Elizabeth Warren shuts door on presidential run. Draft Warren groups kick it back open.

[Autumn]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2015/01/13/elizabeth-warren-shuts-door-on-presidential-run-draft-warren-groups-kick-it-back-open/

As David Dayen details, there is a reason Warren’s brand of populism is ascendant in the Democratic Party: She is articulating a coherent, interlocking set of ideas focused on the economic prospects of the middle class, and a broader critique that explains how and why the economy got to this point, with more passion and specificity than anyone else. There is no reason why these groups would stand down from feeding the dream of a Warren presidential run, as long as the mere possibility continues to generate media attention — no matter how far-fetched that possibility appears, and no matter what Warren herself says about it.

[longship]

1. How many times does Elizabeth have to say no?

And nobody is kicking it back open. BTW, how many times does she have to say "no" before the delusional Warren-2016 folks realize that she is a helluva US Senator and just maybe that is precisely where we all need her?

I know... Warren 2016!!!! Hoo-rah!

Dream on. Meanwhile, I will continue to love her in the Senate.

Some delusions never die.

[Autumn]

2. Try reading the article before you respond. This is a group for Supporters of Elizabeth Warren

and your name calling is not welcome here.

[Dawgs]

4. Please, can we not do that here. We should be welcome to those have different opinions.

We should be better than those other groups.

[Autumn]

5. Yes we are welcome to different opinions but name calling is unnecessary.

Comments for or against the posted material are welcome. Comments on her supporters are not.

[Dawgs]

8. I don't mind the name calling. Give's me, and others, a chance to explain why they're wrong.

[SheilaT]

12. In the Hillary forum you're not allowed to different opinions.

As I've discovered.

[chillfactor]

9. what name calling?

a little sensitive are you? good grief...lighten up!

[Dawgs]

14. Maybe not name calling, but definitely being snarky.

Not cool, but shouldn't be banned.

[Autumn]

15. Nope not at all. Respect for the members is a nice thing to have.

Comments for or against articles about Elizabeth can be done without calling people delusional.

[longship]

13. I apologize.

I love Liz like anybody here. But is this a group for supporting Liz -- something I would love -- or is this a group whose only mission is to promote her as a presidential candidate in 2016 in spite of her repeated denials?

The former is a positive thing -- I support Elizabeth Warren's decision because I believe in her. The latter is madness -- Elizabeth Warren is equivocating, or she will change her mind (in spite of her promise that she would serve out her term).

I think Warren is an honest person. I take her at her word. And BTW, I think she is a wonderful US Senator. She is going to be a really positive influence for progressives.

But she is apparently not interested in the White House. And I am fine with that, in spite of the fact that I would support her if she ran.

What about this do people here not understand? Does an Elizabeth Warren group really have to be a forum for a presidential bid that she clearly does not want? Or is this a group for supporters of Elizabeth Warren, no matter what she wants?

I promise that I will cause no problems here. But Liz has said no so many times that there is no other way to parse it. And some of her fans love her in the Senate, where she can do some real good.

[Dawgs]

16. She can't do shit in the Senate. Anyone that thinks she can is fooling themselves. n/t

[longship]

21. Anybody who thinks she will run for president in 2016 is likewise delusional.

What I've seen here on DU about her putative 2016 presidential candidacy is nothing short of delusion. The arguments read that she is equivocating -- "I am not running" becomes "I may be running", or "I am not running now, but I may change my mind." If I thought that of Elizabeth Warren I don't know if I could ever vote for her for president.

The alternative is that a ground swell of support could convince her to change her mind. Well, that may be. However, I do not think I want a US President who does not want the position, no matter how much I agree with their politics.

Then there's the advantage that she is quickly becoming a formidable force in the US Senate. Since she appears to like it there, maybe we should just support her decision to stay there. That is my position.

Or is the DU Elizabeth Warren group only a forum for a presidential bid that she clearly does not want? If that is so, I will not post here again.

My support for Senator Warren is that I take her at her word.

[Autumn]

23. If you look at the the OPs posted in here you will see much more than

discussions about her running for President. I support her no matter where she is, I also support the Draft Warren Organization and all the work they have done. They are pushing on and I think that they will continue, until she tells them to stop.

[longship]

25. I think she already has, multiple times.

Unfortunately, too many folks just cannot let go of their delusions of Elizabeth Warren running for POTUS.

And I dearly love her politics, how outspoken she is, and the new opportunities that she will likely see in future congresses. She is going to be a formidable force in one of the three equal branches of the government. I'll take that.

A president can only be in office for eight years. Liz can help form a new Senate for far longer, if she is allowed to stay.

I support her decision, and I have done so early on in this Warren 2016 madness.

[Autumn]

26. She can contact the organization and tell them to stop and that would end their push.

She's aware of the organization and their efforts. If people in here want to discuss their desires to have her as President, well that what a discussion forum is for.

[Autumn]

18. This is a group about Liz. All things written about Liz, videos about Liz,

hopes and dreams about Liz. ANYTHING about Elizabeth Warren is welcome in here, There is a lot more about her posted in this group than just posts wanting her to run for President. She says she's not running and I believe her. That makes me unhappy but that life.
However the Draft Warren Organization is still working on their movement to draft her and that is news worthy, until she tells them to stop.
Liz will do great wherever she is and whatever she decides to do. She cares and she believes in doing for the people who she represents and I think that's all of us.

[longship]

22. Why won't the Draft Warren Organization listen to her?

How many times does she have state "Nyet interested" before people believe her? Do they think she is lying? Or equivocating?

How can anybody claim that Elizabeth Warren will indeed run for president in 2016, in spite of her repeated denials, and simultaneously stake any claim that she is an ethical person?

I do not want her to run in 2016, because that would mean that I would have to lower my opinion of her by a significant amount.

Plus, I rather like her on the floor of the US Senate, on which she seems to be a natural.

[Autumn]

24. See they, and we are not claiming she is running in spite of her repeated denials.

A legitimate organization is trying to get her to change her mind and run, that's a part of politics. They have that right and the people who want her to run for President also have that right. Just like you have the right to want her to remain in the Senate. No one knows what the future will hold. For now, she's not running. But having the conversation is a good thing.

[Dawgs]

3. Or, she can make confirmations and drive her agenda as President, instead of..

..spending all of her time blocking the decisions some other President makes.

[Autumn]

7. Either way we win Dawgs. I would just rather have her in the drivers seat.

[Dawgs]

10. But how is being ONE Senator being "in the drivers seat"?

She can make a lot of good speeches, make a lot of proposals, and influence some things, but that's nothing compared to being President.

[Autumn]

20. No it's not the same. I want her in the White House too but she seems to want to stay where she is

[Maedhros]

27. My advice to you would be to refrain from insulting people by calling them "delusional."

What does that accomplish?

[chillfactor]

6. How about leaving the honorable senator alone ...

for pete's sake....if she does not want to run she does not want to run...give it UP already!

[Autumn]

11. Since this is a group for supporters of EW posting articles that

are written about her is what we do in here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12652141

[Daemonaquila]

17. For heavens' sakes, I wish people would just take her "no" for an answer.

I love her. I'd totally vote for her. I'm sick over the idea that Hillary could well be the party's candidate next time around. BUT - how many times does she have to say she isn't interested? The Dems who support her are exactly the folks who need to be loud and proud and shaping the party, but it's time to find someone else who reflects their values.

[Autumn]

19. I think when Elizabeth tells the Draft Warren Organization to focus elsewhere they will shut it down

But for now they are pushing ahead in Iowa and New Hampshire.

[djean111]

28. You know what is delusional? As long as some feel free to come in this group and tell us we

delusional - thinking that Hillary is anything close to liberal or progressive - that is delusional. If I were to post that in the HRC group, I would be locked out. Not that I ever go there.
It is no one else's business, who anyone wants to support at this time. No one's business, at all.

[Autumn]

29. You are right. Maybe we as a group need to discuss what we will

and will not find appropriate. I don't mind disagreement on her policies and beliefs but the members in here have the right to be treated with respect. I think that insisting on respectful discourse should be non negotiable.

[RiverLover]

32. I agree, Autumn.

You've been handling these discussions very well, btw!! Better than I would have. I love how people act as though the OP linked was somehow written by by the person posting it.

Calling us "delusional", when most of us now believe her, but the article posted wants her to run & says probably will, just seems delusional. And if we wanted to hear that, we could just post in the GD. As you know, if someone is rude & disruptive and continue to be so after being warned this is a "group", not the GD, I'm all for banning them.

(For the record, I also hope she changes her mind, but I'm not counting on it at all. But I won't give up hoping until MoveOn gives up!)

[longship]

30. Is this the anti-Hillary group, or the Elizabeth Warren group.

Or, is this the Elizabeth Warren for POTUS 2016 group, or is it just the Elizabeth Warren group, that supports her and her obvious decision that she is not going to run for POTUS.

A delusion is believing something contrary to evidence. Warren has repeatedly said that she is not interested in running for the White House. Yet some here have the delusion that she is equivocating, or lying, or something. I do not know any other way to characterize this.

I love Liz. And I love her in the US Senate where she has been recently given a leadership position during her first term. If she opts to run for reelection in 2018, she could become a formidable force, if she is not already one.

But she is not going to run for the White House and it is increasingly becoming delusional to claim that she will.

[djean111]

31. Thank you for your concern. Noted.

This is the Elizabeth Warren group. Coming in here and lecturing us that we are delusional is just, well, rude. Out in GD - whatevah.
But the hectoring and repetitious stuff in here is getting old. It is none of your business how others feel about her, much less your business to instruct us. We discuss Elizabeth Warren here. You are "discussing" some of us. I don't think this is really the place for that. The Thought Police stuff is out of place, IMO and all that.
And - what do you expect by continuously posting the delusional thing? We got your message.

[longship]

33. Thinking that Liz may still run for president IS delusional and has been for some time.

While support for her remains rational.

Again, what does this group stand for? And my support for Liz includes supporting her obvious desire to not run for POTUS, to remain in the US Senate, as she promised.

So, this may invite the question of how does one support Elizabeth Warren? It may be a complicated answer.

As always, my best regards to you.

[RiverLover]

34. Who here has done that?

No one is claiming she will. We're all hoping she changes her mind.

So back off.

[longship]

36. Gladly.

I don't intend to malign this fine group, only the seemingly true believer Elizabeth Warren 2016 folks, who one can fairly characterize as having some significant cognitive biases.

I apologize to anybody offended. I really like Elizabeth Warren but it hurts her to portray her as just another equivocating politico, who says "No" when she really means, "I will decide later" or something. At least I have heard many such arguments here on DU since she was elected to the US Senate. And it is all rubbish. It detracts from the fact that she is, and will be, an awesome Senator.

[Autumn]

35. It has been explained to you what this group is. I suggest that you look at the posts that are here

and you will find your answer. The people in here are not claiming that she will run. We get it, you like her in the Senate, now please respect that some of us would like to discuss other hopes for her. One could almost think that as often as that has been explained to you and ignored by you that you are trolling the group. No one is fucking delusional, now knock that crap off.

[longship]

37. Again, gladly.

(See my post up thread with the same.)

And BTW, anybody claiming that she really will run for POTUS is, by definition, delusional. My posts are aimed at them.

[Autumn]

38. NO ONE is claiming that she really will run for POTUS, I suggest you try to understand that and not

aim your posts at the other members here.

[longship]

39. There are quite a few on DU who do make that claim.

And I apologize for inflicting this on your group.

I will not do so again.

Mea culpa.