2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumSo Warren won't make an endorsement before the convention and Hillary supporters cheer...
But what did Elizabeth Warren say?
"A new presidential election is upon us... Anyone who shrugs and claims that change is just too hard has crawled into bed with the billionaires who want to run this country like some private club." -- Elizabeth Warren
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/liam-miller/elizabeth-warren-sinks-clintons-hopes_b_9058526.html
And why do you suppose she won't endorse now?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511245564
ebayfool
(3,411 posts)snip/
Warren is eloquent, moving, and on topic as always. Right at the end, however, she changes gears. I almost missed it; what she had said up to that point was so compelling that my mind was ringing. It was only on the second listen that I caught them: three sentences that leapt from the specific (campaign finance reform) to the general (Progressivism itself):
A new presidential election is upon us. The first votes will be cast in Iowa in just eleven days. Anyone who shrugs and claims that change is just too hard has crawled into bed with the billionaires who want to run this country like some private club.
It would be hard to overstate the controlled vehemence and contempt with which Warren delivers her last statement, just as there is no question who that "anyone" refers to. Clinton, unable to win over Progressives (both MoveOn.org and Democracy for America have endorsed Sanders), has attempted to reel in moderates by casting herself as the more pragmatic choice, and has painted Sanders with the broad brush of unrealistic idealism. Warren's message, so aligned with Sanders's as it has always been, is covered by those same strokes. Never one to shrink from a challenge, Warren comes out swinging.
Her riposte could not be more direct, as she reminds us of what true Progressives sound like and stand up for: broadly popular ideas, which are still somehow considered politically impractical. At the same time, she reminds us that 'politically impractical' is just code for 'wealthy donors don't like it.' The money Clinton has received from Wall Street, so much a topic of last Sunday's debate, illustrates Warren's indictment all too well.
YOHABLO
(7,358 posts)Fans of Warren have followed her for quite sometime. DU'ers have seen the clips (Bill Moyers) etc. If Hillary gets (notice I said gets, not wins) Warren will endorse her, with fingers crossed behind her back.
thesquanderer
(11,989 posts)Source? I haven't seen this...
tk2kewl
(18,133 posts)thesquanderer
(11,989 posts)dana_b
(11,546 posts)thesquanderer
(11,989 posts)Only DUer seaotter's opinion that "she will wait until the people have made their decision." There is nothing to that effect in the linked article.
riversedge
(70,242 posts)BreakfastClub
(765 posts)Hillary. A very painful day indeed...
tk2kewl
(18,133 posts)And that will indeed be a painful day for liberals and progressives
onecaliberal
(32,863 posts)MisterP
(23,730 posts)NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)I simply see it as being in her best interest. Pretty simple.
Renew Deal
(81,861 posts)So no endorsement is just as much of a win for Hillary as a Warren endorsement.
Skid Rogue
(711 posts)tk2kewl
(18,133 posts)gwheezie
(3,580 posts)This who have endorsed are clearly behind their candidate. Warren has her reasons for waiting. I'm not happy or sad, she apparently is waiting. I don't see the big deal. Lots of people haven't endorsed yet.