Elizabeth Warren: "This isn't about me. This is about the issues..."

[kpete]

Wednesday, December 18, 2013
Chris Hayes asks the right questions, Elizabeth Warren gives the right answers.
by David Atkins

Chris Hayes and Elizabeth Warren had a great conversation. Chris Hayes rightly calls out the Democratic Party for failing to do enough about the decline of the middle class over the last 40 years, and Elizabeth Warren gives the right answers:



My favorite part of the conversation is this, wherein Warren explains the history of the struggling middle-class and the fundamentally broken and unsustainable economy in which we live.

WARREN: This isn't about me. This is about the issues, about what's happening to America's families. America's middle class, America's hard working families have been hammered on for a generation now. And it's not just one problem. It's one after another after another. They've been hit with flat wages or even slightly declining wages. And all the core expenses of being middle class, of housing, of healthcare, of what it costs to keep a child in daycare or send a kid to college, to medical care. All of those costs have shot through the roof. That has put a squeeze on these families. They sent as many people as they could into the workforce, in two-parent families, they sent both Mom and Dad or both Moms into the workforce, but it still wasn't enough. They turned to debt and then they were targeted by a credit industry that figured out you could make huge profits from lending to people who were already in a financial squeeze. And so what's happened is that America's middle class has just been under this enormous pressure, and parts of it are beginning to break apart. Our once steady, solid, almost dull middle class, that was the idea. We were so sure it would always be there. Pieces are starting to break away. Families can no longer say to their kids, "you're going to do better than I did." And that's what it is we have to attack.

HAYES: Senator, here's my question. The trend you're talking about and have been tracking and are trying to address in legislation like this and other pieces of legislation you've introduced, these are 30 to 40 year trends.

WARREN: Yep.

HAYES: I mean, we've seen this kind of system, this sort of version of American capitalism, and the Democratic Party has been in power during periods in which that has exacerbated. Democrats voted for the bankruptcy bill which you opposed strenuously. I don't know if Democrats have done enough to combat this. Has the Democratic Party focused enough on this core issue?

WARREN: Look, the question is what are we going to do going forward? We have to outline our priorities and we have to be willing to get in there and fight for them. And that's what all of this is about. It's about how we fight for our college kids, the ones who are trying to get an education and being crushed by student loan debt. It's about how we fight for seniors to protect Social Security and to help people get more money into retirement savings. And in this particular case with this bill, it's how we fight for people who have been hit with one economic blow or another and are out there trying to compete in the job market and just want a level playing field. You're right, the pieces come together because a lot is broken, and it's going to take a lot of pieces to get it fixed again.

The reason there's a big movement to draft Elizabeth Warren for President is simply that she gets it. She understands the history. She doesn't pay lip-service to the middle class while actually pushing for higher asset growth and broad social equality. She understands that the economy is fundamentally broken and requires big changes for the middle class to survive.

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2013/12/chris-hayes-asks-right-questions.html

[el_bryanto]

1. That was a pretty loaded question there

"Senator Warren would you like to blame your fellow Democrats so we can paint you as out of tune with the party, and so that you can offend the people you'll need to work with in the future."

Fortunately she doesn't rise to the bait.

Bryant

[kpete]

2. i thought so too...

peace,
kp

[1StrongBlackMan]

8. Much to the disappointment of some "Democrats" here at DU ...

I loves me some EW!

[Le Taz Hot]

3. This woman is SO in need of national exposure.

We on DU take it for granted that everyone knows who she is and what she's all about. We're news junkies, political junkies, the rest of the country isn't and I'll bet most of the rest of the country has never heard of her.

In her plain-spoken way, can you imagine if she had a wider audience? Her message is one of populism and I'm convinced that it will appeal to a very broad swatch of Americans.

This woman needs to run for president in 2016.

[daleanime]

4. +1

[BeyondGeography]

5. I saw that, and it made me more convinced than ever she's fine right where she is

Her life's work is giving a clear context and a powerful voice to addressing the central civilizational challenge of our time, which is inequality of income and opportunity on the one hand, rising costs of the basics (housing, health care and education) on the other. You could do far worse than a senatorial platform for that endeavor.

If she were to take on the Clintons, she could highlight these issues even further, but she would also be playing a lot of defense. I will not enumerate the ways in which she would be undermined, criticized and marginalized by her opponent, who will be supported by a front-running mainstream media (while she, Warren, is forced to go through the exhausting and probably ultimately fruitless process of building a national organization and trying to compete financially). But, suffice it to say that I fear her message would run the risk of being severely compromised in ways it isn't now.

For these and other reasons, I believe her when she says she isn't running. Let Hillary and Bill go for the White House, stay on the sidelines where they will need her approval, a process that wouldn't stop at all if Hillary wins as Warren would remain the most popular, and powerful, progressive voice on the Hill.

I'm also fine if she runs, and would support her, but I really don't think she will.

[HereSince1628]

11. The appeal to financial backers, rather then the desires of voters explains it all.

Democracy as such, doesn't and can no longer exist. Both progressives and the tea-party recognize it and hate it, while blaming different parts of the same dinosaur.

Meanwhile, the monied interests encourage conflict between voters on the left and right as it diverts attention from their abuses

[Eleanors38]

6. She is in a quandry. To get national exposure, she must appeal to MSM.

And the only way they will let her play is if she runs for president. Oh, they will still treat her hostilely, but they will eventually have to cover her.

Alternative: She becomes the "leader" in some fashion of a populist movement, coalesced in an as-yet unknown manner around, in, over or through a never-before-tried New Media vehicle which displaces the fading corporate MSM.

Now, why is NSA so interested in social media?

[bvar22]

12. The Media will do worse than that.

SEE: Howard Dean

SEE: John Edwards

The Media can and WILL use anything, even something as innocent as cheering too enthusiastically to tell America that the individual isn't fit to be President,
and our nation of sheep will follow along without question.
Yes... even most Democrats can be led by the nose.

"They" have had 70 years to develop Marketing and Image Packaging into a predictable Science,
and to train several generations of Americans to respond to their programing.

[Dustlawyer]

7. I wish she had answered the question about other Democrats.

She could have said the most are bought off by campaign cash and called for us to hit the streets to demand publicly funded elections and campaign finance reform! That would shake things up and do more good than anything else!
Regardless, I love this woman!

[1StrongBlackMan]

9. That is exactly why ...

we need her (and many more like her) in the Senate, where she can write the necessary legislation and call the necessary hearings.

My only reservation to the draft EW "movement" is the Presidency is much bigger than managing the economy ... and I know next to nothing about her foreign policy and other domestic policy stances.

[loudsue]

10. But as president, her hands would be tied more. She would have all these foreign powers to deal

with, the MIC to deal with. Distractions everywhere. What we need is her voice right where she is. And a president that she can WORK WITH to move forward. Someone for president who is able to rein in the military spending and drug wars and corporate totalitarianism without getting assassinated.