Jump to content
think

Elizabeth Warren’s Ideas Could Win The Democratic Primary — Even If She Doesn’t

Recommended Posts

 

Quote

FEB. 20, 2019, AT 5:56 AM  -  By Perry Bacon Jr.

 

Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s bid for the Democratic presidential nomination is good news for liberal policy activists. And that’s whether she wins the nomination or not. The Massachusetts senator appears poised to serve as a progressive policy anchor in the 2020 Democratic field, pushing the field — and the eventual nominee — toward aggressively liberal policy stands.

 

How might Warren have such influence? Because the Massachusetts senator is planning to release detailed and decidedly liberal policy proposals on issue after issue. Her rivals, if past primary campaigns are any guide, will feel pressure to either “match” her on policy by coming up with their own proposals, say that they agree with Warren, or convince the party’s increasingly left-leaning electorate that Warren’s proposals are too liberal. And remember that presidential winners usually try to implement their promises — so an idea put out by Warren in March could be in Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand’s platform in August and be signed into law by a President Gillibrand in 2021.

 

Here’s an example of how this works, from a past Democratic primary. Early in the 2008 campaign, John Edwards released a comprehensive plan to provide health care for millions of Americans. A few months later, then-Sen. Barack Obama, looking to compete with Edwards among liberal voters and activists, put out a similar proposal, which was the basic outline for the Affordable Care Act he signed into law as president.

 

Read more:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/elizabeth-warrens-ideas-could-win-the-democratic-primary-even-if-she-doesnt/

 

 

There is a fairly comprehensive list of her policy proposals in the article at the link above.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, think said:

There is a fairly comprehensive list of her policy proposals in the article at the link above.

 

That is a marvelously specific list of proposals and if anyone has the skillset to implement them, it's Warren.  However, as the article implies, Warren may not be as brilliant a candidate as she is a policy wonk.  And for her to get her ideas out there, she needs to stay in the race for longer than a month or two.  My "dream team" would be presidential candidate Bernie choosing Warren as his vice-president.  Together, they could be at least twice as effective as either one, alone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, bludog said:

 

That is a marvelously specific list of proposals and if anyone has the skillset to implement them, it's Warren.  However, as the article implies, Warren may not be as brilliant a candidate as she is a policy wonk.  And for her to get her ideas out there, she needs to stay in the race for longer than a month or two.  My "dream team" would be presidential candidate Bernie choosing Warren as his vice-president.  Together, they could be at least twice as effective as either one, alone.

 

Yes. Warren is much more a policy wonk than a skilled speaker on the campaign trail. She can get fired up though and her passion shines through on issues like anti corruption.

Bernie and Warren as a team would be unstoppable! This is my dream ticket.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BlueDoggL said:

Bernie is better able to reach low information voters who are right center and independent.

 

I agree.  That's one of the main factors that makes him a better campaigner.  But Warren could be a major asset in a Sanders administration.

 

2 hours ago, BlueDoggL said:

In other news... Prosecutors: Coast Guard officer wanted to kill Democrats ... This happened today. This guy was looking to set the record for body count.

 

In addition to being White Nationalist, Neo-Fascist, Neo-Nazi and would-be terrorist, Hasson is probably a high-functioning psychotic as well.  He's quoted as saying something like "I'm dreaming of a way to kill almost every last person on Earth".  And, of course, he is most likely a Trump supporter.

 

Hasson is a disciple of Andres Breivik, the Norwegian, white supremacist, mass murderer.   But above and beyond that, he had indiscriminate mass-murder on the brain also ...   Supposedly to be carried out by wholesale means like botulism, anthrax or Spanish flu virus.

 

Unfortunately, there are probably many more like him, encouraged by the psychopathic nature and authoritarian behavior of Trump.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bludog said:

 

I agree.  That's one of the main factors that makes him a better campaigner.  But Warren could be a major asset in a Sanders administration.

She has the financial know how to keep the economy stable and safe from the the bankters. I do think the Republicans have dirtied up like they did with Hillary. They will smear her and Bernie. 

1 hour ago, bludog said:

 

In addition to being White Nationalist, Neo-Fascist, Neo-Nazi and would-be terrorist, Hasson is probably a high-functioning psychotic as well.  He's quoted as saying something like "I'm dreaming of a way to kill almost every last person on Earth".  And, of course, he is most likely a Trump supporter.

 

Hasson is a disciple of Andres Breivik, the Norwegian, white supremacist, mass murderer.   But above and beyond that, he had indiscriminate mass-murder the brain also ...   Supposedly to be carried out by wholesale means like botulism, anthrax or Spanish flu virus.

 

Unfortunately, there are probably many more like him, encouraged by the psychopathic nature and authoritarian behavior of Trump.

 

There was a time when ALL Republicans would have condemned an animal like him. Every Republican president until Trump would have condemned Hasson. Trump has remained silent. 

 

Trump is Silent About a Real Domestic Terrorist’s Plot to ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Elizabeth Warren is the Lisa Simpson of political candidates.

She's a workaholic overachiever with deep convictions who was born to lead, but nobody wants to sign her yearbook.

 

It seems like the worst reason ever to not succeed, but that's America.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Toldya said:

Elizabeth Warren is the Lisa Simpson of political candidates.

She's a workaholic overachiever with deep convictions who was born to lead, but nobody wants to sign her yearbook.

 

It seems like the worst reason ever to not succeed, but that's America.

 

That's a great description.

 

It would be nice if America finds it has had enough with the popularity contests and votes for candidates based on their merits as to what they would work to accomplish if elected.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, think said:

It would be nice if America finds it has had enough with the popularity contests and votes for candidates based on their merits as to what they would work to accomplish if elected.

 

I wouldn't hold my breath.  One of the worst flaws of representative government is that there are so many low-information voters who choose by Hollywood standards.  Unfortunately we need to take that into account in the choice of candidate. 

 

That said, Bernie has wide appeal despite his age and somewhat disheveled look.  Trump is trying to capitalize on Bernie's appearance, mocking "crazy Bernie Sanders".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Warren and Sanders are on the same plane in trying to deal with inequality. Both have good ideas. Bernie grabs the young more solidly but in her way, Warren can better explain policy. Tax Capital Gains, something I heard Bill Gates say the other day, makes sense. One thing though, tax evasion is a tremendously huge business these days. Corporations and rich individuals are really great at hiding taxable income. How did they get that income? I think corporate subsidy, as well as a huge disinclination towards stronger antitrust legislation perhaps. 

 

The congress has a lot of power, more power than any president could or even should. Fixing things the right way needs to start there. Say want you should say about LBJ and that horrible Southeast Asia war which he should have put the breaks on in its infancy, but the man knew a thing or two about shaking up the legislative branch.

Peace!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/23/2019 at 3:09 AM, bludog said:

 

I wouldn't hold my breath.  One of the worst flaws of representative government is that there are so many low-information voters who choose by Hollywood standards.  Unfortunately we need to take that into account in the choice of candidate. 

 

That said, Bernie has wide appeal despite his age and somewhat disheveled look.  Trump is trying to capitalize on Bernie's appearance, mocking "crazy Bernie Sanders".

 

I am fully convinced that people voted for Trump because of the sincerity of his stupidity.

When intelligent people try to act that stupid, they just come off as condescending.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I too am convinced that when intelligent people try to act stupid they do come off as condescending.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/22/2019 at 2:09 PM, bludog said:

 

I wouldn't hold my breath.

I can only cast my vote and recommend that everyone do the same.  Anything that can settle the flames, possibly enable people to stop and think for just a few minutes, could be enough to turn the tide back in favor of reasoned, moderate, Liberal policy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/20/2019 at 2:20 PM, think said:

 

 

 

There is a fairly comprehensive list of her policy proposals in the article at the link above.

 

Any of the Dem policies will improve America so long as they get rid of the filthy rich who own our government.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, BlueDoggL said:

Any of the Dem policies will improve America so long as they get rid of the filthy rich who own our government.

 

In order to compete with their corporate funded, Republican opponents, most elected democrats now take legalized bribes from Big Money Interests.  If the recipients don't produce legislation favorable to these big donors, and often harmful to everyone else, the money dries up.  As a result, these neoliberals tend to support legislation that is economically conservative and socially progressive.  The owners and top execs at big corporations are willing to pay for legislation that shovels more wealth to the top, but usually don't care about social legislation in favor of the rights of minorities, LGBTQ, etc.

 

Although some of the primary democratic contenders have recently sworn off taking money from corporate pacs, there are only three candidates I currently trust to rely exclusively on small donors and progressive organizations like labor unions.  They are Bernie SandersElizabeth Warren and Sherrod Brown.

 

That said, I would vote for ANY of the democratic hopefuls over a republican.  In most cases, even the most corrupt democrats are more progressive than any republican.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, bludog said:

 

In order to compete with their corporate funded, Republican opponents, most elected democrats now take legalized bribes from Big Money Interests.  If the recipients don't produce legislation favorable to these big donors, and often harmful to everyone else, the money dries up. 

The Koch brothers bribe both at the same time. Trump did the same thing.

3 hours ago, bludog said:

As a result, these neoliberals tend to support legislation that is economically conservative and socially progressive.  The owners and top execs at big corporations are willing to pay for legislation that shovels more wealth to the top, but usually don't care about social legislation in favor of the rights of minorities, LGBTQ, etc.

More simply, the corporatists own the most of the government. The own much more than the politicians. The own government agencies. The FDA is a prime example. The FDA has a revolving door industry and government officials. The FDA and its medical industry masters are responsible for the opiate crisis. 

3 hours ago, bludog said:

Although some of the primary democratic contenders have recently sworn off taking money from corporate pacs, there are only three candidates I currently trust to rely exclusively on small donors and progressive organizations like labor unions.  They are Bernie SandersElizabeth Warren and Sherrod Brown.

It goes beyond candidates. Bribes and kickbacks permeate all levels of government. The only real way to change that is to get rid of the rich. 

3 hours ago, bludog said:

 

That said, I would vote for ANY of the democratic hopefuls over a republican.  In most cases, even the most corrupt democrats are more progressive than any republican.

Years ago I voted a split ticket but not now 100% Democrat. The lesser of two evils is less evil.

 

Republicans can't afford to be honest. Real conservatives such Kasich, Flake, Jolly and Corker quit politics. Unless the Republican candidate is a scumbag the Republican base won't support him. As simplistic as that sounds, it's the truth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, BlueDoggL said:

It goes beyond candidates. Bribes and kickbacks permeate all levels of government. The only real way to change that is to get rid of the rich. 

 

It's important to support democratic candidates who are not in the pockets of the rich and powerful. 

 

Elected officials not in the pockets of wealthy special interests are free to work for the prosperity of the electorate.  In doing so, they narrow the wealth gap.  There are a minority of democratic politicians who don't take legalized bribes and are beholden to the people and not corporations, their owners and top executives.  Voting for them is a vote for equality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BlueDoggL said:

The only real way to change that is to get rid of the rich. 

Years ago I voted a split ticket but not now 100% Democrat. The lesser of two evils is less evil.

 

 

What is your idea of a good way to get rid of the rich?

 

And once you've gotten rid of them, what will fill the power vacuum they leave?

 

I agree with voting a straight Democratic ticket. Since 2006, when I became a citizen, I think I voted for a Republican once, for a minor position, locally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, bludog said:

It's important to support democratic candidates who are not in the pockets of the rich and powerful. 

 

 

In general that's a good idea. Occasionally, it's a terrible idea.

 

Sometimes rich people oppose a candidate because that person's policies are against their interests. But sometimes rich people oppose a candidate because that person's policies are against everybody's interests including their's. The details are important.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not in favor of "getting rid of the rich". When you create a power vacuum, it's typically filled by the least scrupulous opportunists, those will do anything for power.

 

Getting rid of people like Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates, Elon Musk, the Kochs, Bloomberg and Buffet will result in a government by people like Roger Stone and Steve Bannon and Stephen Miller.

 

Just get rid of Trump; by impeachment or election.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, laripu said:

I'm not in favor of "getting rid of the rich". When you create a power vacuum, it's typically filled by the least scrupulous opportunists, those will do anything for power.

I am not in favor of "getting rid of the rich", either. Only a miss-informed provocateur, or troll would suggest such a thing.

However, closing loopholes, and imposing fair tax rates is reasonable, and long overdue. It is not capital punishment.

It is interesting that you use the term power vacuum. They are a very, very small percent of the population that exerts extraordinary power.

I acknowledge money equals power, and power can be used, and / or abused.

It is the abuse of that power need to be checked. There is no doubt in my mind that the criminal justice system is tilted in favor of the wealthy, and politically connected, for instance. Some wealthy individuals use their wealth / power to disproportionately influence politicians. The current tax system is also stacked in favor of the wealthy.

To me it is just a question of fairness.

After closing loopholes, and imposing a fair tax rate, the top 1% will still be the top 1%, just with slightly less wealth.

 

1 hour ago, laripu said:

Getting rid of people like Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates, Elon Musk, the Kochs, Bloomberg and Buffet will result in a government by people like Roger Stone and Steve Bannon and Stephen Miller.

Again, only a loon would advocate 'getting rid' of people. Period.

However, with the exception Bloomberg, the people listed above are not policy experts, and have not been elected by anyone.

They are just like you and I, only richer.

They are richer because they own, or have owned successful businesses, or corporations.

That's good, as long as those businesses do not exploit workers, consumers, or taxpayers.

If businesses, or corporations do use egregious exploitation as a revenue stream, the owners should be held responsible.

The fact that many of these exploitations  are legal, or un-enforced is a political problem that needs to addressed by informed voters.

If a business, or corporation can be successful without exploiting workers, consumers, or taxpayers, then they and their owners deserve to makes as much money (after fair taxation), as they can, and should be applauded.

It really comes down to making a quality product, selling it for a fair price, and paying their workers a fair wage.

1 hour ago, laripu said:

Just get rid of Trump; by impeachment or election.

Absolutely!

I feel he has already committed illegal, or impeachable acts, so it is either indictment, or impeachment.

The election may be politically advantageous, but it is the duty of the Justice Dept, or Congress to act constitutionally.

Lowering the bar of acceptability is unacceptable to me.

 

Besides, if Trump is not indicted, or impeached, there's a chance he could pull off an electoral college win in 2020.

And if he loses , there's no guarantee he will accept the outcome.

All this is dangerous territory. A line needs to be drawn on abuse of presidential power.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, ExPDXer said:

However, closing loopholes, and imposing fair tax rates is reasonable, and long overdue.

 

After closing loopholes, and imposing a fair tax rate, the top 1% will still be the top 1%, just with slightly less wealth.

 

Again, only a loon would advocate 'getting rid' of people. Period.

 

 

The difficulty was choosing which parts of your post to quote, because I agreed with all of it. So I chose the parts that I agreed with and hadn't said myself recently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, laripu said:

 

What is your idea of a good way to get rid of the rich?

Confiscate their ill gotten gains. When their wealth is gone there will be no more rich.

6 hours ago, laripu said:

 

And once you've gotten rid of them, what will fill the power vacuum they leave?

Why would there be a power vacuum? There would be no power vacuum and if they were dumb enough to try and resist there are more of us than there are of them. They would lose badly.

6 hours ago, laripu said:

 

I agree with voting a straight Democratic ticket. Since 2006, when I became a citizen, I think I voted for a Republican once, for a minor position, locally.

It's too bad that it has come to that. For me voting a straight Democrat ticket has as much to do with morals as policy. If the Republican candidate was a center moderate, qualified and told the truth and the Democrat lacked qualifications and was shady I would vote for the Republican but since there are no moderate, honest, and qualified Republicans the whole thing is academic. All the moral patriotic Republicans have quit politics. An honest Republican would be rejected by the base.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/6/2019 at 11:20 PM, BlueDoggL said:

Confiscate their ill gotten gains. When their wealth is gone there will be no more rich.

Why would there be a power vacuum? There would be no power vacuum and if they were dumb enough to try and resist there are more of us than there are of them. They would lose badly.

It's too bad that it has come to that. For me voting a straight Democrat ticket has as much to do with morals as policy. If the Republican candidate was a center moderate, qualified and told the truth and the Democrat lacked qualifications and was shady I would vote for the Republican but since there are no moderate, honest, and qualified Republicans the whole thing is academic. All the moral patriotic Republicans have quit politics. An honest Republican would be rejected by the base.

that is interesting to note. If you had a blue dog that would not vote to push an important piece of progressive legislation into law, what good would that do you?

And yet, policy leadership, someone who has it right, regardless of their party, seems like a worthy vote, 

And yet, that is the problem with the two-party system,

And yet, without using my own bias, I can only wished to be endowed with reason, If I am biased I would appreciate someone who can illustrate

the best path forward, in a pragmatic way.

And yet, But that's never going to happen, nothing is ever going to happen, not now, not with the huge divide however irrational they are on the right.

 

I voted for Hillary. 

And yet, I also voted for Ralph Nader.

 

How could that be?

 

Peace!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×