2020 US Elections | Biden certified as President | Dems control Congress

Status
Not open for further replies.
I like Elizabeth Warren . One of the most hardest working politician in congress and i think the only one who as a bill ready to fight against the corruption in politics.Whatever happens Bernie this time round will find the field a lot harder.
 
Drifter said:
I like Elizabeth Warren . One of the most hardest working politician in congress and i think the only one who as a bill ready to fight against the corruption in politics.Whatever happens Bernie this time round will find the field a lot harder.
Click to expand...

I like Warren but something tells me her time has passed and candidates like Cortez and Beto are currently the ones that could inspire the base plus a wide cross section of voters to get to the voting booths.
 
Before the above posts were posted I always thought Warren came across well.Quite surprised that many democrat supporters dislike her.Any reason behind this ?
 
BrianMcClair'sBarnet said:
Before the above posts were posted I always thought Warren came across well.Quite surprised that many democrat supporters dislike her.Any reason behind this ?
Click to expand...
I wouldn't say she's disliked, at least among Dems. But in this light she's cast as the Progressive rival to Bernie, who has his own catchy brand of charisma and has the jump on her in public support.

Also in this context of primary candidates, she might not be perceived as being as electable as other Dems in the spotlight. That factor is why you'll see Biden polling high early, though those numbers will certainly drop off for him.
 
fishfingers15 said:
Warren has announced. Expect Harris and booker to announce soon as well.



Can never get the media to work.
Click to expand...

Absolutely brilliant video from her. Shame that she decided to run one cycle too late. If Bernie doesn't win the primaries, I hope she wins them.
 
Revan said:
Absolutely brilliant video from her. Shame that she decided to run one cycle too late. If Bernie doesn't win the primaries, I hope she wins them.
Click to expand...


I hope for her sake her campaign isn’t completely contrived with stuff like this.
 
Pexbo said:


I hope for her sake her campaign isn’t completely contrived with stuff like this.
Click to expand...


jfc if bernie does this (following aoc, then beto, now warren), ill lose faith in his political ability.
 
Warren really screwed up with that native American genetics video. The issue was almost done and dusted until she decided to bring it up again.
 
Drifter said:
I like Elizabeth Warren . One of the most hardest working politician in congress and i think the only one who as a bill ready to fight against the corruption in politics.Whatever happens Bernie this time round will find the field a lot harder.
Click to expand...

I feel like @ravi2
I like her as a person and I think her heart is really in the right place but she just miscalculated and missed her opportunity in 2016. In 2014-15 she was by far the most well known progressive voice. She had more political recognition than Bernie. But Bernie challenged Clinton and Warren didn't so history just sort of passed her by.

Now it even feels like everything she is doing is two steps behind the pacesetters. I don't think she can win the nomination but if she wants to really be serious about it I think she needs to stop this type of thing and do some serious soul searching the next month. Try to find some fresh team members and try to go in a direction that is unexpected rather than following in the draft of others.
 
Last edited:
MuFc_1992 said:
Warren really screwed up with that native American genetics video. The issue was almost done and dusted until she decided to bring it up again.
Click to expand...
No, it wasn't. It was gonna get brought up again. It'll get brought up again now but at least all the facts are out on the table.
 
roseguy64 said:
No, it wasn't. It was gonna get brought up again. It'll get brought up again now but at least all the facts are out on the table.
Click to expand...

"It's a story i was told by my parents, and while i found out i have some native ancestry, it isn't as recent as their recollections."
Done.


Instead, she's pretending like a great-great grandparent makes her a Native American.
 
Stolen from reddit:

-Third and final debate before elections-



Warren: "And in closing, Mr. President: over the past months, you've amassed over 350 Golden Pinocchios according to Washington Post, Snopes has a page dedicated to you, and Politifact has given me express permission to literally burn your pants."

Trump: "You probably have 1/1026th my Pinocchios. Because you say you're Indian. White Whitey."

-Trump wins in overwhelming landslide-
Click to expand...
 
roseguy64 said:
No, it wasn't. It was gonna get brought up again. It'll get brought up again now but at least all the facts are out on the table.
Click to expand...
Yup but She still had plausible deniability and could sidestep the issue by saying she does have some native american ancestry. Now, instead she has proven that she has 1/1024 native american ancestry which means nothing because shitload of Americans have 1/1024 native american ancestry. I'm guessing this will hurt her badly in the primaries because her opponents can play "Trump will eat her alive on this issue" card against her.
berbatrick said:
"It's a story i was told by my parents, and while i found out i have some native ancestry, it isn't as recent as their recollections."
Done.


Instead, she's pretending like a great-great grandparent makes her a Native American.
Click to expand...
It's more like great-great-great-great great grandparent.
 
MuFc_1992 said:
Yup but She still had plausible deniability and could sidestep the issue by saying she does have some native american ancestry. Now, instead she has proven that she has 1/1024 native american ancestry which means nothing because shitload of Americans have 1/1024 native american ancestry. I'm guessing this will hurt her badly in the primaries because her opponents can play "Trump will eat her alive on this issue" card against her.

It's more like great-great-great-great great grandparent.
Click to expand...

They didn’t say 1/1024 did they? I thought they said between 6-8 generations which could be a lot less. 1/1024 was just the biggest possibility.
 
Kentonio said:
They didn’t say 1/1024 did they? I thought they said between 6-8 generations which could be a lot less. 1/1024 was just the biggest possibility.
Click to expand...
Doesn't that make things even worse? I actually like Warren's policy positions but she really made a huge mistake by either not running in 2016 and not backing Bernie. It makes her look like a party hack and makes her less appealing to the progressives without whom she has zero chance of getting elected. Her only other play is the woman card which will make her even less appealing to the leftists by triggering the PTSD from 2016.
 
Warren is Obama 2.0.

Nice talker but won't at all address the problems facing both america and the rest of the world.
 
MuFc_1992 said:
Doesn't that make things even worse? I actually like Warren's policy positions but she really made a huge mistake by either not running in 2016 and not backing Bernie. It makes her look like a party hack and makes her less appealing to the progressives without whom she has zero chance of getting elected. Her only other play is the woman card which will make her even less appealing to the leftists by triggering the PTSD from 2016.
Click to expand...

I agree with you completely about all that. I just think the Native American stuff is overblown.
 
Sweet Square said:
Warren is Obama 2.0.

Nice talker but won't at all address the problems facing both america and the rest of the world.
Click to expand...

That's Beto. She's an improvement-everything indicates she knows what's required against wall street, unlike him.
 
Drifter said:
She is nothing like Obama.
Click to expand...
.She used to being a Republican voter(I think during Regan)

.She constantly votes to up the military budget

.Dakota Pipeline protest showed what a Warren presidency would look like for working people - basically a no show.

Even the video she just released had a Obama era emptiness to it. Even as someone who lives thousands of miles away from the US its clear to see the problems in the US aren't the lack of opportunities but a lack of very basic citizens rights such as health care, housing, gun control, workers rights, voting rights etc.


berbatrick said:
That's Beto. She's an improvement-everything indicates she knows what's required against wall street, unlike him.
Click to expand...
The accountable Capitalism Act ? I don't hold out any hope for that, sadly.

Warren seemingly moves onto edgier terrain with her bill’s third plank. This measure would effectively turn all giant companies into “public benefit corporations” (PBCs), the latest fad in the world of “corporate social responsibility.” What that means in practice is that her new federal charter would, in her words, require corporate boards “to consider the interests of all major corporate stakeholders — not only shareholders — in company decisions,” and “shareholders could sue if they believed directors weren’t fulfilling those obligations.”

It takes a bit of background to convey how meaningless this proposal actually is.

There’s an oddly widespread belief that if corporations are so obsessed with profit, it’s because courts legally require them to act in the interests of their shareholders alone. Believers in this legend tend to throw around terms like “fiduciary duty” and allude darkly to a 1919 Michigan court case called Dodge v. Ford.

The reality is that courts grant corporate directors almost unlimited discretion when it comes to determining what’s in the best interests of their company. This “business judgment rule” is based on the premise that judges are in no position to second-guess managers’ on-the-ground decisions, or insert themselves into complex spats over corporate strategy. As long as they’re not lining their own pockets, managers are pretty much free to be as munificent as they want with their company’s funds. That’s why Goldman Sachs, for example, is free to spend its shareholders’ money on symphony orchestras and urban mural-painting programs, without the slightest fear of lawsuits from shareholders charging breach of fiduciary duty.
Click to expand...

Finally, we arrive at the most jarring item on the Warren agenda — though in her Wall Street Journal op-ed she oddly devotes a mere eight words to it: “Employees would elect at least 40 percent of directors.” In other words, workers would choose almost half the voting members of corporate boards.

Here we’re dealing with something altogether different from the other three proposals. This idea, if taken literally, is neither minor nor meaningless. Though it hardly spells the end of capitalism, it would constitute by far the biggest pro-worker shift in labor law since the Wagner Act, and possibly the greatest change to the corporate governance regime since the emergence of general incorporation laws in the early nineteenth century.

There’s only one problem: Elizabeth Warren will never, ever make it happen.

This shouldn’t be a controversial point. Recall the last time a Democratic presidential hopeful promised a dramatic power shift from capital to labor. “We will pass the Employee Free Choice Act [EFCA],” Barack Obama declared at a labor rally in March 2007, referring to the unions’ desperately hoped-for labor law reform bill. “It’s not a matter of if, it’s a matter of when. We may have to wait for the next president to sign it, but we will get this thing done.” Every time he passed through a union hall — which was often — candidate Obama repeated that promise, and unions spent hundreds of millions of their members’ money to elect him.

In the wake of the 2008 election, a rare convergence of political forces created near-ideal conditions for passing an ambitious pro-labor bill: a liberal Democrat in the White House; Democratic control of Congress; a near-filibuster-proof Senate majority; a political atmosphere suffused with popular outrage at bankers and plutocrats.

And yet, just a few months later, as if on cue, the Las Vegas Sun’s labor-attuned political reporter noted a “shift” in the “tone” of the bill’s Washington supporters. “Although Obama pledged to sign the bill into law during the campaign, his chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, in a meeting of chief executives and business leaders this month, declined to say whether the White House would support the legislation. The reason is clear: The new law could be the most consequential social and economic policy shift since President Reagan reshaped the country by slashing taxes and regulation and crushing unions.”

With that, the EFCA was swiftly buried.

This sequence of events no doubt disappointed many union members. But none of it came as a shock to knowledgeable observers. A prominent labor scholar titled his analysis of the episode, “The Unsurprising Failure of Labor Law Reform.” This, after all, is how Democrats win elections: they promise things they have no expectation of delivering.

And yet, there’s an audacity to Elizabeth Warren’s version of this gambit that puts it almost in a separate category. With the EFCA, Obama was at least endorsing a well-known measure that had been championed for years by a serious, organized constituency, one that was willing to put all its muscle into the fight — namely, the AFL-CIO and its affiliated unions. That established a baseline level of plausibility.

Warren’s codetermination plan, by contrast, comes out of nowhere: apart from a few academics, it has no constituency behind it at all, despite being far more radical than EFCA on the merits.

Admiring articles in liberal outlets often mention Germany’s system of codetermination as a precedent for Warren’s idea. Yet the moderate form of codetermination Germany has today was the watered-down outcome of decades of intense, sometimes violent struggles by trade-unionists and socialist militants, who rallied to the banners of “Wirtschaftsdemokratie” and “Mitbestimmung” from the very outset of Germany’s post–World War I democratization: from the shop stewards’ movement for “economic democracy” during the 1918-1920 German revolution (which birthed a weak works-council law under the Weimar Republic), to the West German union federation’s dramatic 1950 strike threat, in which 98 percent of workers voted to shut down the newly formed state through nationwide walkouts if codetermination in the coal and steel industries were not forthcoming.

As a study of postwar German labor put it: “The implementation of full-parity co-determination throughout the West German economy was perhaps the most fundamental political goal of the West German labor movement” — a goal that, to this day, has not been fully realized.

So, to take Warren seriously when she pledges to pass a law in a couple years that will strip the American capitalist class of 40 percent of its control over the means of production — a law that she apparently just thought up on her own — requires a suspension of disbelief that borders on delirium.
Click to expand...

https://jacobinmag.com/2018/09/lets-take-elizabeth-warren-literally-but-not-seriously
 
Sweet Square said:
.



The accountable Capitalism Act ? I don't hold out any hope for that, sadly.





https://jacobinmag.com/2018/09/lets-take-elizabeth-warren-literally-but-not-seriously
Click to expand...

Whether or not that is doable (notably it's to the left of Bernie, though she co-sponsored his version too) I was referring to her history, before joining politics and soon after getting in, she was an expert on bankruptcy law where her work was used by unions, she was an outspoken critic of wall street for more than a decade. Her proposed reforms were uniformly opposed by corporations. Few others have those credentials.

Edit: there's a reason a lot of Bernie 2016 people came from a failed attempt to get her to run.
 
Sweet Square said:
.She used to being a Republican voter(I think during Regan)

.She constantly votes to up the military budget

.Dakota Pipeline protest showed what a Warren presidency would look like for working people - basically a no show.

Even the video she just released had a Obama era emptiness to it. Even as someone who lives thousands of miles away from the US its clear to see the problems in the US aren't the lack of opportunities but a lack of very basic citizens rights such as health care, housing, gun control, workers rights, voting rights etc.

The accountable Capitalism Act ? I don't hold out any hope for that, sadly.

https://jacobinmag.com/2018/09/lets-take-elizabeth-warren-literally-but-not-seriously
Click to expand...

I'm not sure this necessarily matters to be honest - people change their views. I believe Mike Pence voted for Carter at one stage but no one would ever doubt his GOP credentials.

She's not as leftist as Bernie but is undoubtedly to the left of Obama and would probably be a somewhat okay compromise between the left and centre. Especially since she'd be a President with a lot more pressure coming from the left to enact progressive policy than during the Obama years.

Although I don't see her winning - she isn't charismatic enough (I don't think) and showed with the whole Native American spat with Trump that she can end up being drawn into his games and looking rather silly instead of focusing on policy.
 
She could have beaten both Clinton and Trump with a dedicated campaign like this in 2016.

Anti-corruption is familiar ground for presidential candidates trying to position themselves as outsiders who will fix Washington. Trump argued that his prodigious wealth made him incorruptible, empowering him to “drain the swamp.” The truth turned out to be quite the opposite, of course, but it was an effective campaign message against an established political force like Clinton.

But Warren tied her anti-corruption message to Democratic talking points on progressive issues. “How did we get here?” she asks at one point. “Billionaires and big corporations decided they wanted more of the pie, and they enlisted politicians to cut them a fatter slice. They crippled unions so no one could stop them, dismantled the financial rules meant to keep us safe after the Great Depression, and cut their own taxes so they paid less than their secretaries and janitors.”
Click to expand...

https://newrepublic.com/article/152826/elizabeth-warrens-theory-everything
 
fishfingers15 said:
Warren has announced. Expect Harris and booker to announce soon as well.



Can never get the media to work.
Click to expand...


They won't be the only ones. Its likely we'll be seeing 10+ candidates announce in the coming weeks that they are running.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.