On 2/11/15 7:02 PM, Robert Naiman wrote:
> A poll of 800 likely Democratic caucusgoers and primary voters in Iowa
> and New Hampshire shows they like Warren’s economic positions: 97% agree
> with Warren’s desire to cut student loan rates, 84% agree with her
> objections to the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade pact, and 77% agree
> with her opposition to the Keystone pipeline.
>
> http://onpolitics.usatoday.com/2015/02/11/draft-warren-group-says-she-has-support-in-early-states/


I happen to like her myself even if her statements on Gaza are terrible.

The real question is whether anybody like that will ever be president of 
the USA. The answer is no.

Her purpose is instead to create the illusion that change is possible 
within the Democratic Party. Joan Walsh of Salon.com has some 
interesting things to say even if they are repulsive. As the economic 
crisis continues in the USA, there will be more and more disaffection 
from corporate Dems like Clinton. As such the role of Warren, or more 
feasible candidates as Walsh argues, will be paramount.

http://www.salon.com/2015/02/09/the_selling_of_elizabeth_warren_whats_behind_progressives_debilitating_fantasy/

I confess my misgivings about all this crystallized Sunday night, when I 
heard the news that the Working Families Party had joined the “Draft 
Warren” movement. I admire WFP; I think they’re doing exactly what 
progressives should be doing: Working within the Democratic Party and 
pulling it to the left, not standing outside the party and declaring it 
no better than the GOP.

Predictably, other “Draft Warren” groups hailed the WFP news. Move On 
emailed to invite me to share a graphic on Twitter and Facebook that 
thanks WFP for joining the movement. “It’s important that we show them 
this morning that the number of people who think they absolutely made 
the right decision far outweighs the nay-sayers” – that would be me, I 
guess.

In addition to advancing the assumption that the Clinton campaign won’t 
be progressive enough, before she’s even declared her candidacy, the 
hype about Warren serves to obscure the depth and breadth of the new 
populist movement afoot among Democrats in Congress. Why not draft Sen. 
Bernie Sanders, who says he’ll run if he believes he has organizational 
backing? Or other progressive senators like Sherrod Brown or Al Franken 
or Kirsten Gillibrand? Elizabeth Warren is a star in her own right; she 
doesn’t particularly need this kind of help.

It’s also past time to observe that in addition to saying she isn’t 
running, Warren hasn’t done anything to build an organization in any of 
the early primary or caucus states. Now, presumably “Draft Warren” could 
help with that in the unlikely event she changes her mind – but Warren’s 
failure to make any of the moves associated with building a campaign is 
just one more reason to believe she won’t run.

I’d love to see a campaign that popularizes Warren’s “eight point plan 
to build the middle class” and encourages all Democratic candidates – 
including Clinton — to back it. Building a movement around a single 
political leader rather than around issues seems like a recipe for 
disappointment, especially when that leader has made it so clear she’s 
not looking to run for president.
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to