My dream candidate exists - and her name is Elizabeth Warren

[at140]

If I was going to invent a dream candidate, she would be grounded in small-town, rural or heartland America but able to hold her own in the citadels of power on the coasts. She would comfort the afflicted with the same passion with which she afflicts the comfortable, and she would understand the causes of those afflictions and have good ideas about how to remedy them. She would be moved by compassion but wouldn’t ask us to rely on compassion; she would have tangible strategies for widening our distribution of income, healthcare, education and opportunity, and she would be smart about the intersections of race, gender, class and the rest.

Warren doesn't just frighten billionaires – she scares the whole establishment
Robert Reich
Read more
She would have been around long enough to remember that since the 1980s the government has dismantled a lot of systems that made us more safe and more equal, and she’d be fresh enough to imagine new ways out of the consequences of that catastrophic dismantling. Also she would have to be funny and have big plans to address climate change. OK, she already exists, and I’m talking about Elizabeth Warren. She is, to me, a better candidate for president than I ever expected we’d have.

My dream candidate would’ve been a woman of color with all these qualities, and my dreamiest dream candidate would be a woman of color with Medusa hair who could turn the entire Republican Senate to stone with a glance, but Warren is who’s left in the race, and she is magnificent, and superheroes from Megan Rapinoe to Roxane Gay agree. Also, she pretty much turned Wells Fargo’s CEO into stone in a 2016 Senate banking committee hearing, more than a decade after she became one of the most outspoken experts telling Wall Street why it’s vicious and half a decade after she endorsed Occupy Wall Street. The strength of her candidacy is shown by how she’s made it to the front of the race despite misogyny from across the political spectrum, the wrath of the billionaires pouring money – and themselves – into the race, and the smears and distortions of the mainstream media.

Really I see her as a combination of three superpowers: wonkiness, radicalness and what for lack of a better term I would call Big Structural Mom Energy. The wonkiness is how she set new standards in primary campaigns with those famous plans – far more detailed, with the costs accounted for, than was usual before she arrived. The depth with which she understands the economic system – taxes, banks, bankruptcies, credit cards, home and student loans, redlining – is the depth with which she can change it.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/dec/31/2020-dream-candidate-elizabeth-warren-democrats

[question everything]

1. It is sad that the former Sanders' supporters shifted to her: same ideas but a Demcorat

and now, it is reported, many shifted back to Sanders.

Why do people think that someone who has never been a Democrat - except to exploit the Vt. Senate race - has actively campaigned against Democrats including wishing for a primary challenge to Obama in 2012, should be the nominee I will never understand. And I fear the consequences.

[Demsrule86]

2. This has been posted over and over...and in 1980 Warren was a Republican...so I don't get much of

this. She is not my dream candiate...she is OK but I won't support her in a primary only a general...and none of her super powers may included electability...she has very little AA support...an important Democratic constituency.

[at140]

4. Elizabeth has charisma and personality and energy

but more than that I really like her agenda which is to take on big banks and Wall Street who are running our lives and control the politicians.

[Demsrule86]

5. I have serious reservations about what taking on all of this might do to our economy...particularly

banks. I believe in regulation but not everything she wants to do...I think it could hurt the economy.

[at140]

7. Banks do not create wealth, they use wealth

only true wealth creators are mining, farming, manufacturing and to a small extent applied research.
All other parts of economy can not exist if there is lack of wealth creation. For example when I was growing up in pre-independence India, it was a poor country because the British rulers had moved majority of manufacturing to Britain. So we had doctor's but not enough patients who could afford to pay their bills.

[Demsrule86]

12. Banks give loans and mortgages...one of which I recently got...banks are important ...it is this

sort of thing...which I consider kind of out there that gives me pause with Warren. We agree about manufacturing but Warren 's plan isn't good. Her idea is to improve working conditions overseas that she thinks will help here...it won't.

[at140]

14. The problem is NOT all banks, just the behemoth large ones...

The neighborhood and local banks do excellent service to people. The very large banks created those MBS bonds (mortgage backed securities) which was the catalyst for the real-estate crash and recession. Those large banks take unwise risks and if they fail, they are bailed out with the excuse they are too large to fail.

What Warren wants to do is place stringent restrictions on those large banks, so they operate with prudence instead of risky ventures to make bigger profits. Warren is exactly right and knows more on this issue and has more determination to get something done, than all other candidates combined.

[Demsrule86]

16. And f'ing with them...could very well bring the economy down.

I don't know...the idea of breaking up this or that...not on board...regulation yes.

[at140]

17. Economy has never come down because of a company breakup

One of the largest companies in United States was broken up by the government into several smaller companies. The company was AT&T. After breakup, the separate units became more competitive and things became more efficient.

Same thing happens if a company goes bankrupt. The infra structure gets bought by others, employees get hired by the takeover outfit, and things run more efficiently.

What does bring the economy down is allowing giant companies to do risky schemes and if the scheme fails you have a giant problem. That is exactly what the large banks did causing housing meltdown.

[Demsrule86]

18. I remember 2008...very well. I am against much of what Sanders and Warren say...I believe in

regulated banks and corporations and personal and business banking needs to be separated. And Stocks need to be held for a certain number of days, weeks...not sure, but we will figure it out...Warren's plans first of all won't happen and could damage the economy.

[Demsrule86]

6. I miss the charisma and the personality...I just don't get it. I would voter for her happily in a

general however...and hope I was wrong and that she wins.

[at140]

8. Charisma is not all that complicated.

It is when a person is able to infuse energy in the audience, makes the audience love the speech maker.

[Demsrule86]

9. Idon't lover her or her speeches...I don't feel it and I have watched them. She is a worthy

candidate but I think she is able to speak to those already on her side and the rest not so much. I would vote for her in a general but ...it is not a falling in love kind of thing...not being mean...I don't get her appeal.

[at140]

10. I understand, and please note that

having charisma does not mean you can win every vote. But a charismatic candidate will cause his/her followers to walk through broken glass to go to the voting booth.

[Demsrule86]

11. I don't see her charisma...but should she be the nominee...I would walk barefoot through broken

glass to vote for her in the general.

[Skya Rhen]

13. You're not the only one who doesn't see it...

[at140]

15. Yeah none of the Biden supporters can see it

because they are against everyone whose name is not Biden.

[FM123]

3. Great article from the Guardian!

This one sentence spoke volumes: At the heart of her campaign is kindness as an emotion, as a value – and as a basis for policy.