This. she was trying to figure out her crowd without alienating the donor elite that DNC + Obama knows is crucial to win over (both money and the support they can call in). Before the M4A gaffe, she was mainly opposed for offending teddy bear philanthropist Bill Gates for wanting more of his friends money, but moreso of the quiet rumbling of “well intentioned liberal” rich folk putting their money in trump. Bernie was a hurdle she couldn’t overcome without burning key bridges Bernie left behind decades ago
This is a good take on M4A issue: I disagree that her campaigning was bad, she was able to get up off the mat from the stupid 23andme dna test thing (at which point, I had totally dismissed her) and even fight into the tentative lead. She did it with things like campaign rallies, the plan branding, selfie lines, debates - all traditional campaign stuff. Meanwhile Biden's campaign which was more based on hope ("hope everything goes right and is like, ah Bernie, **** no") and leveraging his previous status at the right time. It worked, so you can't criticize it, but again Bernie & Biden are graded on a curve that she just didn't seem to get, IMO.
I disagree with the 5th one. I don't think it was sexist, it was the fact that she surged with her I have a plan for that slogan and when called on it she either did not have a plan or did not want to give details. It ruined her credibility, at least with me.
Except Bernie did answer the M4A question by saying taxes would go up and then offered his "but copays, deductibles yada yada" stuff where Warren simply refused to answer. She made it an issue. That wasn't sexism.
She did not get that curve because she was supposed to be the Wonk and have it all figured out, after the debate flub she just looked like any other politician. Not saying it was right but she kind of set herself up for that.
There may or may not be sexism in voting (there probably is), but that's not what stopped Warren. She had a wonky campaign and it successfully appealed to highly educated people. But she didn't expand much beyond that - Bernie sucked all the oxygen out of the rest of the progressive/revolution lane, and much of the party is more moderate than people think and there were plenty of candidates already there. I think I saw she was the top "2nd choice" of people, but whatever you wanted, there was generally one person that fit your lane a bit better than her.
I'm not sure she would want that. She wants to do stuff, and VP isn't a place you can really accomplish much of anything. And if Bernie loses the primary, she's alienated herself from the party, meaning she loses her other opportunities to do big things (Sec of Treasury, for example).
That said, it might have been a big reason it was even kind-of close. Notice how much worse Bernie is doing this time around facing men, despite tons more infrastructure and an already existing volunteer army.
As an outsider looking in it seems to me she tried to push her own version of everything Bernie was pushing but never really got any of his supporters to come her way. When she became the front runner for a short time the media actually asked tough questions like "how will you pay for your plans" that really hurt her with the more moderate Dems. Without pulling Bernie Bros. her way and losing the moderates her campaign collapsed.
I think people overthink these things in politics especially at the presidential level. IMO it comes down to likability and trust. I personally like Liz Warren, but I know many many many people that just do not like her. It's mostly sexism, but in the end, we all know alot of people that just do not like her. Joe Biden is .... well... he's just Joe for better or worse, but liberal voters know him, and they know he's likable. People trust him, and know he's a good man with integrity. The biggest question of 2020 in 2021 and beyond will certainly be.... should Democrats have been making voting decisions based on how they feel other people feel about a candidate?? That's the biggest issue driving this idea of "electability" or favorability with candidates. Should we as liberal Democratic voters be making our decision based off of how likely Trump voters will react & potentially support our candidate?? We really don't know yet. The polling shows we are making a smart decision especially for down ballot races. We'll just have to see how Joe Biden does from now till November to know whether its the right decision or not.
I just completely reject this. Completely. My wife didn't know Elizabeth Warren and watched the first debates and came away liking her the least of all the candidates. Eventually she got to where she couldn't stand her. She liked Kamala Harris fine, she liked Amy Klobuchar fine...this was Warren specific. In the actual debates, both Harris and Klobuchar came to really resent Elizabeth Warren. Her attitude, her condescending nature...it was ridiculous. Warren has pushed this sexism narrative so much that it is gross. She said it's harder to get donors as a woman. She outraised Joe Biden by what, 10x? She balked at being asked who she would endorse, asking if the male candidates were asked this. Yes, they were lol. Rachel Maddow said yesterday "If not Clinton winning, and not you now, will it ever?" or something like that with regards to a woman president. Then it was "maybe we'll always just have two old straight white males running against each other?" This is so insulting. 1) Clinton dominated the primary against Bernie and then won the popular vote by a significant margin. So the MOST RECENT election disproved that argument. 2) The implication is that Warren deserved to be the candidate and any other outcome is sexism. This is so stupid. With Kamala Harris it was racism was the reason she wasn't the candidate, with Booker the same. Now with Warren it's sexism that she isn't the candidate. There's some kind of "reason" for all of them that basically boils down to "IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN ME THIS ISN'T FAIR!" You know who can make an argument that he should have gotten more attention? Michael Bennett of Colorado. Zero traction. Maybe people are racist and sexist against white males! Warren wasn't likeable. Not because she's a woman, but because she's arrogant and condescending. She was dishonest, despite what her fans think, with the Indian stuff, the pregnancy stuff, her dad stuff...Those were such huge unforced errors and she looked so stupid because of them. In the debates she was dismissive and attacked everyone with her "I'm too good for you and your ideas are all stupid" attitude and she constantly interrupted everyone. Like I'm sorry, but the same electorate that embraced Hillary Clinton wanted nothing to do with her. That's not sexism.
People forget there were 23 candidates - and 22 of them were inevitably going to lose. She made it into the final 3. The top 2 could be there because they are white males. Or they could be there because they were the favorites and best-known coming in. Bernie had a whole movement behind him, and Biden was a VP and has 50 years of history with Democrats. Odds always were that one of them was going to win, regardless of any gender/race crosscurrents that might exist.
