Dems mull whether Warren is the one to take on Trump

  • Thread starter Thread starter robertmidwest
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

robertmidwest

Guest
Warren (D-Mass.) has shown an ability to rally and excite progressives, she’s a proven fundraiser and she has policy bona fides from her work in the Senate.
Yet there are creeping doubts among some Democrats that she’s the best candidate to take on Trump.

Some worry the former Harvard professor will have a tough time winning back the Rust Belt centrists and independents who abandoned Hillary Clinton and Democrats for Trump.

“I just can’t see a blue-collar, Rust Belt guy voting for her,” said one Democratic strategist who has worked on presidential campaigns. “I think the party needs to be realistic about that.”

Some Democrats almost certainly remain shellshocked from the last election after Trump’s surprise win. He became the first Republican to win the states of Pennsylvania and Michigan in a presidential election since 1988 and the first Republican to win Wisconsin since President Reagan in 1984.

If Democrats don’t retake those states in 2020, their chances of winning the Electoral College will fall.
Click to expand...
Note: The author of this this article, not me, chose to abbreviate Democrats to Dems. I know some might see this as a microaggression and be triggered. I do not intend to upset anyone, but I thought it was best to leave the author’s title as it stands.
 
Last edited:
God, help us all!

She’s even more objectionable than Secy Clinton!. 😲

I sat up until early morning after the 2016 election watching state after state go for Donald Trump. Did the Democrats not understand the message?! Or were they too busy crying to listen to all the voices of the deplorables throughout the U.S.?

Does the Democratic Party not have anyone in the wings who is a “moderate?” Or at least a “non-extremist?” Golly, even secular women’s magazines call Sen. Warren “extreme!”

Maybe the Democratic Party is just fielding Sen. Warren’s name, and when everyone starts booing, they’ll retract and present a less-extreme candidate who will “look” moderate and reasonable compared to Sen. Warren.

Although in a way, I hope Sen. Warren runs–Pres. Trump will easily win a second term.
 
Last edited:
Peeps said:
Maybe the Democratic Party is just fielding Sen. Warren’s name, and when everyone starts booing, they’ll retract and present a less-extreme candidate who will “look” moderate and reasonable compared to Sen. Warren.
Click to expand...
Yeah, it’s kind of like how a virus just needs to run its course.
 
I just can’t get over that fact that a professional writer would abbreviate a proper name in a headline. He surely had an ulterior motive and meant something derogatory by it.
 
Elizabeth Warren to me is basically a hard left Sanders version of Hillary Clinton. Speaking as a Trump GOP supporter, I think this would be a fantastic choice for the Dems.
 
They won’t do it. They’ll put up someone who can credibly pretend to be “moderate”.
 
That’s what I think, too.

If ever there was a time to be “wise as serpents and gentle as doves,” this will be it. So many Christians who don’t like Pres. Trump because of his “unpolished” personality and his public sins need to be very careful that they thoroughly vet any Democratic “gentleman” or “lady.” Someone can appear very civilized, kind, and family-friendly on the surface, but it’s the voting record and the public record of service that we should evaluate when considering who to vote for.

Sen. Warren has a long record of extreme beliefs about women’s issues, especially abortion. I don’t see how any Christian could vote for her in good conscience.
 
Right off hand, I can’t think of any Dem these days that is “moderate”.
 
Peeps said:
Does the Democratic Party not have anyone in the wings who is a “moderate?” Or at least a “non-extremist?” Golly, even secular women’s magazines call Sen. Warren “extreme!”
Click to expand...
There are a few moderate dems who have recently been elected, I can’t remember where though…I want to say Iowa and NC. Read something a while ago about how “these are the new faces of the Democrat party”. And there are a couple of people like Tulsi Gabbard from Hawaii, but these are rare.

But then the Dems just elected Cortez in NY, and the news said she is “the new face of the Democrat party”

And then there is those who really run the Democrat party: Clinton, Obama, Pelosi, Schumer, Watters,
Ridgerunner said:
They won’t do it. They’ll put up someone who can credibly pretend to be “moderate”.
Click to expand...
I don’t know if they can. While there are a few pretend moderates (and a couple of potentially true moderates) in the Dem party, the money and power of the Dem party is localized in extreme leftist areas like SoCal, NYC, Chi, etc.
 
Unfortunately, for the DS “new” must always mean leaning further left. Moderation is in itself “old.” The right side of history is always towards the as-yet-untried.
 
Boatswain2PA said:
And there are a couple of people like Tulsi Gabbard from Hawaii, but these are rare.
Click to expand...
I think Tulsi has potential, once she is seasoned a bit longer with experience in DC. She was pro-Bernie but wasn’t completely unreasonable. She actually may have been more anti-HRC.
 
Which Senator can fill that bill? Senators historically have a problem getting electoral votes.
 
I’m not sure I even get the headline. Doesn’t any person who wants to run for the chance to become President can run? Isn’t it up to the voters to choose the Democratic Candidate. I know the powers that be of the the DNC crushed Bernie in favor of Hilary. I would have thought they learned their lesson and will allow the best candidate win. I’m sure the likes of Antifa and the Women’s marchers will be able to choose their very best!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top