Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Showing Original Post only (View all)NYT Op-ed: Warren Can Win [View all]
Warren Can Win
12/15/14
....Her biggest adult fight has been against the banks, against what she saw as their rapacious exploitation of the poor and vulnerable. The crucial distinction Warren makes is this one: Its not just social conditions like globalization and technological change that threaten the middle class. Its an active conspiracy by the rich and powerful. The game is rigged. The proper response is not just policy-making; its indignation and combat.
The political class has been wondering if Warren, a United States senator from Massachusetts, will take on Hillary Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination. This speculation is usually based on the premise that Warren couldnt actually win, but that she could move the party in her direction. But, today, even for those of us who disagree with Warren fundamentally, it seems clear that she does have a significant and growing chance of being nominated.
Events like the Brown case in Ferguson and the Garner case in New York have raised indignation levels across the progressive spectrum. Judging by recent polls, the midterm defeat has not scared Democrats into supporting the safe option; its made them angrier about the whole system. As the party slips more into opposition status, with the next Congress, this aggressive outsider spirit will only grow.
In this era of bad feelings, parties are organized more around what they oppose rather than what they are for. Republicans are against government. Democrats are coalescing around opposition to Wall Street and corporate power. In 2001, 51 percent of Democrats were dissatisfied with the rise of corporate power, according to Gallup surveys. By 2011, 79 percent of Democrats were. According to an NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll last month, 58 percent of Democrats said they believed that the economic and political systems were stacked against them.
Clinton is obviously tough, but she just cant speak with a clear voice against Wall Street and Washington insiders. Warrens wing shows increasing passion and strength, both in opposing certain Obama nominees and in last weeks budget fight.
The history of populist candidates is that they never actually get the nomination. The establishment wins. Thats still likely. But there is something in the air. The fundamental truth is that every structural and historical advantage favors Clinton, but every day more Democrats embrace the emotion and view defined by Warren.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/16/opinion/david-brooks-elizabeth-warren-can-win.html
12/15/14
....Her biggest adult fight has been against the banks, against what she saw as their rapacious exploitation of the poor and vulnerable. The crucial distinction Warren makes is this one: Its not just social conditions like globalization and technological change that threaten the middle class. Its an active conspiracy by the rich and powerful. The game is rigged. The proper response is not just policy-making; its indignation and combat.
The political class has been wondering if Warren, a United States senator from Massachusetts, will take on Hillary Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination. This speculation is usually based on the premise that Warren couldnt actually win, but that she could move the party in her direction. But, today, even for those of us who disagree with Warren fundamentally, it seems clear that she does have a significant and growing chance of being nominated.
Events like the Brown case in Ferguson and the Garner case in New York have raised indignation levels across the progressive spectrum. Judging by recent polls, the midterm defeat has not scared Democrats into supporting the safe option; its made them angrier about the whole system. As the party slips more into opposition status, with the next Congress, this aggressive outsider spirit will only grow.
In this era of bad feelings, parties are organized more around what they oppose rather than what they are for. Republicans are against government. Democrats are coalescing around opposition to Wall Street and corporate power. In 2001, 51 percent of Democrats were dissatisfied with the rise of corporate power, according to Gallup surveys. By 2011, 79 percent of Democrats were. According to an NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll last month, 58 percent of Democrats said they believed that the economic and political systems were stacked against them.
Clinton is obviously tough, but she just cant speak with a clear voice against Wall Street and Washington insiders. Warrens wing shows increasing passion and strength, both in opposing certain Obama nominees and in last weeks budget fight.
The history of populist candidates is that they never actually get the nomination. The establishment wins. Thats still likely. But there is something in the air. The fundamental truth is that every structural and historical advantage favors Clinton, but every day more Democrats embrace the emotion and view defined by Warren.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/16/opinion/david-brooks-elizabeth-warren-can-win.html
137 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Of course she can. She's our best chance of not only winning, but of changing the system.
Scuba
Dec 2014
#1
So anyone who votes for our candidate in November, if it isnt Warren, is 3rd way?
NoJusticeNoPeace
Dec 2014
#102
Besides, if we can't change the system, anyway, what is the point of winning?
Enthusiast
Dec 2014
#18
Rick Santorum comes off as a religious nut case. That's why he had no support last time.
Enthusiast
Dec 2014
#19
The problem is that to find the, "crazy inflammatory things" you'd have to Google...
genwah
Dec 2014
#112
Wow. Never thought I'd see a Rick Santorum post so full of praise for him on DU.
BlueCaliDem
Dec 2014
#29
I really would have thought it better to assess possible opponents' strengths as they may be
djean111
Dec 2014
#41
My apologies. I thought you meant "DLC". It's early on the west coast. That said,
BlueCaliDem
Dec 2014
#43
Have a gander at my sig. If we lose elections, it's not because I'm too lazy or too privileged or
BlueCaliDem
Dec 2014
#71
Oh no, I read your post, and yes, I see your point pretty clearly. Not surprised you'd
BlueCaliDem
Dec 2014
#78
I apologize if I came across mean-spirited. That wasn't my intention...at least, not in my last post
BlueCaliDem
Dec 2014
#92
Well said, but the phrase "David Brooks is right" kinda made me throw up a little in my mouth.
mountain grammy
Dec 2014
#100
Bernie Sanders is who will run and is as close to FDR as you can get, for now.
NoJusticeNoPeace
Dec 2014
#105
You come up with your own definition for "socialist" and are too tired to explain what you mean?
brooklynite
Dec 2014
#119
No, they don't. Right-wing Republicans are not secretly populist liberals in disguise.
NYC Liberal
Dec 2014
#73
And if they say something or think something along those lines, fox will straighten them out
NoJusticeNoPeace
Dec 2014
#106
I will campaign for Warren. I would vote for Warren. I will stay home for Hillary. It's that simple.
Katashi_itto
Dec 2014
#9
Do you think President Obama won't campaign for SoS Clinton should she be the nominee?
BlueCaliDem
Dec 2014
#34
I read comments to this waiting for someone to point that out. Brooks has an agenda here.
stevenleser
Dec 2014
#21
"Brooks frequently seems more sympathetic toward Obama than the liberal Paul Krugman."
RiverLover
Dec 2014
#22
Yep. And yet it's strange that some on this thread not only support Brooks but Rick "blah people"
BlueCaliDem
Dec 2014
#36
I think its great Brooks reaches conservatives & could win some over for us.
RiverLover
Dec 2014
#40
You have GOT to be kidding me. Barring an economic catastrophe that Cons know Dems are best at
BlueCaliDem
Dec 2014
#42
Smacks of an ulterior motive. There are TWO posts that even praise Rick "blah people" Santorum
BlueCaliDem
Dec 2014
#37
It's Brooks' way of lifting Senator Warren up (in order to vilify HRC) and then dropping her hard
BlueCaliDem
Dec 2014
#68
In the meantime...71 rec's for this p.o.s. Right-winger's article by DUers...*sigh*
BlueCaliDem
Dec 2014
#87
Well, I've been a member for longer than that. You just signed up when? Oh yeah. 2014.
BlueCaliDem
Dec 2014
#136
Some here know his work and are capable of seeing exactly what this op ed of his is.
Autumn
Dec 2014
#69
Oh, Autumn, pal...it's not as if you're the only one with a brain on this site. We know
BlueCaliDem
Dec 2014
#74
Boston pundit thinks Liz would be tough foe against Bush & Romney in GE as well
RiverLover
Dec 2014
#132