Elizabeth Warren has to THINK about it? Really?

Warren before quitting, in an image from her Twitter feed.

Warren before quitting, in an image from her Twitter feed.

So Elizabeth Warren has dropped out.

But she has not endorsed anyone.

She says,

Not today. I need some space around this and want to take a little time to think a little more.

REALLY? You have to think about whether you want to back Joe Biden… or a guy who would lead to four more years of Trump, loss of the House, and zero chance of dumping the Senate majority that refused even to consider evidence in the impeachment “trial”?

What is this about? Angling for an offer from one camp or the other?

Speaking of which: There are people out there saying Warren should be Joe’s running mate. The old “balance the ticket” nonsense.

Absolutely not, Joe. Go with Amy Klobuchar.

In case you haven’t noticed, Democrats are rejecting the left wing of the party. Pick a representative of that faction, and you’ll lose large chunks of the coalition that’s assembled behind you these last few days, the coalition that will take you to victory over Trump. They’ll want someone else like you, and that’s Amy Klobuchar. Or some other moderate who didn’t run.

For that matter, the fact that she had to think about whom to support should disqualify her as a running mate, without considering anything else. Amy Klobuchar didn’t have to ponder it.

Anyway, I thought I’d better say that now…

66 thoughts on “Elizabeth Warren has to THINK about it? Really?

  1. Mr. Smith

    “Democrats are rejecting the left wing of the party.”

    Some VOTERS may be. But a vote for Biden doesn’t necessarily equate with a demand for middle-of-the-road policies across the board. Even in my Upcountry precinct Sanders came in a respectable second, only 21 votes behind Biden. It seems pretty clear that voters flocked to Biden not because they’re in lock-step with where he stands, but because they feel, rightly or wrongly, that he has the best chance of unseating the creature currently occupying the Oval Office.

    The left wing is PART of the party, not some invasive species. Reject it at your peril.

    Reply
    1. Brad Warthen Post author

      You’re right that “Warren has no reason to hurry,” as long as what she’s concerned about is “what’s good for Elizabeth Warren.”

      I always sort of hope people will care more about the country. Of course, even there… if a hasty decision leads her to endorse Bernie, and a more deliberative process leads her to Joe, then by all means take your time, senator…

      Reply
  2. Phillip

    But if Warren DOESN’T believe that nominating Sanders would “lead to four more years of Trump, loss of the House, and zero chance of dumping the Senate majority that refused even to consider evidence in the impeachment “trial”” ? After all, she didn’t believe that HER winning the nomination would lead to that, and her policy outlook is obviously similar in many if not most respects to Bernie’s. And also, after all, if she is pondering giving an endorsement, her choice is between two candidates who are still neck-and-neck in the delegate count.

    I’m sure she will ultimately enthusiastically support whoever the nominee is. (And I still think she’ll hedge her bets by not endorsing either, unless one or the other concedes or drops out—there could still be a health issue for either at any moment).

    Reply
    1. Brad Warthen Post author

      “After all, she didn’t believe that HER winning the nomination would lead to that, and her policy outlook is obviously similar in many if not most respects to Bernie’s.”

      Forget the policies. Even a centrist like me likes single-payer.

      There was a world of difference between the two candidates, in terms of anyone I would consider hiring for any job, especially this one. There are lot of jobs I’d hire Warren for. Bernie seems more like someone I wouldn’t want to share a workplace with. He’s just so angry, and his anger attracts some unpleasant elements.

      Another way to put it: Elizabeth seems like much less of a bomb-thrower than Bernie. Warren has a plan. Bernie wants a revolution… Well, you know

      Reply
    1. Barry

      Lying doesn’t matter. Trump lies dozens of times a day and conservatives embrace them and don’t care.

      So anyone pointing out a candidate’s lies can spare us all. It doesn’t matter anymore.

      Reply
  3. Bryan Caskey

    From another place on the internet:

    “Tell General Biden I know his heart. What he told me before, I have it in my heart. I am tired of running. Our Candidates are no more; Mini Mike is gone, Buttgiggity is gone. The other candidates are all gone. It is the old men who say yes or no. He who led on the young men is gone. It is late, and we have no delegates. The young candidates are frozen out of debates. My people, some of them, have retreated to the faculty lounge, and they have no lattes, no avocado toast. No one knows where they are – not even their baristas. I want to have time to look for my principles, and maybe get me a beer. Maybe I shall find one in the refrigerator. Hear me, my delegates! I am tired; my heart is sick and sad. From where the sun now stands I will run no more forever.”

    Reply
        1. Brad Warthen Post author

          Anyway, changing “I will fight no more forever” to “I will run no more forever” doesn’t work in this case. When writing words that are supposed to be Elizabeth Warren’s, you want to use “fight” as many times as possible…

          Reply
        2. Mark Stewart

          I’m from Oregon and caught the Chief Joseph riff right away. Funny.

          But, yeah, the Chief really lost it all, not just politically.

          Reply
        3. Bryan Caskey

          To be clear, all the mockery was aimed at Senator Warren. Not even 1/1024 was aimed at Chief Joseph.

          Reply
  4. Bill

    Trump trumps Trump!
    any effing ONE can beat him.Stop obsessing
    He’s done.Screw every repug in lex county…

    Reply
    1. Barry

      Anyone can beat him if the economy declines. He’s be the weakest candidate in the last 100 years if that happened.

      But as it stands, republicans are hitched to trump no matter what he says or does. It’s why I now reject conservatism.

      Reply
        1. Mr. Smith

          The Republican Party has over time become a playground for the comfortably complacent, libertarians, social Darwinists, economic and religious fundamentalists, those who covet power for its own sake and now Trumpistas. Reject those sorts of people and their ideas? You betcha.

          Reply
          1. Barry

            Yep, I reject conservatives and their hypocrisy every time. I not only lost respect for their ideas, I lost respect for them.

            Hypocrites.

            Reply
          2. Brad Warthen Post author

            No, it used to be the home of the comfortably complacent. From today’s perspective, those were the good old days. Then, for awhile in the early ’90s, it was the home of (some) religious fundamentalists. That, too, was a far better time than today.

            Now, it’s occupied by racist nihilists, and those who fear them. And the latter group — those who fear — are the larger group, among elected officials. But the distinction doesn’t matter. If you place yourself completely at the beck and call of barbarians, you might as well be a barbarian…

            Reply
            1. Mr. Smith

              I beg to differ.
              If the rank-and-file weren’t complacent about the state of things, both in their party and in the country generally, they would not be so accepting of el caudillo presidente. I know of some who are embarrassed by his antics, but are comfortable about giving him a pass so long as their stock portfolios are doing good. Same with the religious zealots: so long as they get “their” judges and justices, they’re fine with him, too.

              Reply
        2. Barry

          No, I HAVE rejected it.

          When i see “conservatives”” who state they have had the same beliefs for 40 years suddenly have a change of heart and adopt Trump, it’s easy to reject a dumb ideology.

          As a former friend told me, “we care about deficit when Democrats are in office, not when republicans are in office.” – at least conservative hypocrisy isn’t Trying to be hid anymore.

          Thank goodness that mess is behind me.

          Reply
          1. Barry

            Edit “deficits”

            And that’s just one thing they don’t care about when a Republican is in office. There are many more.

            Hypocrites.

            Reply
  5. bud

    The budget deficit issue in particular underscores just what a bunch of hyper-partisan hypocrites Republicans have become. I remember the time when Republicans would lecture use liberals about the dangers of big budget deficits. Now with the economy roaring (or at least it was) Republicans have nothing but excuses over their own mismanagement of revenue. How can anyone respect this party?

    Reply
      1. Brad Warthen Post author

        Ah, but these people aren’t conservatives, as Bud points out. Conservatives can at least be counted on to be careful with money.

        These people are bulls in a china shop…

        Reply
          1. Big D

            “Most conservatives I know are in debt up their eyeballs.”

            Pretty much the opposite for me. Most conservatives I know are careful with their money. I work with a bunch of liberals and they are the ones who are complaining about how broke they are as they drink their 3rd $7 Starbucks coffee of the day. The conservatives I work with are mostly tight with their money.

            Reply
            1. Brad Warthen Post author

              As I already said, I would expect real conservatives to be careful with money, sort of by definition — just as I would expect them to be careful stewards of the environment. You know, conservationists.

              Of course, as I also said, I don’t consider most people who call themselves conservatives today to be actual conservatives…

              Reply
            1. Brad Warthen Post author

              To expand beyond that point, I would say that most people who call themselves conservatives don’t qualify in my book.

              Here’s what I consider real conservatism to be. I refer you to my 2008 column, “Give me that old-time conservatism.” Because, you know, real conservatism is by definition old-time. My definition was at the end:

              By now some of you think I have it in for all things “conservative.” I don’t. I just grew up with a different concept of it from that which has in recent years been appropriated by extremists. I grew up in a conservative family — a Navy family, as a matter of fact. To the extent that “conservative ideas” were instilled in me, they weren’t the kind that make a person fume over paying his taxes, or get apoplectic at the sound of spoken Spanish. They were instead the old-fashioned ones: Traditional moral values. Respect for others. Good stewardship. Plain speaking.
              And finally, the concept that no passing fancy, no merely political idea, is worth as much as Duty, Honor and Country.

              So no, I don’t consider libertarians, Tea Partiers, members of the Freedom Caucus, or supporters of Donald Trump to be conservative. After all, they ain’t even old-timey

              Reply
              1. Mr. Smith

                ” moral values. Respect for others. Good stewardship. Plain speaking.”

                Hmm, sounds like things any “liberal/progressive” could quickly ascribe to. So, in other words, not that definitive of conservatism as distinguished from any other political perspective.

                Reply
                1. Brad Warthen Post author

                  … which is probably why I don’t particularly subscribe to any name-brand political ideology.

                  I associate a lot of good things with conservatism. I also associate a lot of good things with liberalism — tolerance, generosity, empathy, embrace of pluralism and civil liberties, openness to positive change.

                  Neither conservatism nor liberalism holds a monopoly on virtue. I think anyone who wants to be a good person should aspire to the best of both…

  6. Bryan Caskey

    I’m shocked that conservative folks don’t comment here more often, what with all y’all being so open-minded and tolerant of opposing viewpoints.

    Have a good weekend you adorable ol’ lefties; I’ll be doing crazy right-wing things like coaching little league baseball, leading a Cub Scout outing, going to church, and working around the house.

    Reply
    1. Mr. Smith

      “what with all y’all being so open-minded and tolerant of opposing viewpoints.”

      More mockery. Conservatives love mockery. It makes them feel so superior.

      As for open-mindedness, apparently you confuse pushback with intolerance.
      Or is acquiescence the only acceptable form of “debate” conservatives are willing to recognize now?

      Reply
      1. bud

        I was just thinking about how respectful conservatives have been in the arena of public debate. They always fashion arguments in such a way as to be civil toward opposing points of view and never resort to ad-hominem attacks or otherwise tawdry outbursts. On the contrary, conservatives present themselves with the utmost decorum. Facts and intelligent, reasoned arguments are the order of the day for conservatives. Liberals should aspire to such a high minded presentation of ideas.

        In all seriousness I long for the day when we can have a civil discussion about the important issues of the. Frankly that seems totally impossible in today’s polarized environment. Even the host of this blog resorts to calling those with whom he disagrees with nihilists, Marxists and crybabies. How do we ever recover from this sordid state of affairs?

        Reply
        1. Brad Warthen Post author

          Actually, real conservatives DO “fashion arguments in such a way as to be civil toward opposing points of view and never resort to ad-hominem attacks or otherwise tawdry outbursts.”

          It’s just that there are too few true conservatives around these days. That said, Bryan is a true, civil gentleman. If you know him, you don’t see any malice in his gentle joshing…

          I’d really like to see some more conservatives here. Real ones…

          Reply
        2. Brad Warthen Post author

          Whom have I called a “crybaby?” Or a Marxist, aside from maybe Bernie?

          But I do plead guilty of calling people who want do tear down the house “nihilist.” And there are a lot of them these days, from Bernie’s “Dirtbag Left” faction to the MAGA-hat wearers.

          And sometimes I hold myself back. Just minutes ago, I was about to say that most people who call themselves “conservative” these days — and who are anything but conservative — are actually barbarians. But I restrained myself at the last second…

          Reply
    2. Barry

      Why would they not comment? Wasn’t it conservatives, Fox News, and right wing radio saying everyone else was a snowflake because they couldn’t handle some ridicule? Yep, it was.

      I’ll be at church Sunday teaching a middle school class, celebrating a family member’s birthday Saturday, and taking my children out to eat.

      I’ll also be working in my backyard on my landscaping project and completing a fence repair.

      Reply
    3. Barry

      “ tolerant of opposing viewpoints.”

      Hey Bryan,

      I’m tolerant of opposing viewpoints. I simply pointed out blatant conservative hypocrisy.

      “ going to church”

      I’ll be at church too, but I don’t Worship Trump like many of the conservatives I know.

      Reply
  7. bud

    I have an idea. Since the Democratic Party primary process is pretty much over, (Biden has an 85% chance of winning) , maybe Brad could post something about an important issue and we all weigh in with actual civil arguments. I’d stay away from guns and abortion. Perhaps healthcare. Certainly there is common ground out there if we only try to find it.

    Reply
    1. Brad Warthen Post author

      Good idea, Bud!

      I don’t know about “important topic,” but that’s exactly what I was going for on the Top Five Coolest Airplanes post — lots of good, differing opinions without any rancor. And even though no one agreed with all my choices, I thought everybody had a good point. For instance, I’m persuaded that some of y’all were right — the SR71 probably is cooler than the X-15…

      Reply
    2. Mr. Smith

      Begin with this, the most fundamental question:

      Do we agree as a country agree that providing universal healthcare coverage is a goal we should achieve?

      If we cannot agree on that, then there’s little reason to address the underlying means.

      Reply
      1. Barry

        I have come around on this to agree we do.

        I’d like to do it slowly, first by extending the option to join Medicare to 58 year olds and over.

        I would not do away with private insurance.

        Reply
          1. Barry

            Well, unless status quo is ok, then lowering the age is my goal.

            I’d even be ok with the lower age resulting in less benefits (within reason).

            But I’m all for compromise on this use, unlike the current people debating the issue in DC.

            Reply
        1. Brad Warthen Post author

          Of course, Doug thinks we can take all the money to pay for it from the military. As does Bernie.

          I don’t.

          And I worry whether it’s even possible right now with the crazy debt that Trump and his minions have, like drunken sailors, only added to.

          I guess at this point, as much as I believe single-payer should be our goal, I’m sort of where Lincoln was on abolition early in the war. I’m waiting for political conditions to be right.

          First step is defeating Trump and Trumpism. And then you’ve only taking a tiny step toward normalizing our politics.

          Pushing for Medicare for All right now, with a wild-eyed avowed socialist as the messenger and Trump poised to take advantage of it, is kind of crazy.

          I mean, even if Biden or some more moderate Democrat were pushing it, they’d still stop it by screaming “socialism!” No point in just handing it to them, wrapped in a bow…

          Build on Obamacare. Introduce a public option. Work in the right direction…

          Reply
          1. Mr. Smith

            “I’m sort of where Lincoln was on abolition early in the war. I’m waiting for political conditions to be right.”

            Yeah, well, Lincoln only had to wait two years for that. And he was cloaked in those “immense powers” of a wartime presidency to help make it happen.

            Waiting around for just those sorts of conditions may mean it takes several lifetimes to move on universal healthcare.

            Or a major national disaster.

            Reply
        1. Mr. Smith

          “I’m sort of where Lincoln was on abolition early in the war. I’m waiting for political conditions to be right.”

          Yeah, well, Lincoln only had to wait two years for that. And he was cloaked in those “immense powers” of a wartime presidency to help make it happen.

          Waiting around for just those sorts of conditions may mean it takes several lifetimes to move on universal healthcare.

          Or a major national disaster.

          Reply
            1. Mr. Smith

              NEWS FLASH :
              “Rebs defeated at Antietam Creek
              Lee withdraws to the southward.
              President Warthen set to release healthcare plan.
              Nation to give thanks.”

              Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *