PoliSci 101 crap doesn't explain this. It's Race. The MAGA movement is about White people. It's about race. And they will follow their leader's lies as long as he appears to help them feel victimized, fearful,,, but in control now. Dems can't do that, because it's more difficult to have one message. Combine that with a rich class also getting what they want, and you have the fuel to power Authoritarianism.
Just silly and uniformed about what intelligence "brightness" means. Both are undoubtedly in roughly the top 1% IQ wise. Sufficiently smart to be a good president. Studies and theories of intelligence show that at the level with the possible exception of a few international geniuses, you are largely splitting hairs.
Warren is showing her character, courage and political instincts deficits. She just looks narcissistic and careerist by horsing around on SNL at a key time in the primaries and not endorsing Sanders, assuming her whole "plan" was not just drafting on heavy lifting done by Sanders from 2015 to the present when despite his urging she failed to have the courage to run against Hillary. She has lost all leverage and might as well join the crowd and endorse Biden which gains her or him next to nothing. I guess she could now, after it doesn't matter endorse Sanders, if for some reason she wants to keep the veneer of being deeply progressive. Biden owes her nothing and does not need her endorsement. Even as a VP she helps him little. It is hard to think of a significant group of people who would be thinking "I was not going to be voting for Biden vs. Trump until he chose Elizabeth Warren.
Nah... Warren’s knowledge, experience and education on the issue of finance and corporations blows Sanders out of the water.
Horsing around at a key time in the primaries? Endorse Sanders? It is over, Sanders lost fair and square.
And yet her polices mirror Sanders. I agree Warren is more educated and nuanced but she has a credibility problem that Sanders doesn't in the progressive circles. Many blame it on sexism, which I'm sure for a portion of the electorate, it is a valid excuse.
It's water under the bridge now but some more research on the sexism issue: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/11/opinion/sanders-trump-biden.html Not the only factor by far, but a signifcant one. Also the effect of "second order" sexism (people who are on the left side of the curve, but vote tactically because the people on the right) is really hard to tease out here.
Sanders early on not being able to plan on how to finance her healthcare plan was a big detriment Regardless she should have run four years ago. She just has bad instincts and I'm sorry if this comes off as sexist but she is whiny. Women are going to have a problem in presidential elections because people want their president to sound strong. I can't stand Carly Fiorina but her time as CEO of HP probably did enhance her appearance as a leader. Regardless I don't consider the bias as sexist. We are improving on these subjects but it takes a while to eradicate bias Edit: Clinton didn't have a problem with sexism. Warren has an overall appearance problem.
Or maybe she, like everyone else, is wholly opposed to Sanders and didn't endorse Biden out of respect to their friendship. At some point, you'll have to accept that no one supports your candidate.
She didn't run 4 years ago and build a cult following for the last 4 years. So she simply had no lane. Just as Amy/Pete/etc couldn't break through Biden's lane because of his history. The two finalists are the ones with the pre-existing constituencies. Because of the # of people in the race, none of the new candidates could break through and coalesce the remaining voters.
Yeah, agreed. In her knowledge in her relatively narrow area of evidence. Once outside of that she looks to be a quick study like he is, but much more of a beginner wrt to leadership, politics, international affairs and many other areas that a president must deal with. As for education. Sanders went to a much more competitive undergrad school. Warren went to a relatively mediocre law school. Both have done well in their careers. Sanders better as a politician as we see in this election in which her best showings was some thirds. Sanders won an office in Vermont that Dems had not won in 130 yrs. Warren a recent convert to liberalism has consistently underperformed the Dem ticket in MA and as we just saw came in third in her own state.
Sam, since you an identity type of liberal I must point out that Warren had very little appeal to Latinos, African Americans and people of color. At least I iirc correctly you are not blaming her poor performance on the Russians or bots.
"Cult" lol you used to be so proof reader like in your wonkiness. Her lack of moral courage and or poor political instincts are the reason she did not run 4 years ago or at least set herself up by endorsing Sanders to show some actual commitment instead of ordinary politician trying to figure out which direction the wind was blowing. Amy Kobuchar who was a total unknown compared to Warren starting taking her votes as the campaign went on.
It does. It is. Women are going to have a problem in elections because people want them to sound like men. It is. "Tone" comes a close second behind looks for criticizing a woman who dares to lead. Man speaks with righteous anger = manly man. A leader. Woman does the same = screechy, whiny. A b*tch. Man criticizes a systemic problem and demands action = strong. Woman does the same = Angry, b*tchy. Put the exact same words and tone from a man to a woman and the reactions are very different. It's sexism. Yep.
For me, Warren's expertise and experience and knowledge is extremely important when you are talking about the type of massive economic changes being proposed. As far as education is concerned, I believe Sanders only has an undergraduate degree, wasn't a particularly good student and wasn't terribly interested in class. I do agree that Chicago is an excellent school and to be clear, I do believe he is bright, just not as bright as Warren. As far as Warren's schooling, she was married and raising children at the same time so I do not judge her too much for that. Where she went was largely dependent on where her husband was employed. I would support Warren (and have in the past) as she is far more realistic when it comes to the financial aspect of programs. I also believe she is exceptional at articulating the perspective of being a female and society is lacking in that regard.
Sam, take a breath, you are owning yourself. AOC is a member of the Democratic Socialists of America as I have been for years. We both support Sanders a lot and not your OMG SHE IS A WOMAN Warren.
That will not happen for the most loyal movement and Sanders supporters..... because at their very basic level they believe they are representing the wants of the majority of Americans and oppressed Americans. Having the electorate (including minorities and the working class) vote otherwise throws the entire premise into chaos. It is the reason there is an excuse for every falter along the way, it is always something or someone else fooling the masses or tipping the scale against Sanders and progressives. If you spend a lot of time studying communists in the decades prior to WW2 and the Russian revolution, you see a similar issue...... in Russia the extremists got around it by embracing violence.
