it buys.

 

The only thing that can stop her is a populist uprising in the party against warmongering banksters. Unlikely to be successful, but her only potential challenge.