• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Seeya

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
7,984
All the people saying Warren ran a terrible campaign or made nothing but mistakes.

She's the only other candidate to crack a national average of mid 20s besides Sanders for God's sake.

And she collapsed shortly there after, finishing 4th or 5th in IA/NH.

That is the definition of a bad campaign, like... what?

She just isn't the candidate the voters want.

That doesn't mean you ran a shit campaign or did nothing but mistakes.

But.... they wanted her at one point quite strongly and she didn't make the proper choices to maintain that desire among the electorate.
 

CeeCee

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,118
If the Democrats used the same system that Labour are currently using in the UK (RCV, keeps going until one person has a majority), I think Warren would have a great shot.

She seems to have fallen into the "lots of people's second choice, no one's first choice" trap.
 

Surfinn

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
28,590
USA
All the people saying Warren ran a terrible campaign or made nothing but mistakes.

She's the only other candidate to crack a national average of mid 20s besides Sanders for God's sake.
Obviously every bit of her campaign wasn't a mistake or failure as she had strong surges. For a while, it legit looked like she had the momentum to blow past Bernie and challenge Biden, and I was prepared to 100% back her if that happened.

But it's important to be able to recognize that there were issues with her run and that she didn't fail primarily because of sexism.
 
OP
OP
TheHunter

TheHunter

Bold Bur3n Wrangler
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
25,774
I don't think there's really a meaningful difference, to be honest. Warren has repeatedly failed to re-energize the momentum she had half a year ago. How good is her campaign if she was once challenging Biden for the frontrunner spot and is now repeatedly falling behind in 3-4th place? She's failed to build a stable coalition which is poison in such a divided, competitive primary. I just don't buy this idea that Warren somehow actually ran a great campaign and the people just didn't see it.
Well then I guess Bernie didn't run a good campaign in 2016 either.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯
 
OP
OP
TheHunter

TheHunter

Bold Bur3n Wrangler
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
25,774
And she collapsed shortly there after, finishing 4th or 5th in IA/NH.

That is the definition of a bad campaign, like... what?



But.... they wanted her at one point quite strongly and she didn't make the proper choices to maintain that desire among the electorate.
Well no, one candidate started attacking her from the right and then the very online left screamed bloody murder that Warren was abandoning m4a(she wasn't).

She ran a fine campaign, she just got unlucky that Pete is a smiley opportunistic bastard. Who also won't win.
 
OP
OP
TheHunter

TheHunter

Bold Bur3n Wrangler
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
25,774
Obviously every bit of her campaign wasn't a mistake or failure as she had strong surges/moments in her campaign. For a while, it legit looked like she had the momentum to blow past Bernie and challenge Biden, and I was prepared to 100% back her if that happened.

But it's important to be able to recognize that there were issues with her run and that she didn't fail primarily because of sexism.
Her issues being apparently trying to not lie to people about how to realistically get M4A and trying to be a unity candidate.

Fantastic issues to have really.
 

Seeya

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
7,984
Well then I guess Bernie didn't run a good campaign in 2016 either.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Sanders wasn't intending to run a big 'go for the win' campaign in 2016. Things just ballooned very quickly. They were disorganized and made a lot of mistakes! That said, at the very least Sanders 2016 run ended up being massively influential in the party, I don't think we'll be able to say the same of Warren's 2020 run in the end.

The definition given applies to Bernie's former campaign.

It technically applies now! He didn't win NH by near as much.

This is like 3 logical fallacies my dude...
 

Jiggy

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
9,280
wherever
Well then I guess Bernie didn't run a good campaign in 2016 either.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Well, he didn't. His campaign completely ignored the South.

Warren fell apart when Bernie recovered from his heart attack slump and Pete sucked up her college educated white base. I also thought her last couple debate performances have been pretty meh. What happened to the Warren that came for #winecavepete?
 

Mekanos

▲ Legend ▲
Member
Oct 17, 2018
44,127
The definition given applies to Bernie's former campaign.

It technically applies now! He didn't win NH by near as much.

I'm pretty sure Bernie in 2015/2016 was never actually competitive for the frontrunner spot in polls to the extent Warren was around October-ish last year, but I could be wrong on that. He never fumbled a lead like Warren did. Either way, his campaign certainly made mistakes and I'd be the first to admit that.

His NH margin is smaller because the field is much more competitive. Nobody gave a shit about any candidates that weren't Hillary or Bernie in 2016. Like this is obvious, c'mon lol.
 
OP
OP
TheHunter

TheHunter

Bold Bur3n Wrangler
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
25,774
I'm pretty sure Bernie in 2015/2016 was never actually competitive for the frontrunner spot in polls to the extent Warren was around October-ish last year, but I could be wrong on that. He never fumbled a lead like Warren did. Either way, his campaign certainly made mistakes and I'd be the first to admit that.

His NH margin is smaller because the field is much more competitive. Nobody gave a shit about any candidates that weren't Hillary or Bernie in 2016. Like this is obvious, c'mon lol.
So...then we could use the same arguments for Warren falling yes?

There are more choices. If this was a more one on one, or three way race I'd agree but this entire primary has been nothing but a giant mess.
 

Mekanos

▲ Legend ▲
Member
Oct 17, 2018
44,127
So...then we could use the same arguments for Warren falling yes?

There are more choices. If this was a more one on one, or three way race I'd agree but this entire primary has been nothing but a giant mess.

Warren had a lead and fumbled it pretty bad is my point. She's not the only one, Biden took a hard tumble. I don't know how she gets less than half the votes Klobuchar did in New Hampshire, who was barely even talked about least year, without some sort of failing of her campaign. Maybe New Hampshire was just feeling the Klob, but it tells me there's a pretty big issue on her messaging getting through. Or voters just don't like her that much, I guess that's also an option, but it's not one I'd like to entertain because I'd think a candidate as solid as Warren should be doing better than she is.
 

Deleted member 8644

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 26, 2017
975
So...then we could use the same arguments for Warren falling yes?

There are more choices. If this was a more one on one, or three way race I'd agree but this entire primary has been nothing but a giant mess.
Uhm are you sure that we could?
I'm pretty sure Bernie in 2015/2016 was never actually competitive for the frontrunner spot in polls to the extent Warren was around October-ish last year, but I could be wrong on that. He never fumbled a lead like Warren did. Either way, his campaign certainly made mistakes and I'd be the first to admit that.
 

jviggy43

Banned
Oct 28, 2017
18,184
I'm still waiting on the actual identifiable actions her campaign has taken that have resulted in a positive outcome for her to be listed as opposed to trying to shift the topic onto bernie in 16 or just tell people they dont know what theyre talking about. Like it should be pretty easy to do if she ran such a good campaign. And I don't consider having a national lead and then falling off a cliff to be particularly noteworthy in that category either. If anything it should signify what a bad job her team has done at maintaining that lead.
 

Jiggy

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
9,280
wherever
Klobs got a big boost in NH when she bodied Pete on the debate stage. That could have (and should have) been Warren. Forget this unity crap and attack Pete. It makes people happy.
 

BADMAN

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
2,887
Warren marketed herself as the "reasonable capitalist" alternative to Bernie. The people on the left marked her down as a potential second choice candidate and the people in the center have several different flavors of mundane centrist crap to choose from. That's her first problem.

Her second problem is she has no appeal outside of her base. She hasn't been able to harness the populous anger that's felt by people who think the system has failed them. She hasn't been able to convince the "electability" crowd that she'd be the easiest win vs Trump.

Her biggest problem though? She flops under pressure. The DNA thing? Flop. Getting challenged on her M4A plan? Flop. Her handling of the Bernie dinner fiasco? Total flop. Shit she even flopped in an interview with Megan McCain when she dogged her about Soleimani. Her inability to handle pressure has been the source of several of her biggest issues this campaign. That's my take on it at least.
 
OP
OP
TheHunter

TheHunter

Bold Bur3n Wrangler
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
25,774
Warren marketed herself as the "reasonable capitalist" alternative to Bernie. The people on the left marked her down as a potential second choice candidate and the people in the center have several different flavors of mundane centrist crap to choose from. That's her first problem.

Her second problem is she has no appeal outside of her base. She hasn't been able to harness the populous anger that's felt by people who think the system has failed them. She hasn't been able to convince the "electability" crowd that she'd be the easiest win vs Trump.

Her biggest problem though? She flops under pressure. The DNA thing? Flop. Getting challenged on her M4A plan? Flop. Her handling of the Bernie dinner fiasco? Total flop. Shit she even flopped in an interview with Megan McCain when she dogged her about Soleimani. Her inability to handle pressure has been the source of several of her biggest issues this campaign. That's my take on it at least.
I actually agree with this take accept the Bernie thing. Warren is too "nice" and doesn't have a bite.

She didn't flop, that was just a crap situation all around the CNN nakedly took advantage of.

I mean they did it before their own debate!
 

Mekanos

▲ Legend ▲
Member
Oct 17, 2018
44,127
Warren flatly saying "no" when asked if Pete's answer on race policy was acceptable in the last debate was great. I want more of that Warren. I'm not sure how much more I'll get, I assume she'll stay in until Super Tuesday.
 

BADMAN

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
2,887
I actually agree with this take accept the Bernie thing. Warren is too "nice" and doesn't have a bite.

She didn't flop, that was just a crap situation all around the CNN nakedly took advantage of.

I mean they did it before their own debate!
Oh yeah, CNN fucked her for sure. But she still fucked herself by not taking control of the story. She should have either firmly and decisively thrown the story in the dumpster, or gone full scorched earth. She did neither. I'm not going to guess at her and her campaign's intentions on why that's the case, but her actions and inactions didn't help.
 
OP
OP
TheHunter

TheHunter

Bold Bur3n Wrangler
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
25,774
Oh yeah, CNN fucked her for sure. But she still fucked herself by not taking control of the story. She should have either firmly and decisively thrown the story in the dumpster, or gone full scorched earth. She did neither. I'm not going to guess at her and her campaign's intentions on why that's the case, but her actions and inactions didn't help.
I mean she initially did say who cares.

CNN then asked Bernie and the rest is history. Neither of them handled it well; Warren should have just dropped it amd Bernie should have been noncommittal as she was.
 

Surfinn

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
28,590
USA
Warren flatly saying "no" when asked if Pete's answer on race policy was acceptable in the last debate was great. I want more of that Warren. I'm not sure how much more I'll get, I assume she'll stay in until Super Tuesday.
This is where she really excels. I don't agree with Warren being too timid/lacking bite (not your words, mentioned above), she's shown over and over again the she's got fire in her.

IMO, her camp should be preparing to rip into Bloomberg. She's got nothing to lose and people love seeing that side of her when they feel like it's a legitimate attack.
 

xenocide

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,307
Vermont
Warren had a lead and fumbled it pretty bad is my point. She's not the only one, Biden took a hard tumble. I don't know how she gets less than half the votes Klobuchar did in New Hampshire, who was barely even talked about least year, without some sort of failing of her campaign. Maybe New Hampshire was just feeling the Klob, but it tells me there's a pretty big issue on her messaging getting through. Or voters just don't like her that much, I guess that's also an option, but it's not one I'd like to entertain because I'd think a candidate as solid as Warren should be doing better than she is.
The NH exit polls had people split saying she was too liberal or not liberal enough with just 7% saying she was just right. Not entirely sure how you can avoid something like that. It's a mind blowing stat for sure.

The only mistake Warren really made was launching M4A plan and it not being Sanders plan, during a time when the moderate candidates were going all in on attacking M4A. Not only did Warren start to drift around that time, but overall support for the concept of M4A did with it. The fact that she couldn't avoid being targeted by Pete and Amy at every turn probably had a bigger effect on her than any change in strategy she consciously made.

I'm still waiting on the actual identifiable actions her campaign has taken that have resulted in a positive outcome for her to be listed as opposed to trying to shift the topic onto bernie in 16 or just tell people they dont know what theyre talking about. Like it should be pretty easy to do if she ran such a good campaign. And I don't consider having a national lead and then falling off a cliff to be particularly noteworthy in that category either. If anything it should signify what a bad job her team has done at maintaining that lead.

1. Focused on presenting a long list of detailed and achievable policy. Helped bring a lot of concepts into the popular discussion such as universal childcare and a wealth tax.
2. Refused to lie or obfuscate about how to pay for that policy. Even though this likely hurt her more than anything.
3. Focused heavily on retail politics. Everything from the selfie lines to the phone calls to donors.
4. Avoided—until CNN stepped in—making the campaign about her being a woman. Although inevitably it was going to come up, and there's no way to avoid it short of being born a man.
5. Invested reasonably in key states—Biden's problem now is he invested heavily in IA and NH despite his chances of winning those states being abysmal from day one.
6. Even though it probably hurt her, a lot of her messaging was amazing. Her Wealth Tax messaging was great, her talk about abortion rights was great, and her speech in Atlanta about the role of black woman activists in American history set the bar for outreach.
 

BADMAN

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
2,887
I mean she initially did say who cares.

CNN then asked Bernie and the rest is history. Neither of them handled it well; Warren should have just dropped it amd Bernie should have been noncommittal as she was.
Oh man, as I typed my counter argument I started reliving the dark times of that part of the election. Let's just agree to disagree lol
 

Heromanz

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
20,202
Warren had a uphill battle since the beginning. Being the second most progressive person in the Democratic race really isn't a good spot to be in. and that's the campaign went on she tried to be in the middle of moderates and sanders. And it really didn't work.
 

jviggy43

Banned
Oct 28, 2017
18,184
The NH exit polls had people split saying she was too liberal or not liberal enough with just 7% saying she was just right. Not entirely sure how you can avoid something like that. It's a mind blowing stat for sure.

The only mistake Warren really made was launching M4A plan and it not being Sanders plan, during a time when the moderate candidates were going all in on attacking M4A. Not only did Warren start to drift around that time, but overall support for the concept of M4A did with it. The fact that she couldn't avoid being targeted by Pete and Amy at every turn probably had a bigger effect on her than any change in strategy she consciously made.



1. Focused on presenting a long list of detailed and achievable policy. Helped bring a lot of concepts into the popular discussion such as universal childcare and a wealth tax.
2. Refused to lie or obfuscate about how to pay for that policy. Even though this likely hurt her more than anything.
3. Focused heavily on retail politics. Everything from the selfie lines to the phone calls to donors.
4. Avoided—until CNN stepped in—making the campaign about her being a woman. Although inevitably it was going to come up, and there's no way to avoid it short of being born a man.
5. Invested reasonably in key states—Biden's problem now is he invested heavily in IA and NH despite his chances of winning those states being abysmal from day one.
6. Even though it probably hurt her, a lot of her messaging was amazing. Her Wealth Tax messaging was great, her talk about abortion rights was great, and her speech in Atlanta about the role of black woman activists in American history set the bar for outreach.
1& 2. But going down this road only resulted in hurting her. You can agree its good to actually have an idea of how to pay for these things but its had a negative impact on her campaign.
3. Not sure this had a tangible effect on her campaign one way or the other.
4. I don't see why it would be a positive to not bring this up. In fact I'd this could have been a positive for her campaign to acknowledge. I agree the CNN townhall incident wasn't a great way to get her to come around on this.
5. Erm but is this an actual good move? Because she tanked enough in the first two states that now the narrative around her is shes drowning in the water and has pulled ads and cut staff in Nevada and SC. Idk how we could say right now that this was a smart move unless she seriously rebounds on super tuesday or something.
6. I actually liked all of this stuff and I'm not sure this hurt her to be honest. I think what actually hurt her was some of the aforementioned stuff you and I both brought up.

I feel like her campaign worked for you and for others but certainly hasn't been something I would call good in terms of winning her this race or winning over people in general. Which might be where the disagreement lies.
 
Oct 25, 2017
7,523
This is where she really excels. I don't agree with Warren being too timid/lacking bite, she's shown over and over again the she's got fire in her.

IMO, her camp should be preparing to rip into Bloomberg. She's got nothing to lose and people love seeing that side of her when they feel like it's a legitimate attack.

Yeah going all in on Bloomberg is a no-brainer.
 
OP
OP
TheHunter

TheHunter

Bold Bur3n Wrangler
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
25,774
The NH exit polls had people split saying she was too liberal or not liberal enough with just 7% saying she was just right. Not entirely sure how you can avoid something like that. It's a mind blowing stat for sure.

The only mistake Warren really made was launching M4A plan and it not being Sanders plan, during a time when the moderate candidates were going all in on attacking M4A. Not only did Warren start to drift around that time, but overall support for the concept of M4A did with it. The fact that she couldn't avoid being targeted by Pete and Amy at every turn probably had a bigger effect on her than any change in strategy she consciously made.



1. Focused on presenting a long list of detailed and achievable policy. Helped bring a lot of concepts into the popular discussion such as universal childcare and a wealth tax.
2. Refused to lie or obfuscate about how to pay for that policy. Even though this likely hurt her more than anything.
3. Focused heavily on retail politics. Everything from the selfie lines to the phone calls to donors.
4. Avoided—until CNN stepped in—making the campaign about her being a woman. Although inevitably it was going to come up, and there's no way to avoid it short of being born a man.
5. Invested reasonably in key states—Biden's problem now is he invested heavily in IA and NH despite his chances of winning those states being abysmal from day one.
6. Even though it probably hurt her, a lot of her messaging was amazing. Her Wealth Tax messaging was great, her talk about abortion rights was great, and her speech in Atlanta about the role of black woman activists in American history set the bar for outreach.
This.

She's also somehow been the most open talking about race related issues. (of the one's left) (and not PRing it like Butti and Bloomy)
 
OP
OP
TheHunter

TheHunter

Bold Bur3n Wrangler
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
25,774
Why are any progressives fighting/disagreeing right now?

Obliterate Bloomberg first, circular firing squad second.
 

BADMAN

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
2,887
Why are any progressives fighting/disagreeing right now?

Obliterate Bloomberg first, circular firing squad second.
Bernie already won the battle for the progressives in terms of numbers. And if you look at Bernie and Warren's campaign, they've already moved on to obliterating Bloomberg since he has the softest support out of all the candidates.
 

Stinkles

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
20,459
Media continues to be the number one expression of the problem with money in politics. Not just Citizens United- but the Invisible Hand too - where earnest prime time reporters try their damndest to explain to the country why we're in a crisis of unprecedented existential danger- then try to "balance " that take by pretending there's an alternative viable position and knowingly giving airtime to doubt-sowing bullshit - and their parent companies make bank from the crisis eyeballs.

and that's just the ten percent of "liberal " reporting. Then self fulfilling prophecies like squawking about Bloomberg's ad spend while repeating them for free.

meanwhile self-confessed executive branch anarchy fetishist Barr is doing consigliere murders on fifth avenue in broad daylight and it is discussed as "it's possible his rebuke is part of a strategy and many of the things he said aren't necessarily factual "

the abuse of "first amendment " as somehow protecting hate speech and knowing lies means that "fairness doctrine " now sounds like "no knock gungrab raids by black helicopters "

Our constitution doesn't define the culture, our constitution is a quaintly worded series of non binding 18th century poems that is interpreted through the lens of a culture that is created and ratified by the media.

oh well
 

Surfinn

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
28,590
USA
Why are any progressives fighting/disagreeing right now?

Obliterate Bloomberg first, circular firing squad second.
Are you talking about the conversation happening in here? Providing and examining criticism is how you grow; progressives can do multiple things at once.

I expect Warren and Sanders to both go pretty hard at Bloomberg, though they must be extremely smart about their approach so not to make unforced errors.
 

Crocodile

Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,071
I don't get why there is so much debate about what is a pretty clear timeline to me:

-She flubs the DNA test at the start of the campaign
-She runs a pitch perfect campaign from months after that point
-The media, that loves a comeback story, writes glowing material
-Eventually she gets relentlessly pressured to reveal how she'd "pay for M4A" (in a way Bernie never did)
-At the height of her polling, she decides to actually be responsible and show how she could pay for M4A without raising middle class taxes
-At the height of her polling some bad (and I think somewhat misleading) H2H polling v Trump is revealed showing she does worse against Trump than Biden and Sanders
-At the height of her polling, both the center and left stop seeing her as a compromise and rather as a threat to their side. She gets attacked from both sides. Random billionaires also started to pile on.
-Media starts to get bored of the "Warren rising" narrative
-As a result of all of the above, her polling starts to decline
-Trump insanity, impeachment, etc. makes people even more scared about what's "electable" which further hurts
-Diet sexists/"progressives" lose their shit about that 2018 meeting between Warren and Sanders. She tries to lean into her gender to counter the narrative. Probably hurt more than helped?
-Media REALLY wants to make Pete and Amy things which drains her "moderate" support and actually trying to explain her M4A plan + the gender talk drain her "left" support
-We end up where we are

I don't think Warren has made zero mistakes but she didn't end up here because she's dumb or sucks :/

FWIW, Warren trying to explain her M4A plan only made me want to vote for her more. But I guess I'm interested in little things like "how will you actually make your ideas into legislation?" :P
 

adam387

Member
Nov 27, 2017
5,215
The NH exit polls had people split saying she was too liberal or not liberal enough with just 7% saying she was just right. Not entirely sure how you can avoid something like that. It's a mind blowing stat for sure.
This is another one of those times you really shouldn't just believe things you either saw on Twitter/reddit or someone just posted from Twitter/Reddit. It's mind blowing because it's not the actual stat.
warrem.png

These are the actual numbers. Either someone deliberately posted that to...idk get a dig? Or someone at MSNBC just typed them wrong in one chyron because they were fixed later.
 

Vector

Member
Feb 28, 2018
6,641
Warren did not run a perfect campaign by any stretch of the imagination - she faceplanted right out the gate with the DNA thing, managed to correct course and actually rose to the top when she was fervently defending her progressive positions on the debate stage, bungled her healthcare messaging to the point where both moderates and progressives were super confused then kinda faded into the background while trying to make a weird kind of alliance/association with Klobuchar of all people?

I strongly believe Warren is at her best when she's making the case for her proposals without any political calculations (like "try to sell M4A to people without mentioning raising taxes on the middle class") - in like 80% of cases her advisors/her calculations are wrong and it ends up backfiring on her. I fear it's too late now, but I strongly believe she would be the frontrunner right now if she wasn't so eager to get all those former Obama staffers on her team and just stuck to the basics.
 

Deleted member 24149

Oct 29, 2017
2,150
Crocodile said:
-We end up where we are

I don't think Warren has made zero mistakes but she didn't end up here because she's dumb or sucks :/

FWIW, Warren trying to explain her M4A plan only made me want to vote for her more. But I guess I'm interested in little things like "how will you actually make your ideas into legislation?" :P
She started sucking when she backtracked on her Medicare for all plan and then faded in with the rest of the shitty candidates by positioning herself as the unity candidate like some of us don't remember Obama.

It might have made you excited but it turned me off and shut me out of her campaign.
 

xenocide

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,307
Vermont
This is another one of those times you really shouldn't just believe things you either saw on Twitter/reddit or someone just posted from Twitter/Reddit. It's mind blowing because it's not the actual stat.
warrem.png

These are the actual numbers. Either someone deliberately posted that to...idk get a dig? Or someone at MSNBC just typed them wrong in one chyron because they were fixed later.

I only saw the initial claim in several different places. Glad to see the reality is less dire.

I don't get why there is so much debate about what is a pretty clear timeline to me:

-She flubs the DNA test at the start of the campaign
-She runs a pitch perfect campaign from months after that point
-The media, that loves a comeback story, writes glowing material
-Eventually she gets relentlessly pressured to reveal how she'd "pay for M4A" (in a way Bernie never did)
-At the height of her polling, she decides to actually be responsible and show how she could pay for M4A without raising middle class taxes
-At the height of her polling some bad (and I think somewhat misleading) H2H polling v Trump is revealed showing she does worse against Trump than Biden and Sanders
-At the height of her polling, both the center and left stop seeing her as a compromise and rather as a threat to their side. She gets attacked from both sides. Random billionaires also started to pile on.
-Media starts to get bored of the "Warren rising" narrative
-As a result of all of the above, her polling starts to decline
-Trump insanity, impeachment, etc. makes people even more scared about what's "electable" which further hurts
-Diet sexists/"progressives" lose their shit about that 2018 meeting between Warren and Sanders. She tries to lean into her gender to counter the narrative. Probably hurt more than helped?
-Media REALLY wants to make Pete and Amy things which drains her "moderate" support and actually trying to explain her M4A plan + the gender talk drain her "left" support
-We end up where we are

I don't think Warren has made zero mistakes but she didn't end up here because she's dumb or sucks :/

FWIW, Warren trying to explain her M4A plan only made me want to vote for her more. But I guess I'm interested in little things like "how will you actually make your ideas into legislation?" :P

This is actually a pretty solid timeline of how things played out.
 

Deleted member 24149

Oct 29, 2017
2,150
This is another one of those times you really shouldn't just believe things you either saw on Twitter/reddit or someone just posted from Twitter/Reddit. It's mind blowing because it's not the actual stat.
warrem.png

These are the actual numbers. Either someone deliberately posted that to...idk get a dig? Or someone at MSNBC just typed them wrong in one chyron because they were fixed later.
FWIW here's the chyron

ynofixcj4ig41.png
 

Crocodile

Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,071
She started sucking when she backtracked on her Medicare for all plan and then faded in with the rest of the shitty candidates by positioning herself as the unity candidate like some of us don't remember Obama.

It might have made you excited but it turned me off and shut me out of her campaign.

Obama? You mean the most popular Democrat in the country who would crush Trump and every other Dem if he could run again? Unfortunately it seems nobody in this field has the chops to pull it off in times this polarized but it's a great gameplan in most circumstances. Obama got both young and old people of all races to love him. Most candidates nowadays seem to be having trouble doing that.

Anyway, I hope you're happy with whatever Public Option you'll get when Sanders (if he wins) passes whatever Joe Manchin lets him pass. Seriously. I don't want to hear you complain about a bill if its legit good but isn't M4A.
 

Deleted member 24149

Oct 29, 2017
2,150
Anyway, I hope you're happy with whatever Public Option you'll get when Sanders (if he wins) passes whatever Joe Manchin lets him pass. Seriously. I don't want to hear you complain about a bill if its legit good but isn't M4A.
What? I have no idea where this argument started but I want no part of it.
 

Vector

Member
Feb 28, 2018
6,641
Obama? You mean the most popular Democrat in the country who would crush Trump and every other Dem if he could run again? Unfortunately it seems nobody in this field has the chops to pull it off in times this polarized but it's a great gameplan in most circumstances. Obama got both young and old people of all races to love him. Most candidates nowadays seem to be having trouble doing that.

Anyway, I hope you're happy with whatever Public Option you'll get when Sanders (if he wins) passes whatever Joe Manchin lets him pass. Seriously. I don't want to hear you complain about a bill if its legit good but isn't M4A.
Trying to run an Obama-esque campaign isn't gonna work in this day and age unless you're an incredibly gifted politician. We've already had candidates attempt it and they all ended up in Loserville (see: Beto and Kamala, with Warren going through the same thing at the moment)

The only one who is sort of sticking (but not for long presumably) is Mayor Pete, who tried really hard to walk that fine line between appearing progressive and moderate, but his shtick got exposed because he's no Obama and people are significantly more informed this time around.

The truth is, if you strongly believe in something and make the case for it over and over again, it's bound to land with some people; that's why Republicans can still find success despite having horribly unpopular policies. Klobuchar, for all her faults, didn't even attempt to walk that line and is relentlessly lame and moderate and it's kinda working out for her because at least she stands for something.
 

Crocodile

Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,071
What? I have no idea where this argument started but I want no part of it.

Sanders sticking closer to a M4A plan that has no chance of passing through Congress (Warren's also had next to no chance but it had a better chance by actually doing the math) doesn't strike me as a virtue. I'm hoping you're not as disappointed when Sanders doesn't pass M4A or anything close to it as you are for Warren "backing away" from it. Hopefully that point is more clear?

Trying to run an Obama-esque campaign isn't gonna work in this day and age unless you're an incredibly gifted politician. We've already had candidates attempt it and they all ended up in Loserville (see: Beto and Kamala, with Warren going through the same thing at the moment)

The only one who is sort of sticking (but not for long presumably) is Mayor Pete, who tried really hard to walk that fine line between appearing progressive and moderate, but his shtick got exposed because he's no Obama and people are significantly more informed this time around.

The truth is, if you strongly believe in something and make the case for it over and over again, it's bound to land with some people; that's why Republicans can still find success despite having horribly unpopular policies. Klobuchar, for all her faults, didn't even attempt to walk that line and is relentlessly lame and moderate and it's kinda working out for her because at least she stands for something.

Oh yeah I know an Obama type campaign is going to be hard to pull off in this environment. I said as much. I'm just saying if there was a candidate that could pull if off, they would probably be on track to beat Trump by like 10 whereas a Biden or Sanders is probably really lucky if they get a 5 point win (though maybe negative partisanship will carry the day).

As an aside, I'm not sure how much "stand for something" means in this primary. Pete is leading in delegates and I think he's proven to be the most flexible with his positions of all of the candidates :P
 

Y2Kev

Member
Oct 25, 2017
13,838
I think warren started pretty poorly but I think she largely faded once people started paying attention to her. She got pressure to reveal how she'd pay for m4a but she insisted on using the costs framing that flopped like a Christina Aguilera album. I think if Bernie said "yeah your taxes aren't going up" he'd get some scrutiny. But I dunno. I think you can't really attribute a candidate's failures to a campaign. I don't think warren is the right candidate for the country and I don't think any positioning or maneuvering changes that.
 

Tamanon

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
19,729
Honestly, I'm not sure 2008 Obama would beat Trump. He did have some bonuses. Not as much exposure for terrible optics like Reverend Wright, as social media was slower in spreading shut. Also, McCain was ultimately an honorable guy that didn't go to half the places Trump would.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.