You still think Elizabeth Warren is not as influential as Hillary Clinton? Just look at Move On's

[Cal33]

information below. And there are still a year and 9 months to go before Nov. 2016:

Mark Crain, MoveOn.org Political Action - Run Warren Run - Feb 3 at 2:55 PM


It's happening. Elizabeth Warren's bold, progressive vision for our economy, her
straight-talking style, and her effective leadership are reshaping our political landscape.
Democrats in the Senate, President Obama, and even leading Republicans like Ted Cruz,
Rand Paul, Marco Rubio, and Jeb Bush are starting to sound like Senator Warren.1 Why?
Because her commitment to giving everyone a fighting chance resonates broadly—and
the louder her voice is amplified, the more Americans agree. That's why we're committed
to amplifying Sen. Warren's voice as loudly as possible—by urging her to run for president
and giving her access to the biggest megaphone in American politics. If she can have this
much impact as a senator, imagine the Warren Effect in a presidential campaign, or in the
White House. Can you chip in $3 to help keep our "Run Warren Run" campaign going and
growing?

Yes, I want to chip in to amplify Sen. Warren's message and urge her to run for president.

Let's look at the Warren Effect so far:
• Senate Democrats, emboldened by Warren's leadership, forced a Wall Street insider out
of consideration for an important post at the Treasury Department.2
• The president's State of the Union address focused on the kind of economic issues Sen.
Warren champions every day—leading some political commentators to observe it was as
though the speech was written by Warren herself.3
• And even Republicans are feeling the Warren Effect. Bush, Cruz, Paul, and Rubio suddenly
seem to understand that Americans care about income inequality—and they want to seem
like they care too.4
If this is Elizabeth Warren's impact as a leading voice in the Senate, imagine how much her
effect will be multiplied when she steps onto the largest stage in American politics: the
presidential primary.

We've hired field staff. We've opened offices in Iowa. And this past weekend, thousands of
MoveOn members across America attended hundreds of "Run Warren Run" house parties.
In short, with a whole year until the first-in-the-nation Iowa caucuses, we're serious about
building a movement big enough to encourage Sen. Warren to enter the presidential race.
Will you chip in $3 to keep this campaign going?

Yes, I'll chip in.

It's amazing that candidates of all stripes—even Republicans—are realizing that Sen. Warren's
message about reshaping our economy resonates with regular Americans. And for the political
insiders who were deaf to that fact, recent focus groups have grabbed their attention.5

But so far, some of these candidates are just talking the talk. Will they actually walk the walk?
Bush, for example, is against student debt reform, cracking down on Wall Street, and creating
a more progressive tax code. So we can't let him get away with talking about economic
inequality when his own policies further it. That's why we need Sen. Warren in the race. It's
not just rhetoric—it's a real vision, backed by bold policy. She has it. We need it. And the more
Americans hear it, the more we all agree. We can't let Republicans disingenuously campaign
on these issues. And we need to keep pushing Democrats to take strong stances on reshaping
our economy. The best way to do both? Convince Elizabeth Warren to run for president. Can
you chip in $3 to help with our campaign?

Yes, I'll chip in.

Thanks for all you do.

–Mark, Ben O., Erica, Milan, and the rest of the team

[demigoddess]

1. actually, I would like to see her stay in the Senate

and do even more from there. And also Hillary, as President, would have her as an advisor from the Senate. I think it would be a great one-two punch.

[Cal33]

2. I doubt it that Hillary would agree to cut down on the control that American corporations have over

our nation and in much of the rest of the world. In fact, the word "control" is a euphemism --
"death-grip" would be closer to the truth. And this cutting down is exactly what the US and the
rest of the world need to survive. Warren is for it and she has the courage to try her best at
bringing it about. Hillary is not for it, and it doesn't look likely that Elizabeth would be able to
budge Hillary on this point either. And this is the CRUCIAL point.

If the Republicans should also win the presidency in 2016, what's left of Democracy today will
very likely become a thing of the past within 4 to 8 years. A relatively few people at the top
would be controlling the entire nation. The masses would have little or no say whatsoever.
We'd be living under an Oligarchic form of government.

If Hillary should win the nomination, I will vote for her -- in the sense that she would
probably delay the death of Democracy in our country during her term in office, and hopefully
a Progressive Democratic president (someone like Warren) would come after her. I don't
expect any real change with Clinton as president -- I think she would maintain the status quo.

I realize that many Democrats do not think that our present situation is as precarious as I
believe it to be. I think we are at the edge of the precipice right now. And time is not on our side.

[Demeter]

4. If TPP passes, there won't be any democracy to save

and guess where Madame Secretary stands on TPP...

[Cal33]

5. It doesn't look good, does it?

[demigoddess]

6. So a republican president would be more likely to be more progressive

than Hillary? I think that is the question. You think Hillary would do what you fear but a republican president sure would.

[Cal33]

7. I think the Republicans represent the worse of the two.

Last edited Fri Feb 6, 2015, 11:07 AM - Edit history (1)

[Demeter]

3. Hillary who?