Eagan: Elizabeth Warren poses a tough choice for 2016

[MannyGoldstein]

From the Boston Herald

Eagan: Elizabeth Warren poses a tough choice for 2016

Hillary just walloped all comers in a new Quinnipiac poll, coming in first at 61 percent, ahead of New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul and Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, whom John McCain now refers to, deliciously, as “whacko bird.”

Warren finished a distant 7 percent, third among Democrats behind Joe Biden. But if you think that means Warren has zero chance in 2016 — and zero interest in running — consider below...

Nationally, she was a virtual unknown just months ago. That was before she got on TV and trashed bank regulators for refusing to regulate big banks, a crusade with appeal both to young voters stalled in this shaky economy and older moderates who blame Wall Street for their shaky 401(k)s. Public Policy Polling just reported that Warren has quickly become the most popular politician among Massachusetts voters, beating both Obama and Deval Patrick.

Another Quinnipiac poll in early August measured passion toward a candidate. That poll had Warren finishing third behind only Christie and Hillary but ahead of Obama, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, Ted “whacko bird” Cruz and Biden.

[coldmountain]

1. Warren=Republican victory in 2016

Why take a chance at electing one of these worst in history Republicans when Hillary is easily elected? If you think Hillary is too far right, put resources into getting a more leftist congress to help her or pressure her.

[Dawgs]

2. Oh for fucks sake, we suck as a party if we only have one option to beat THIS GOP.

Especially if that person is center-right.

[coldmountain]

5. History is on the GOP side but Hillary polls well even in Texas and gives us the best chance

Hillary is hardly center right, that's not accurate or fair. She gets enough lies told about her from the GOP/Tea party without Dems piling on the strongest chance we've ever had for a woman president.

The party out of power gets a boost when the president of the other party has a 2 term run such as Bush/Cheney,Bill Clinton, JFK-LBJ, Eisenhour. One time that wasn't true was when we ran Massachussetts liberal and not quite ready for primetime Dukakis who blew a huge lead

[betterdemsonly]

9. She is pro-iraq war

pro-Syria War and pro-bailout and pro-grand bargain, those are all center right positions. Prove otherwise!

[whathehell]

17. She is also pro-TPP...Word is, she helped craft it.

I'd rather take a chance on the fat dude.

[blue14u]

10. I agree with you

I don't want another centrist, and we will certainly have other options by 2016...

Warren could go VP for us, if not POTUS, and we have others that can take the reins.. Hillary

is to dug in with the corporatist.. I read about a month ago somewhere that the US is

starting to lean Left again, we have seen what damage a center, or center right can do..

Lets find some choices that can win, and get Hillary to promote them and back them..

Hillary and Bill both could help us find a way back into the White House 2016!!!!


I am a little tired of all the Hillary is the only sure bet!!!

BTW... Welcome to DU!!!!!

[coldmountain]

11. Nothing is more important tan keeping the RAPEpublicans out of office

Hillary is best positioned to keep a TeaNut out of the POTUS and when she is in she is best prepared to fight them. That Hillary is so rightwing is a overblown. Like FDR and Obama say, "That's a good idea, now make me do it".

[Le Taz Hot]

12. Flashback, 2004:

Dean=Republican victory in 2004. Kerry is electable! Uh-huh.

[coldmountain]

13. Dean would have lost worst

[Laelth]

14. Demographics say we will win no matter whom we run.

Since the right wing is going to paint whomever we run as the most liberal so-and-so since Lenin, why not run a real liberal?



-Laelth

[longship]

3. I think she has zero chance since she's already said she wasn't interested.

I'd like her to run, but I don't think 2016 is a good idea. Obviously, she doesn't either. We'll just have to wait and see what she does. But I think she's a Cracker Jack senator and I support her apparent decision to stay there.

[Salviati]

6. And I think we need to consider where she might do the most good.

I for one would love to see the presidency weakened a bit, and Warren to have a long career in a more powerful senate.

[longship]

7. I am in line with those sentiments. nt

[WovenGems]

4. Why, oh, why

Why would we want to elect a woman whose IQ is more than Limbaugh's weight? Darn, I answered my own question.

[MADem]

8. Boston Herald is a right wing, shit-stirring paper.

They just LOVE to play that divisive, shit-flinging game.

Here's an example of Boston Herald's 'lean:'

http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion/opinion/editorials/2012/10/romney%E2%80%99s_one

Let's be clear--that wasn't a one-off. Let's go back four years and see where they stood:

http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion/opinion/editorials/2008/10/mccain_president_certain_leader_uncertain_times

So...you'll forgive me if I virulently disregard ANYTHING that is printed in the Herald. They're like World Nut Daily on newsprint.

[Laelth]

15. I didn't know that. Thanks for the post. n/t

-Laelth

[NYC_SKP]

16. Can you imagine the impact of just a few Warren public addresses would have?

Sure, getting the media to air, and not bury, them would be a challenge, but Hillary would be powerless against her.

Powerless.

We need Warren.

[Laelth]

18. k&r for Elizabeth Warren. n/t

-Laelth

[Sheri]

19. at this point, all the polls register is name recognition.

not surprised that Hillary's name recognition is high. EW's name recognition is higher than i thought. i'd be happy with either of them, but i prefer warren.