• Tips gratefully accepted here. Thanks!:

  • Recent Comments

    riverdaughter on VEEP Stakes.
    eurobrat on VEEP Stakes.
    Catscatscats on VEEP Stakes.
    Kathleen A Wynne on VEEP Stakes.
    Ga6thDem on VEEP Stakes.
    Ga6thDem on VEEP Stakes.
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on VEEP Stakes.
    William on VEEP Stakes.
    Kathleen A Wynne on VEEP Stakes.
    Catscatscats on VEEP Stakes.
    Kathleen A Wynne on VEEP Stakes.
    tamens on VEEP Stakes.
    William on VEEP Stakes.
    riverdaughter on VEEP Stakes.
    Kathleen A Wynne on Throw it against the wall, see…
  • Categories

  • Tags

    abortion Add new tag Afghanistan Al Franken Anglachel Atrios bankers Barack Obama Bernie Sanders big pharma Bill Clinton cocktails Conflucians Say Dailykos Democratic Party Democrats Digby DNC Donald Trump Donna Brazile Economy Elizabeth Warren feminism Florida Fox News General Glenn Beck Glenn Greenwald Goldman Sachs health care Health Care Reform Hillary Clinton Howard Dean John Edwards John McCain Jon Corzine Karl Rove Matt Taibbi Media medicare Michelle Obama Michigan misogyny Mitt Romney Morning Edition Morning News Links Nancy Pelosi New Jersey news NO WE WON'T Obama Obamacare OccupyWallStreet occupy wall street Open thread Paul Krugman Politics Presidential Election 2008 PUMA racism Republicans research Sarah Palin sexism Single Payer snark Social Security Supreme Court Terry Gross Texas Tim Geithner unemployment Wall Street WikiLeaks women
  • Archives

  • History

    May 2019
    S M T W T F S
  • RSS Paul Krugman: Conscience of a Liberal

  • The Confluence

    The Confluence

  • RSS Suburban Guerrilla

  • RSS Ian Welsh

    • Cold War 2.0 Incoming
      Right, with the ban on Huawei using chips made with American manufacturing equipment (one of America’s last few places of absolute advantage); the bans of TikTok, Tencent and WeChat; the attempt to convince other countries to not use Huawei 5G; the arrest of the Huawei founder’s daughter for doing business with Iran along with the […]
  • Top Posts

Eleven years ago, Elizabeth Warren knew what was ailing middle and working class people.

Here’s her presentation on the two income trap from eleven years ago before she ever thought of running for office.

And here is one of her former students, California Representative Katie Porter, recently picking up what Warren put down:

There’s a reason why Warren is resonating across the great divide.

22 Responses

  1. I think that, from what I’ve seen, Warren has the best positions, and I agree with you on that. But I think that there is a tremendous risk to nominating her. Prospective matchup polls are always iffy. I know that every Democrat is running close to or ahead of Trump. But as Ga6thDem pointed out below, being from Massachusetts is a risky thing in a national election. It’s pretty easy to get painted as “another Massachusetts liberal.” Couple that with any other attack on her, and I really wonder if enough rust belt voters would vote for her. Strangely enough, she was a Republican until around age 40 or so. This doesn’t evince a consistent view toward things, as I guess that she voted for Reagan twice?

    Rather unfortunately, I think we’re being pushed toward a Biden-Harris ticket, more out of convenience, than anything else. I also agree with Ga6thDem that Harris to me just seems like a created candidate, we’re supposed to like her, because. I’ve never been much a fan of Biden. But now we’ve got not only Biden in a big lead, but the implication that he’ll pick Harris, which of course helps him in primaries with some voters. One of the biggest problems with a Biden candidacy is that he will almost certainly serve no more than one term, which means we have to go through the whole thing again in four years, plus we likely get Harris, and have little choice of our own the next time.

    I can definitely see Warren emerging as the “liberal candidate” in the primaries. But I don’t see how she or anyone could pass the prospective Biden/Harris candidacy. Actually, if I voted today, I’d vote for Beto, because I see him as having some JFK aspects, of being someone who with energy and passion, could swing large groups of people behind his appealing ideas. But I know that he is not going to be nominated. I will tell you that if I had the choice to make between Warren or Biden, I’d prefer Warren, even though I would be afraid that we were doing something like we did in 1972. I guess it just depends if one wants to gamble on something really good in terms of issues, with a greater risk of losing it all. One more thing: if we do not somehow win the Senate, no Democratic President or House is going to get anything through McConnell, who won’t even bring bills or judges to the floor. Best bet is that BIden-Harris get elected, and accomplish next to nothing, other than holding the fort, like in the last six years of Obama; except that we are in a worse place now, with only two years of an all-Republican government.

    • The whole Biden/Harris thing is a media creation probably pushed by Biden. Biden has the media pushing for his candidacy which should scare voters away. I see this primary as a repeat of 1992 where we really don’t know who we are going to end up with. The debates are going to show who can cut the mustard and frankly I see Biden as the Scott Walker of 2020 where the more people see him the more his numbers start to collapse. You know Biden is not going to be in a debate with all those women and not make some stupid misogynistic comment. Warren has not successfully explained why she left the GOP. If Reagan and Bush’s behavior did not scare her off what exactly did? Bob Dole losing in landslide in 1996?

      • I actually think that the African-American Democratic voters may exert a disproportionate effect on the Democratic nomination. That is because there are Southern states where they are 30-40% of the Democratic electorate, which means that if they vote mostly as a group, their preferred candidate will win a lot of delegates in those states, states where Democrats are likely not going to win in the national election. That is how Obama “beat” Hillary in 2008. Hillary benefitted from it in 2016. Also, as I continue to note, the Brazile rules apportion more delegates to African-American districts. So if Biden, or the imagined Biden-Harris ticket, wins a lot of votes of Black voters, Biden will sweep the Southern states, and gain an insurmountable lead in delegate, even if he falls back some in the rest of the country. This whole system is not good, not that there is any obviously better one. I would like one national primary election, except that of course that would benefit the more populous states. Right now, though, this seems to be almost predetermined. We all remember that Obama was getting about 96% of the Black vote in the primaries, thus meaning that Hillary had to win something like 72% of the rest of the vote in the Southern states, essentially impossible. Obama won many hundreds of delegates in those states, and then of course the caucuses, all of which favored him, and denied Hillary the nomination, even though she beat him in most of the major primaries, usually by ten points or more. If Biden sweeps Southern primaries, no other candidate can win so many more delegates than Biden in the other states, to make up for that. A rather strange but unfortunate political reality seemingly missed by many of the pundits.

        • African American voters are not voting as a group so far if you look at the internals of polling. They are splitting their votes among a couple of candidates. Biden just has the biggest percentage so far at least. There is no Obama that is getting 90% of the African American vote. We may not have a winner after super Tuesday but the field definitely will be whittled down. Bernie may not even make it out of Iowa at this point.

  2. While some say Warren would be dangerous as the nominee, but I bet all of Warren’s good ideas specifying policies that will benefit the American people and their quality of life will be picked up by some guy who put no effort into developing them into viable policies, but would get the credit.

    I still believe that the primary reason Warren is considered a gamble is because she is a woman. Let us not jump the gun too quickly. People not only vote based on emotion but they also want to vote for the candidate who proposes realisitic policies that will make a difference in their lives. Why is it less scary to vote for a candidate who has not offered any ideas, just name recognition, such as biden?

    The primary reason Joe is given a pass for making his launch into the race with an emotional video is because historically he has not shown that he is willing to do the hard work necessary in coming up with the comprehensive policies Warren is proposing. What is so detrimental about voting for the peron who came up with the ideas first? Are we being pushed into voting based on gender AGAIN?

    It’s still early and I want to see how these men and women perform in the debates. Warren, so far, has shown more gravitas in her willingness to stand up to trump by advising impeachment, plus, she has offered more policies than any of the other candidates running so far. In the end, the candidate (male or female) who has offered policies with specifics and can show how they can benefit the country’s best interest is the one we should vote for.

    What we are witnessing is whenever women are in the race for the presidency, the guys can’t get away with just talking about what they are going to do when one or more of the women are offering specifics in policy ideas. What a refreshing change. The big mistake would be to ignore the difference.

    • I actually think Biden is a terrible candidate. He has ideas but they are bad ones. It’s Obama redux with him. Right now he is sucking up so much oxygen for nothing and the press is giving him a complete pass on everything. If one of the other candidates would decide that they want the middle lane they could easily knock Biden off his perch.

      • This is interesting. Biden has one big advantage, which is his name recognition and connection with Obama in the minds of potential voters. No one else can take that lane, though of course others can be close to him on issues. I wonder if Biden is going to get away without saying much about issues, other than verities. Obama never did deal much with issues in his campaign in ’08, it was mostly a slogan and an image. Obviously, the press likes Biden, and will likely protect him. We will see if Democrats really challenge him on issues. Sanders will, but that’s not whom we need in that regard. Biden was saying something about a moderate plan about climate change, and he got criticized, even by Booker, but Biden said that his statement was misinterpreted.

        I could still see this coming down to Biden and one other candidate who is preferable on the issues, but it would have to be one, or at most two, as the number of other candidates will mute and muffle it. My worry, of course, is that while I’d prefer some of others on issues, we could end up with someone who is seen as too radical, even if she/he is not really. Sadly enough, the election will probably be decided by the same group of Reagan/Clinton/Bush/Obama/Trump voters who seem swayed differently in each election cycle, as they try to discern who is speaking to their supposed needs. I was surprised to see Beto polling better against Trump than anyone else, but it was only one poll, and may have been skewed by people from Texas. Still, he may be able to appeal to such voters, because of youth and energy. We will see if anyone is able to emerge from the large shadow Biden casts now. The primary schedule favors him, as he is almost certain to win the first three states, and then suddenly we have a whole bunch of states voting at the same time, which means that all he would need is to get the most delegates in that group, even if he loses a few of the states. One state at a time can sway momentum, but a whole bunch at the same time diffuses that of any outsider candidate.

        • What’s missing from this discussion is the elephant in the room…that is that Russia will repeat what they did in 2016 to ensure a trump “win” because Congress (i.e., the republican senate) has taken no action in passing legislation that will protect the electoral process. It really won’t matter who the candidate is if we allow that outside foreign adversary to interfere again and steal the election NO MATTER WHO THE CANDIDATE IS. If the American people want to have a chance to choose their next president, we MUST have the largest turnout in our country’s history to undermine Russia’s attempts to meddle again and that includes meddling with the voting systems to shave off votes to favor trump in the electoral college. This kind of turnout would also mean that the dems could take back the senate, which would make the person with the best ideas even more important than settling for another obamaesque president who enjoys the pomp and circumstance of the office and not the work.

          IMO, Beto is just not ready for prime time and I can’t imagine that the electorate will fall for any candidate who is not qualified for the job but is relying strictly on “charisma” to win their vote. . Our country is in dire straights and must have a qualified person as president who actually has a list of plans for the many issues which need to be addressed NOW, plus the ability, backbone and “persistence” to carry them out, if we really want to change course and not just have a kumbaya moment.

          I am looking forward to the debates when we can compare those candidates who are just depending on being media darlings, their so-called charisma and running out the clock by talking incessantly and saying nothing compared to those offering great ideas and how they plan to achieve them. The best candidate to take on trump will also need to be a fighter who will not shrink under trump’s bullying and bravado nor talk in platitudes in response to his insanity. So far, Warren and Harris appear to have what it takes to do that successfully. In any event, the debates will give us a closer look of who these candidates REALLY are, outside the media hype and speculation.

        • I believe that voters make a course correction with elections. I don’t see Biden or Beto going far simply because Biden would be a repeat of Obama and so would Beto. It was Obama’s people that were encouraging Beto to run for president because he sounded so much like Obama. Like Kathleen says we need someone who can hit the ground running which is not Beto and we also need someone who can serve 2 terms which is not Biden. My stepfather once he hit 80 started going downhill fast and I would expect Biden if elected would be a year or two into his term turning 80 and he possibly would not be even able to finish one term.

          • Ga6thDem,

            Totally agree with you about Biden’s age being an issue, because IT IS, for the reasons you state above! The question I have is why the media hasn’t recognized that biden would more than likely be a 1 term president, if that long. How much could be accomplished in that short amount of time? I just hope the electorate will keep an open mind and not fall victim to the media’s incessant push to decide who the nominee should be. That decision should left be up to us.

            Something that has bothered me since the media has annointed biden as THE ONE is that even though trump has openly expressed concern about biden being the nominee, I can’t help but believe that he secretly believes he can beat him.

            Knowing trump as we do, wouldln’t it make more sense that he is truly afraid of another woman kicking his ass? Hillary kicked his ass despite everything that was thrown at her. I will never accept that she lost “fair and square” or that she actually lost.

            Moreover, I believe a powerful woman with a vision for the future as our next president would send the right message from the electorate to the government that we truly want change and are not the least interested in supporting a candidate that the media has decided can beat trump. If we really turn out in droves, I am confident that we can kick the traitor out of the WH.

  3. I completed my 56th solar orbit today.

  4. Among the many malfeasances of Trump, is the fact that he is deliberately manipulating the stock market. I don’t know what he owns, or what interests he has in it, but he surely does. He has interfered with the Federal Reserve, in an effort to prop the market up. He has attacked various companies and dropped their share price, at least for a few days, which is all big traders need. He issues tweets which are reacted to by the market. When the market is down, he often hastily goes before the media to say things intended to move it back up. This is deliberate, and should be grossly illegal, but of course nothing is going to happen to him for it. One thing I am virtually sure of, is that i the months before the 2020 election, the market is going to shoot up. Wall Street loves Trump, and they can easily manipulate prices, and will do so. I am also somewhat suspicious of the jobs and GDP numbers. Trump cheats at everything, so why not fix these, too? Remember when he kept claiming that the numbers under Obama were false? He always projects his own evil onto others. We’ve got a cabal of merciless capitalists, perverted pseudo religious types, gun nuts, fascists, and know-nothings, running our country right now.

  5. I have just spent a half hour looking at various articles or threads about the vote hacking in Florida, and it is a depressing topic. If De Santis says that he was told by the FBI that two counties in Florida were hacked, then it is likely more. What counties? The two most Democratic counties in the state? And if they were hacked, the votes were changed. Russia did not hack the system just to look around there.

    So many things which can alter results. Change votes. Throw out a bunch of Democratic votes by voiding the ballots, changing the voter registration numbers. In Texas last time, we know that people reported votes for Beto being changed to Cruz. We know that Bill Nelson talked about vote hacking in Florida in 2018, and was mocked by Republicans and much of the media. There were a lot of suspicions about Ohio in 2004. I don’t know whether Florida has had a fair election in twenty years. Republicans do everything they can to cheat, so why not this? Why would this be sacrosanct to them? Back to Florida in 2016, Hillary lost by about 1%. Did she win that state? She certainly was winning by a strong percentage in the pre-election day voting, and it was said that Trump would have to win election day votes by an unusual percentage to overcome that. If Republicans could get away with cheating, of course they would. Someone pointed out that Gillum in Florida was leading by 7% in the last poll, and the felon voting proposition was leading by 7% as well. The proposition won by 7%, Gillum lost by 1%. Hillary was leading in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania by 3-4% right up to election day. Polls can be inaccurate, but why is it always to the detriment of the Democratic candidate?

    It is awful to have to consider the possibility that everything has been fixed just enough for Hillary to have lost an election that she won. And how many Senate and Gubernatorial seats have been handed to the Republicans in certain states, controlling the Supreme Court appointments, and the gerrymandering and vote suppression in states? We’ve got the real questions as to whether the 2016 election was literally stolen, and whether all the next ones will be, too? I have read enough pieces about how Trump was certain that he was going to lose. And very likely, he did, but the Russians changed the results for him. I am not ordinarily a conspiracy theorist, but I am starting to believe this one. And what is going to be done about it, going backward and forward? There are old jokes about someone saying that he knows he is being cheated in the weekly poker game; and when asked why he keeps playing in it, he replies, “It’s the only game in town.” In this case, it really is.

    • Our enemies have one weakness that will ultimately defeat them–the only problem is it may not defeat them soon enough to save the Republic.

      I speak of the fact that the authoritarians are disproportionately old.

      “Progress moves at the speed of a hearse.”

    • William,

      I have been posting about voting machines being hacked into since the consequential 2016 election and how it could have been done by the Russians. I also included the link to the documentary “Hacking Democracy” which shows how we got to this point. Have you watched it? If you haven’t, I hope you do because it’s a real eye opener of what’s been going on in our elections since Congress approved of these voting systems without ever asking the American people if they wanted to pay the billions necessary to install them throuhgout the country. Not one discussion or study on whether these machines were safe enough to protect the integrity of our votes — NOTHING.

      Congress had a huge conflict of interest passing legislation which approved of these various voting systems without public input and I believe it was because the power elite do not trust the American people to choose the “right” person to be in power and they wanted to do that themselves. You know, the “illuision” of an election to assuage the people into believing they choose our leaders.

      It should clue you in as to how dangerous these machines are by what was said by the Finnish computer security expert we brought in to demonstrate how the machines could be easily manipulated…after reviewing hte so-called security measures which were put into place by the manufacturers to protect the integrity of the vote he said, “these machines look like the kind you would set up in a banana republic…”

      • Kathleen, I have not seen that, but I will try to find it, unsettling as it might be. I don’t know how we as a country ever get to the bottom of this, particularly, as you say, when the Congress has a vested interest in all of it. The end result could be that the Republicans never lose power, because the voting systems are rigged; or because people decide that it there is no purpose to vote, because it won’t count. As we know, there was a bill to spend $250 million on fortifying voting systems for the next election, and Republicans blocked it. I cannot understand how or why the FBI made DeSantis sign a non-disclosure agreement about the vote systems hacking? The Russians already know what they hacked, so who is being kept from knowing about it by an NDA?

  6. I’ll try to be brief about this, because a book could be written. Last night, I watched a tape of a show on PBS “American Masters” from about 2007, about the great screenwriter and author Dalton Trumbo. I had already seen the movie “Trumbo” which came out a year or so ago, but I learned more about the blacklist and its effect on him and his screenwriting contemporaries, by watching this program. So many lives were irrevocably ruined. I learned about how Trumbo’s daughter, about ten, a bright girl who loved school, was so harassed and made miserable, that she didn’t want to go to school any more. Apparently some parents in their New Mexico town, along with the people who ran the Bluebirds girls’ group there, got together and inculcated their children so that they made her life absolutely miserable. She didn’t tell her parents about it, but they finally found out. Trumbo wrote a powerful and poignant letter to the school, expressing all the awfulness of what was happening to his daughter, as well as about the nature of things in that terrible political era.

    The program brought back the horrors of the HUAC hearings. And of course the Republicans were the chief architects of all of it. Oh, a few Southern Democrats, who would later become Republicans, but it was Joe McCarthy, Nixon, and House Republicans who created this reign of terror. And so this idea that “there used to be a lot of good Republicans,” is really untrue. There were a few, that’s all. And the Republicans got Nixon elected twice. And then there was Reagan, and then the Bushes. There were Gingrich and DeLay, and Armey, and Strom Thurmond, and Jesse Helms. The Republicans of the 1950’s and beyond have been a malign political force. And that leads me to Joe Biden, and his comments about Trump being an aberration, and that he believes that if Trump is out of office, Republicans will “go back” to working together with Democrats? Oh, like they worked to get Clinton impeached? Or vowed to block every bill under Obama? And blocked hearings on his Supreme Court nominee? And vowed to never approve any Supreme Court nominee whom Hillary would nominate? And appointed people like Rehnquist, Scalia, Thomas, Alito to the Supreme Court? And who have been trying to overturn Roe v. Wade for 50 years? And who held 13 hearings on Benghazi? And have been trying to fix the votes for decades?

    Thinking about all of this, and the absolute foolishness of Biden’s comments, made me decide that while I certainly would vote for him if he is nominated, as i would any Democrat except Gabbard and possibly Sanders, I would note vote for him in a primary, nor favor his being nominated. Optimism can be good, and appealing to the so-called better angels of the opposition. (Biden does not think that they are enemies). But almost willful naivete about the nature of the Republican Party; and the very misguided belief that all the problems are due to Trump, and that they will mostly go away without him, is insulting and dangerous. Republicans are not going away, and they are not suddenly going to turn into something they haven’t been for many decades, if at all then. I believe that Trump, as insane and dangerous as he is, is the symptom of the sickness which is the Republican Party. If Trump hadn’t gotten the nomination, it likely would have been Cruz. Trump didn’t “steal souls,” they were already on his side. Chaffetz and Gowdy and Jordan and Gomert and the like were all there before Trump entered the scene. Trump was just the showbiz front man who could get them the power they have craved. Biden, who says that Pence is a good guy, and that he enjoyed working with Cheney, is not a vestige of a vanished era, he is fantasizing about one which never existed. Getting elected, and then doing a few half-measures, is certainly better than what we are going through now, but it is hardly going to get us anywhere near where we need to go, on climate change, on civil rights, economic fairness, health care, gun control. Republicans would just do what they did under Obama: block all the judges, block all the legislation, and wait until they could continue dismantling the democracy in another four years. I don’t know what the answer to all of this is, but it is not in believing that the Republicans care about democracy and fair play, or ever did.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: