He should be.

shows "Biden is worried about Warren."

And I'm really puzzled as to why you think he "should be" worried about her when he's so far ahead of her in the polls.

Whoever pushed this article in the first place wasn't thinking very clearly.

And again, he's quoting a number of people who have donated to Elizabeth Warren.

Reporters are fed angles and sources all the time.

who gave to both Warren and Biden to talk about this?

Two of the organizers of the "swanky" Biden fundraiser Warren criticized hosted Warren fundraiser?

is doing.. he can't debate the OP so he comes up with all this other "fear" crap.

smh

Her previous election was for the Senate. This time, she is running for the presidency and is trying to set a precedent. I believe that her run for the presidency is, more than anything, an attempt to ensure that important issues like the influence of money in politics are discussed. While I believe she is running without personal ambition, I also believe that she would make the best president of anyone who is running. That's why I support Elizabeth Warren, and it's also why I am not bothered by people like you attacking her out of a sense, clearly, of insecurity.

In other words, in the past, she accepted big donations because it was important to keep her seat against a Republican raising big money. This time, she is not accepting big donations because she doesn't care if she loses, as long as a Democrat wins. I suspect she is attacking Biden in this way because she doesn't think Biden can win against Trump (because Biden has too many weaknesses, in particular too many ties to the financial industry). Elizabeth Warren has the boldest and most liberal policy positions, and I sincerely hope she ends up being our candidate in the general election. I'm going to go and donate to her right now.

Thanks for attacking a liberal, though. I know how much some DUers love to do that.

Didn't stop her coming to NYC to pick up large dollar checks (I wrote some of them).

Either way, my point stands. A senatorial election is not the same as a presidential election. The latter gives her a much taller soap box. The fact that she took big checks when running for her Senate seat does not mean she has to take big checks to run for the presidency.

...but if she could take large checks IN her Senate race and not sell out her principles, she COULD do the same in the Presidential...and so can Biden.

Then again, you seem to be quite proud of how much money you have, so I suppose you it makes sense that you think all candidates should court and accept big donations.

I would be delighted to give up my financial clout and have federally funded elections. To do that, we have to win against someone who will have north of $1 Billion to spend.

on Biden.

In no way do they seem to be pointing this out from a "sense, clearly, of insecurity."

Warren is one of our best candidates. She is a progressive and has fought for years for progressive causes. She is a huge asset to the liberal wing of the Democratic Party. You should ask yourself, honestly, why you are attacking her.

attack on Biden's fundraising.

I saw a lot of posts here on DU attacking Biden for that fundraiser.

We all have candidates we like and dislike, but please let's avoid harsh attacks like this one that imply that a candidate on our side is a hypocrite.

The fact that others are engaging in such attacks does not make it OK. Please consider the long game. Elizabeth Warren may be our candidate in the general election, in which case this will come back to haunt her. She is my preferred candidate, but I would defend any of our candidates against charges of hypocrisy.

her responded to her attack on him, and that's what the article is about.

Perhaps you should ask the Warren campaign not to attack Biden for doing what she's done in the past, if she doesn't want her donors who are also Biden donors to say anything.

And btw, since I know from what else you've posted here about Biden supporters that you assume they're older white men who didn't support Hillary Clinton

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1287&pid=109936

I want to point out to you that I'm a woman and I supported HRC.

I like a lot of things about Warren. I did not like her attack on Biden for that fundraiser.

There is also a difference between saying that Biden is a centrist and saying that Warren is a hypocrite. Biden is proud of his centrism; he has chosen centrism as the focus of his campaign. Saying that he is a centrist is not an attack. It is a statement of the truth.

Incidentally, saying that most people who support Biden on DU are older white males does not imply that they all are. Saying that Hillary was attacked for centrism on DU and Biden is being celebrated despite being more of a centrist does not imply that everyone who is for Biden was against Hillary. Saying that sexism causes people to be against women candidates doesn't mean only men are sexist and that no woman is against female candidates. I am a physicist by training. I know statistics. It seems you don't.

At this point, you are clearly just trying to keep your attack thread against Warren alive. Good luck with your efforts. Perhaps if you attack Warren enough, she won't be president. Who cares that Trump may get another four years, eh? That worked so well in 2016, didn't it? Good bye.

used in that Philly.com article, either.

It was simply about what Warren said and what her donors said.

....at $2800, and another 41 who have contributed $2700 (maybe not realizing that the limit was raised from $2700 to $2800)

There's nothing wrong with that, all candidates should get as much as they can for the crunch of the campaign next year. But let's not be fooled that candidates who talk down to "big donors" don't accept them anyway.

There's another candidate who talks about "small contributions", not mentioning that many many of those "small contributions" are multiples from the same contributor, essentially escaping the "big donor" tag by keeping the individual contributions small. That candidate has a few contributors that have sent in dozens or even hundreds of "small contributions" but have maxed out as well.

Personally, I don't mind rich folks who support Democratic candidates for office. Neither do most politicians, who are glad for the help when it's needed. Elizabeth Warren was glad for the support from some of the same people who supported Joe Biden recently. That's because she needed the funding to win her election and keep her Senate seat.

I don't fault Warren for that, nor do I fault Joe Biden for it. Now, Warren is not taking financial support from big donors right now. If she becomes the Democratic nominee, though, I'm betting she'll welcome PAC money for the general election campaign. It won't go directly to her, of course, but it will certainly help her campaign.

You should donate to her, if she's your choice. Others should donate to the candidates they prefer. Election campaigns are very, very costly, and candidates need all the help they can get.

Once again, I like rich people who donate to Democratic campaigns. They're supporting the same things I am. I wish I had the money to make some large donations. Sadly, I don't.

....the FEC limits and parameters (i.e., $2800 max, $5600 for a couple, only individuals, no foreign entities) All of those contributions are in the candidates' filings and we know exactly who they are, their occupation, employer, etc.

What concerns me is the growing number of "un-itemized" contributions being reported by some candidates. In those cases, we have no idea who those people are or anything about them, or even if they made multiple very small contribution in order to remain "un-itemized" and keep their identities undisclosed.

hoping to raise millions and millions of dollars to help them in their race. There's all sorts of oddball stuff around campaign financing. Those "un-itemized" donations are one of the oddball things. I don't actually understand any of that very well. I'm not even able to max out donations under the FEC limits. I just don't have that kind of money at hand, so I donate in small amounts when I can.

Perhaps my donations are "un-itemized," too.

At the home of a Comcast lobbyist?