In my opinion she has to go further than she has so far on this issue. I understand that she is trying to take action in the Senate that is achievable and knows the votes are not there for free college education for all. Her leadership on the issue has not gone unnoticed, and despite her age, I think young people would return to the polls for a Warren candidacy. She has fought to lower interest rates, to allow the current debt to be refinanced at lower interest rates. I would think that a candidate Warren would have bolder proposals and, because she has already fought so hard, would have credibility on the issue.
Elizabeth Warren: "Today, if a Wall Street bank goes out and makes the wildest bet on earth, it will keep the profits if the bet pays off and you and I and millions of other American taxpayers could be on the hook if the bet falls short. But if a family gets into trouble, if a family loses a job, if they've been tricked into some crazy payment scheme or if someone in the household has gotten sick, the answer is that you are on your own. The same is true for small businesses -- you are on your own. Those are the rules we're operating under, and those rules are wrong."
This is her appeal. She articulates better than any other politician what so many people in America are feeling. When Elizabeth Warren talks about injustice people believe her. When Jeb Bush talks about it people are skeptical.
There is a huge opening here for any candidate who is not Clinton. All of the Republicans are free-traders, and so is Hillary. Labor has got to be searching for a way to find someone who can win the White House who is not for more trade deals that will ship jobs overseas. O'Malley, Webb, and Sanders will try to fill this void, but would labor be wise to back a candidate who hasn't shown that they have what it takes to win?
The TPP will likely be signed by President Obama before he leaves office. If it isn't, Hillary or any Republican would likely sign it. In a conference call with reporters on Wednesday, Elizabeth Warren blasted a provision in the deal called the investor-state dispute settlement mechanism, an independent, international court with the power to force the U.S. government and American corporations to abide by its rulings. "The name may sound a little wonky, but this is a powerful provision that would fundamentally tilt the playing field further in favor of multinational corporations. Worse yet, it would undermine U.S. sovereignty," said Warren. On the same day, the AFL-CIO announced plans to freeze political contributions to Democratic lawmakers who support fast-track trade authority for Obama. Hillary Clinton supports the trade deal.
Nate Cohn is right: Elizabeth Warren can't build Obama's coalition, but she can build a different coalition, a coalition that is fed up with the rigged system. She won't need 80% of the African American vote to win the nomination. There are plenty of white voters who are fed up with the different rules for those at the top.
Hillary Clinton leads the polls and is the favorite to become the next president of the United States. There is no doubt she would make a better president than anyone in the GOP field. Not being a career politician, I believe Warren needs convincing that she is up to the task. The American people are looking for a champion who has not been a career politician, that is part of her appeal.
I believe that every time Warren says no, it is because she doesn't want to run for president. Hillary, Bernie, Jeb, and the rest want to be president. Elizabeth Warren may not want the job. When someone is appointed to direct a recovery project after a national disaster, it is a job they wish they didn't have to do. If Elizabeth Warren realizes that her country needs her to lead, she might just just answer the call.
Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).