Warren now the most likely nominee according to some betting markets

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To have blatantly lied about her cultural background the way she did ... so insulting. I could never vote for that weasel.

As an Asian American whose kid got royally screwed by affirmative action, I can never vote for her due to her lying about being a native american to gain unfair advantage in getting a job at Harvard. Native Americans get at least 10X the preference the blacks get.

Also Asian, and no. When you vote, you vote for the country, not yourself. Warren has incredibly deep knowledge of policies and issues. She's by far the best candidate. She strikes me as being as little Aspergery, if you know what I mean (my son has Asperger's) - she doesn't always say and do what's in her best interest. But she's in the country's best interest, that's for sure.

No. You know who actually has the best policies for this country. Andrew Yang. He wears "MATH" hat as well as his supporters because he is data driven and logic driven. His son actually has autism and he talks about it sometimes. If you really cared about the ills of this country, millions of people living on the streets, average person in America making $38,000 in income per year, thousands people a month dying due to lack of affordable healthcare, so many white people in the flyover states ignored and abandoned and living in poverty, millions of black children getting terrible public education because the way we fund public schools in this country, millions of elderly people having to choose between prescription drugs and food on and on and on.

Yang's policies will transform this country and finally deal with the underlying ills of this country. Please watch his interview with Joe Rogan at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cTsEzmFamZ8&t=6046s

Yang is not running for ego or pride. He wants to fundamentally change the system because that is the only way to help millions of Americans who deserve better than what is happening now.

This. And he has a better shot of beating Trump than Warren or Sanders. Yang is more a libertarian, if you want to put a label on him. He can attract enough libertarians and blue collar workers who voted for Trump to win.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Warren wont be able to take the Midwest. She's too East Coast and it remains appareent that she doesn't understand flyover country as well as Pete or Klobuchar. Dems need MI and WI to win.

Don't know why you say that because, except for the racism and pro-life, her platform is very similar to the one Trump ran on. And the midwest voted for Obama. I think they will bote for anybody who they think doesn't favor the plutarchs. And the plutarchs hate hate hate Warren.

With that racism bs...you mean against Native Americans likr her?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Warren wont be able to take the Midwest. She's too East Coast and it remains appareent that she doesn't understand flyover country as well as Pete or Klobuchar. Dems need MI and WI to win.

Don't know why you say that because, except for the racism and pro-life, her platform is very similar to the one Trump ran on. And the midwest voted for Obama. I think they will bote for anybody who they think doesn't favor the plutarchs. And the plutarchs hate hate hate Warren.

Maybe, but I think you’re over stating similarities. Trump was, for a major party candidate in recent years, uniquely hostile to interventionism. Warren is actually fairly hawkish. Furthermore, who in their right mind trusts a tenured Harvard Professor to be anti-plutocrat? Like Trump, she’s got some folks to believe her, but she could definitely try for a larger collation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Warren wont be able to take the Midwest. She's too East Coast and it remains appareent that she doesn't understand flyover country as well as Pete or Klobuchar. Dems need MI and WI to win.

Don't know why you say that because, except for the racism and pro-life, her platform is very similar to the one Trump ran on. And the midwest voted for Obama. I think they will bote for anybody who they think doesn't favor the plutarchs. And the plutarchs hate hate hate Warren.

Maybe, but I think you’re over stating similarities. Trump was, for a major party candidate in recent years, uniquely hostile to interventionism. Warren is actually fairly hawkish. Furthermore, who in their right mind trusts a tenured Harvard Professor to be anti-plutocrat? Like Trump, she’s got some folks to believe her, but she could definitely try for a larger collation.

Who would trust a native New Yorker real estate trust fund kid to do this? Midwesterners, that's who.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Warren wont be able to take the Midwest. She's too East Coast and it remains appareent that she doesn't understand flyover country as well as Pete or Klobuchar. Dems need MI and WI to win.

Don't know why you say that because, except for the racism and pro-life, her platform is very similar to the one Trump ran on. And the midwest voted for Obama. I think they will bote for anybody who they think doesn't favor the plutarchs. And the plutarchs hate hate hate Warren.

But the big money love love loves Trump, Buttigieg, and Yang. Different sources of bug moneh, but for the same reasons.

[Anonymous]

This is a great article about Warren. She really has it. https://www.gq.com/story/the-summer-of-elizabeth-warren/amp?__twitter_impression=true

[Anonymous]

Please make it happen. It will be Hillary 2.0 all over again, down to post-election tears and another 4 years of whining

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Please make it happen. It will be Hillary 2.0 all over again, down to post-election tears and another 4 years of whining

+1

And we'll get to hear again how misogynistic Americans are, because we are so fearful of her brilliance.

[Anonymous]

and glass ceiling, don;t forget that thing!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:None of Warren's policies are ever going to pass. If there was a D majority even 60ds most of them still wouldn't pass

She is way out of the mainstream of the political spectrum

and 73k federal taxes is around 250k HHI which is very common in this area

Close. About $280k. One Fed, one software engineer. Only mortgage interest and charitable contribution deductions. All public schools, except kid 1 is in a private college with a 1/2 tuition merit award. I know We are not MC. I know we have a sizeable income. I am not saying I’m poor. But take out federal, state, etc taxes. And housing. And retirement savings. And college savings— a lot, because we got hit by the recession and started saving late. College plus retirement is $6k a month right there. And healthcare for one with a chronic, thankfully not life threatening, but not cheap, illness. It adds up fast. I think $71,000 with two kids at or near college age in an area with a very high COL is doing my part. And yes, I’d like to retire some day.

DP here. You are extremely shortsighted.

What happens if you get hit by another recession and lose all the college savings? What happens if you retire, and your adult kids cannot make 280k? Or if they make 280K and have expensive challenges e.g disabled children?

You should be the one championing Warren's ideas because you know what it is to struggle. And at that income, you will never be out of the woods. Don't you want different for your children and their children?

My DH(a fed too) and I are in pretty much the same boat as you are. And I support Warren 100% because I want my children to live in a society where they don't have to die because they cannot afford healthcare. I want them to live in a society where they don't have to starve because they lost their jobs. I want them to live in a society where they don't have to starve because the company they work for thinks it is okay for the executives to make all the money while the rest of the employees who work just as hard live hand to mouth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please make it happen. It will be Hillary 2.0 all over again, down to post-election tears and another 4 years of whining

+1

And we'll get to hear again how misogynistic Americans are, because we are so fearful of her brilliance.

"Brilliance"?

You must be high

[Anonymous]

No to Warren coming from a minority.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Please make it happen. It will be Hillary 2.0 all over again, down to post-election tears and another 4 years of whining

With treason, anything is possible.

[Anonymous]

I like Warren- I think she’s incredibly smart and capable. Her proposals reflect the ideas she has supported for years. She is who she is, and I respect that.

However, someone this smart should be reading the tea leaves better. For example, I feel like pushing for universal health care right now is lose-lose- the votes aren't there, and the prospect of losing their private insurance will scare a high percentage of voters. The public option would be a more realistic goal that could serve as a stepping stone to universal health care.

And sure she has plans to pay for everything NOW, but what about down the road? How will forgiving everyone’s student debt further drive college costs up?

I want her to answer some of these questions. If she’s the nominee, I’ll vote for her. But I’m not the type of voter that needs convincing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Warren wont be able to take the Midwest. She's too East Coast and it remains appareent that she doesn't understand flyover country as well as Pete or Klobuchar. Dems need MI and WI to win.

Don't know why you say that because, except for the racism and pro-life, her platform is very similar to the one Trump ran on. And the midwest voted for Obama. I think they will bote for anybody who they think doesn't favor the plutarchs. And the plutarchs hate hate hate Warren.

Maybe, but I think you’re over stating similarities. Trump was, for a major party candidate in recent years, uniquely hostile to interventionism. Warren is actually fairly hawkish. Furthermore, who in their right mind trusts a tenured Harvard Professor to be anti-plutocrat? Like Trump, she’s got some folks to believe her, but she could definitely try for a larger collation.

Well trump was a plutocrat from birth, warren did actually have to work hard to get there. But if you think their platforms are the same, you clearly haven’t read much about her platform. I don’t think she’s suggesting buying Greenland, for instance.