Elizabeth Warren: "I am not running for president." Um, does it get any clearer? See link:

[RBInMaine]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/12/04/elizabeth-warren-i-am-not-running-for-president/


Now, can we please stop the insanity. She is NOT running. And this is just ONE time she has said so. There are many others. In August she disavowed "Ready for Warren" and AGAIN publicly announced she wasn't running.

Is it the "NOT" or the "RUNNING" that people don't understand? Again, enough of the wasted energy nonsense on this. She isn't running. Time to remember that the planet Earth and not fantasyland is under our feet, and move on. Warren is wonderful in her zeal against the big banks and on other progressive issues, but she isn't running. Plain and simple. Time to move on.

[Enrique]

1. she is not running now

she might run later.

She "plans" to complete her term. Plans change.

[RBInMaine]

4. She isn't running. Time to grow up, deal with it, and end the insanity on this.

[Enrique]

13. you are speculating

aggressively, like the way the people do when they're talking about sports.

I'm not doing that, I'm just thinking back to previous elections, where certain people hadn't announced yet, and they keep getting asked if they're running, and they have to hedge their answers. They sound a lot like Warren's answers in your OP.

[VanillaRhapsody]

22. actually YOU are the one speculating....SHE said she isn't running multiple times!

[House of Roberts]

2. The best person for the job is the one who doesn't want it,

but is the best qualified.

Fuck moving on.

Yogi Berra: It ain't over 'til it's over.

[RBInMaine]

5. She isn't running and has said so. Do you think she is lying? Please, stop the insanity.

[NanceGreggs]

3. No, it's still murky.

Yes, she said "I am not running."

But she DIDN'T say "I will not run, ever, ever, ever, no matter what, cross my heart and hope to die." And there are NO photos/videos available to prove that she didn't have her fingers crossed behind her back when she said she wasn't running.

In other words, (at least for some here), she is still wide open to the idea of running, and is probably planning her announcement speech even as I type.

[RBInMaine]

6. In other words, many here are having a problem understanding plain English. Sad isn't it?

[NanceGreggs]

10. Well, yeah ...

Having a problem understanding plain English - there seems to be a lot of that going around lately. On all kinds of topics.

[leftofcool]

15. Yes, it is sad.

Usually, no means no, but here on DU, no means, "maybe", "wishful thinking", "she might", and a whole host of other words/phrases that mean everything but no.

[VanillaRhapsody]

23. She is a woman...Fiddle dee dee.....everyone knows they are all just fickle...

[sofa king]

71. Oh no, it's not that!

Part of the problem is "I'm not running for President" is also the way someone kicks off a campaign for President.

For example, Mitt Romney just said the exact same words. But when is the last time Mitt told the truth about anything, eh? And so what can we conclude from that?

Currently, Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton are not running for President. George W. Bush was not running for President while he was collecting a giant pile of foreign money with which to (illegally) run for President. And so on.

You'd be a fool to trust a politician no matter how well you like them, so a claim that one is not doing something is just as likely to be a declaration that they are, because they're all full of shit!

[VanillaRhapsody]

72. NOT when a FRIEND of yours is going to run....her friend Hillary Clinton....

you guys are losing it over this....

It smells of desperation....

[1StrongBlackMan]

25. I guess ...

"NO" really doesn't mean "NO" ...if you REALLY want the other person to do something.

Where have I heard that before?

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

28. From police, from the draft, from salesmen...

From lots of people who really want something, whether that something is something good or something bad.

From civil rights leaders, who refused to accept things like 'No blacks in the front of the bus' or 'No Irish need apply'.

While it might be 'cute' to compare people trying to get Elizabeth Warren to announce that she's running to rapists, I think it's a tactic that's below you.

[joshcryer]

32. Actually, she pledged not to run.

“I pledge to serve out my term,” which ends in January 2019, Warren said, when pressed during a news conference in Boston with Mayor-elect Martin J. Walsh.

When asked whether she welcomed the speculation about a potential White House run or found it annoying, Warren said it was fine if it would help her advance her populist issues.

“I am not running for president,” she said. “I am working as hard as I can to be the best possible senator that I can be and to fight for the things that I promised during my campaign to fight for. I’m fighting for bank accountability. I’m fighting hard to help rebuild america’s middle class and I’m glad to see any possible energy put behind those fights.”

http://www.boston.com/politicalintelligence/2013/12/04/elizabeth-warren-says-presidential-run-pledge-serve-out-term/I61F7TQ8vBf8qEzhBHrlRL/story.html

People are just idiots. Warren doesn't strike me as a pledge breaker.

[bravenak]

7. Yet?nt

[RBInMaine]

8. It is insane to dismiss REPEATED plain English. She isn't running, at least on this planet.

[bravenak]

9. It will continue until all candidates have announced.nt

[Kalidurga]

11. I wish she would name some names

if she isn't going to run she could at least tell us who she really really likes as an alternative.

[leftofcool]

14. She has already stated that she will support Hillary if she decides to run.

[mazzarro]

16. And, we the professional left, don't trust or like Hillary - n/t

[former9thward]

33. No she didn't.

She and the rest of the Democratic women in Congress signed a letter encouraging Clinton to run. It was not an endorsement.

[VanillaRhapsody]

24. She HAS Hillary Clinton.....Some just refuse to believe that...because they refuse to believe

Hillary is a Liberal...

Strongly Favors topic 1:
Abortion is a woman's unrestricted right
(+5 points on Social scale)

Lift ban on stem cell research to cure devastating diseases: Favors topic 1
Respect Roe v. Wade, but make adoptions easier too: Favors topic 1
Alternatives to pro-choice like forced pregnancy in Romania: Strongly Favors topic 1
Must safeguard constitutional rights, including choice: Favors topic 1
Remain vigilant on a woman’s right to chose: Favors topic 1
Keep abortion safe, legal and rare: Favors topic 1
Being pro-choice is not being pro-abortion: Favors topic 1
Supports parental notice & family planning: Opposes topic 1
No abortion for sex selection in China: Opposes topic 1
Voted liberal line on partial birth & harm to fetus: Favors topic 1
Endorsed Recommended by EMILY's List of pro-choice women: Favors topic 1
Rated 100% by NARAL, indicating a pro-choice voting record: Strongly Favors topic 1
Expand embryonic stem cell research: Favors topic 1
Sponsored bill providing contraceptives for low-income women: Favors topic 1
Sponsored bill for emergency contraception for rape victims: Favors topic 1
Rated 0% by the NRLC, indicating a pro-choice stance: Strongly Favors topic 1
Provide emergency contraception at military facilities: Favors topic 1
Ensure access to and funding for contraception: Favors topic 1
Focus on preventing pregnancy, plus emergency contraception: Favors topic 1
NO on prohibiting minors crossing state lines for abortion: Strongly Favors topic 1
NO on defining unborn child as eligible for SCHIP: Favors topic 1
NO on banning partial birth abortions except for maternal life: Strongly Favors topic 1
NO on criminal penalty for harming unborn fetus during other crime: Favors topic 1
YES on $100M to reduce teen pregnancy by education & contraceptives: Favors topic 1
NO on notifying parents of minors who get out-of-state abortions: Favors topic 1
YES on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines: Favors topic 1

Strongly Favors topic 2:
Legally require hiring women & minorities
(-5 points on Economic scale)

Some world leaders are still misogynistic: Favors topic 2
Some world leaders are still misogynistic: Favors topic 2
We’ve come a long way on race, but we have a long way to go: Strongly Favors topic 2
Apologize for slavery, but concentrate on civil rights now: Favors topic 2
Human rights are women’s rights: Neutral on topic 2
Women’s rights are human rights: Favors topic 2
OpEd: "18 million cracks" meant "lingering sexism": Strongly Favors topic 2
Equal pay is not yet equal: Strongly Favors topic 2
1988: Instituted gender diversity Report Card within ABA: Strongly Opposes topic 2
Argued with Bill Clinton about diluting affirmative action: Strongly Favors topic 2
Shift from group preferences to economic empowerment of all: Neutral on topic 2
Sponsored bill maintaining role of women in armed forces: Favors topic 2
Rated 96% by the NAACP, indicating a pro-affirmative-action stance: Strongly Favors topic 2
Recognize Juneteenth as historical end of slavery: Strongly Favors topic 2
Re-introduce the Equal Rights Amendment: Strongly Favors topic 2
Reinforce anti-discrimination and equal-pay requirements: Favors topic 2
Ban discriminatory compensation; allow 2 years to sue: Favors topic 2
Sponsored bill enforcing against gender pay discrimination: Strongly Favors topic 2

Strongly Favors topic 3:
Comfortable with same-sex marriage
(+5 points on Social scale)

Increase America’s commitment against Global AIDS: Favors topic 3
I re-evaluated & changed my mind on gay marriage: Favors topic 3
DOMA discrimination holds us back from a more perfect union: Strongly Favors topic 3
I support gay marriage personally and as law: Strongly Favors topic 3
Let states decide gay marriage; they’re ahead of feds: Favors topic 3
2004:defended traditional marriage; 2006:voted for same-sex: Strongly Favors topic 3
Federal Marriage Amendment would be terrible step backwards: Favors topic 3
Gays deserve domestic partnership benefits: Strongly Favors topic 3
Military service based on conduct, not sexual orientation: Favors topic 3
More funding and stricter sentencing for hate crimes: Strongly Favors topic 3
Rated 89% by the HRC, indicating a pro-gay-rights stance: Strongly Favors topic 3
Provide benefits to domestic partners of Federal employees: Strongly Favors topic 3
YES on adding sexual orientation to definition of hate crimes: Strongly Favors topic 3
NO on constitutional ban of same-sex marriage: Strongly Favors topic 3

No opinion on topic 4:
Keep God in the public sphere
(0 points on Social scale)

Partner with faith based community in empowerment zones: Strongly Favors topic 4
Tap into churches to avoid more Louima & Diallo cases: Favors topic 4
Community involvement helps, but only in short term: Favors topic 4
Link payments to good parenting behavior: Opposes topic 4
Allow student prayer, but no religious instruction: Opposes topic 4
Character education: teach empathy & self-discipline: Favors topic 4
Change what kids see in the media: Favors topic 4
Co-sponsored bill to criminalize flag-burning: Favors topic 4
Rated 0% by the Christian Coalition: an anti-Family-Value voting record: Strongly Opposes topic 4
Rated 100% by the AU, indicating support of church-state separation: Strongly Opposes topic 4
NO on recommending Constitutional ban on flag desecration: Opposes topic 4

Strongly Favors topic 5:
Expand ObamaCare
(-5 points on Economic scale)

Outcry if AIDS were leading disease of young whites: Favors topic 5
Lower costs and improve quality and cover everybody: Strongly Favors topic 5
Supply more medical needs of families, & insure all children: Strongly Favors topic 5
Medicare should be strengthened today: Favors topic 5
Smaller steps to progress on health care: Favors topic 5
Guaranteed benefits & focus on prevention: Neutral on topic 5
2006: If I can't do universal coverage, why run?: Strongly Favors topic 5
Universal health care will not work if it is voluntary: Strongly Favors topic 5
Universal health care coverage by the end of my second term: Strongly Favors topic 5
We need a uniquely American solution to health care: Favors topic 5
Health care initiatives are her first priority in Senate: Strongly Favors topic 5
Establish "report cards" on HMO quality of care: Favors topic 5
Invest funds to alleviate the nursing shortage: Favors topic 5
Let states make bulk Rx purchases, and other innovations: Opposes topic 5
Rated 100% by APHA, indicating a pro-public health record: Strongly Favors topic 5
Preserve access to Medicaid & SCHIP during economic downturn: Strongly Favors topic 5
NO on means-testing to determine Medicare Part D premium: Favors topic 5
NO on funding GOP version of Medicare prescription drug benefit: Favors topic 5
NO on $40 billion per year for limited Medicare prescription drug benefit: Opposes topic 5
YES on increasing Medicaid rebate for producing generics: Favors topic 5
YES on negotiating bulk purchases for Medicare prescription drug: Strongly Favors topic 5
YES on expanding enrollment period for Medicare Part D: Favors topic 5
NO on limiting medical liability lawsuits to $250,000: Opposes topic 5
YES on requiring negotiated Rx prices for Medicare part D: Favors topic 5
YES on overriding veto on expansion of Medicare: Favors topic 5

Strongly Opposes topic 6:
Privatize Social Security
(-5 points on Economic scale)

1997: Hillary warned against privatizing Social Security: Strongly Opposes topic 6
Soc.Sec. one of greatest inventions in American democracy: Strongly Opposes topic 6
Social Security protects families, not just retirees: Strongly Opposes topic 6
All should join the debate now to preserve future solvency: Opposes topic 6
Create Retirement Savings Accounts: Favors topic 6
Rated 100% by the ARA, indicating a pro-senior voting record: Strongly Opposes topic 6
NO on establishing reserve funds & pre-funding for Social Security: Opposes topic 6

Strongly Opposes topic 7:
Vouchers for school choice
(-5 points on Economic scale)

OpEd: Common Core recycled from Clintons in 1980s and 1990s: Strongly Opposes topic 7
Fully fund special education & 21st century classrooms: Strongly Opposes topic 7
Supports public school choice; but not private nor parochial: Opposes topic 7
Vouchers drain money from public schools: Strongly Opposes topic 7
Fight with Gore for public schools; no voucher “gimmicks”: Strongly Opposes topic 7
Charter schools provide choice within public system: Opposes topic 7
Vouchers siphon off much-needed resources: Strongly Opposes topic 7
Parents can choose, but support public schools: Opposes topic 7
Supports public school choice and charter schools: Favors topic 7
Solemn vow never to abandon our public schools: Strongly Opposes topic 7
Offer every parent Charter Schools and public school choice: Opposes topic 7
Rated 82% by the NEA, indicating pro-public education votes: Strongly Opposes topic 7
YES on funding smaller classes instead of private tutors: Opposes topic 7
YES on funding student testing instead of private tutors: Opposes topic 7
YES on $5B for grants to local educational agencies: Opposes topic 7

Strongly Opposes topic 8:
No 'rights' to clean air and water
(+5 points on Social scale)

$5B for green-collar jobs in economic stimulus package: Opposes topic 8
Voted against and consistently opposed to Yucca Mountain: Strongly Opposes topic 8
Scored 100% on Humane Society Scorecard on animal protection: Strongly Opposes topic 8
Remove PCBs from Hudson River by dredging 200 miles: Opposes topic 8
Rated 89% by the LCV, indicating pro-environment votes: Strongly Opposes topic 8
EPA must do better on mercury clean-up: Opposes topic 8
Grants for beach water pollution under Clean Water Act: Opposes topic 8
Strengthen prohibitions against animal fighting: Strongly Opposes topic 8

Opposes topic 9:
Stricter punishment reduces crime
(+2 points on Social scale)

Longtime advocate of death penalty, with restrictions: Strongly Favors topic 9
Address the unacceptable increase in incarceration: Opposes topic 9
Mandatory sentences have been too widely used: Strongly Opposes topic 9
Give kids after-school activities to prevent gangs: Opposes topic 9
Spend more time with kids to prevent violence: Opposes topic 9
Supports citizen patrols & 3-Strikes-You’re-Out: Favors topic 9
Supports “Three Strikes” and more prison: Strongly Favors topic 9
End hate crimes and other intolerance: Favors topic 9
Require DNA testing for all federal executions: Opposes topic 9
Increase funding for "COPS ON THE BEAT" program: Opposes topic 9
Reduce recidivism by giving offenders a Second Chance: Strongly Opposes topic 9
YES on reinstating $1.15 billion funding for the COPS Program: Opposes topic 9

Strongly Opposes topic 10:
Absolute right to gun ownership
(-5 points on Economic scale)

Rein in idea that anybody can have a gun anywhere, anytime: Strongly Opposes topic 10
Against illegal guns, crack down on illegal gun dealers: Opposes topic 10
Get assault weapons & guns off the street: Strongly Opposes topic 10
Background check system could prevent Virginia Tech massacre: Opposes topic 10
Congress’ failure at Littleton response inspired Senate run: Opposes topic 10
Limit access to weapons; look for early warning signs: Opposes topic 10
License and register all handgun sales: Strongly Opposes topic 10
Gun control protects our children: Strongly Opposes topic 10
Don’t water down sensible gun control legislation: Strongly Opposes topic 10
Lock up guns; store ammo separately: Strongly Opposes topic 10
Get weapons off the streets; zero tolerance for weapons: Opposes topic 10
Prevent unauthorized firearm use with "smart gun" technology: Opposes topic 10
NO on banning lawsuits against gun manufacturers for gun violence: Strongly Opposes topic 10
NO on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers: Strongly Opposes topic 10

Strongly Favors topic 11:
Higher taxes on the wealthy
(-5 points on Economic scale)

Rescind tax cuts for those making more than $250,000 a year: Strongly Favors topic 11
Pay down debt & cut taxes within balanced budget: Favors topic 11
GOP tax plan would hurt New York’s students: Favors topic 11
Rated 21% by NTU, indicating a "Big Spender" on tax votes: Strongly Favors topic 11
Rated 80% by the CTJ, indicating support of progressive taxation: Strongly Favors topic 11
NO on raising the Death Tax exemption to $5M from $1M: Strongly Favors topic 11
NO on allowing AMT reduction without budget offset: Favors topic 11
YES on reducing marriage penalty instead of cutting top tax rates: Favors topic 11
YES on spending $448B of tax cut on education & debt reduction: Favors topic 11
NO on $350 billion in tax breaks over 11 years: Strongly Favors topic 11
YES on extending the tax cuts on capital gains and dividends: Strongly Opposes topic 11
YES on $47B for military by repealing capital gains tax cut: Favors topic 11
YES on retaining reduced taxes on capital gains & dividends: Strongly Opposes topic 11
NO on permanently repealing the `death tax`: Strongly Favors topic 11
NO on supporting permanence of estate tax cuts: Strongly Favors topic 11
NO on raising estate tax exemption to $5 million: Strongly Favors topic 11
NO on repealing the Alternative Minimum Tax: Strongly Favors topic 11

Favors topic 12:
Pathway to citizenship for illegal aliens
(+2 points on Social scale)

Introduce a path to earn citizenship in the first 100 days: Strongly Favors topic 12
Consider halting certain raids on illegal immigrant families: Favors topic 12
Deporting all illegal immigrants is unrealistic: Strongly Favors topic 12
Illegal immigrants with driver’s licenses puts them at risk: Opposes topic 12
Oppose granting driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants: Opposes topic 12
More border patrolling on both Mexican AND Canadian borders: Opposes topic 12
Anti-immigrant bill would have criminalized Jesus Christ: Strongly Favors topic 12
Sanctuary cities ok; local police can’t enforce immigration: Favors topic 12
Comprehensive reform to get 12 million out of shadows: Strongly Favors topic 12
Sponsored bill covering child resident aliens under Medicaid: Favors topic 12
Sponsored bill funding social services for noncitizens: Favors topic 12
Rated 8% by USBC, indicating an open-border stance: Strongly Favors topic 12
YES on continuing federal funds for declared "sanctuary cities": Strongly Favors topic 12
YES on allowing illegal aliens to participate in Social Security: Strongly Favors topic 12
YES on giving Guest Workers a path to citizenship: Strongly Favors topic 12
YES on establishing a Guest Worker program: Favors topic 12
YES on building a fence along the Mexican border: Strongly Opposes topic 12
YES on eliminating the "Y" nonimmigrant guestworker program: Neutral topic 12
NO on declaring English as the official language of the US government: Strongly Favors topic 12
YES on comprehensive immigration reform: Strongly Favors topic 12

Favors topic 13:
Support & expand free trade
(+2 points on Economic scale)

Chief advocate for Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP): Strongly Favors topic 13
TPP agreement creates more growth and better growth: Favors topic 13
Smart, pro-American trade: NAFTA has hurt workers: Strongly Opposes topic 13
No fast-track authority for this president: Opposes topic 13
Defended outsourcing of US jobs to India: Favors topic 13
1980s: Loved Wal-Mart's "Buy America" program: Opposes topic 13
Globalization should not substitute for humanization: Opposes topic 13
Supports MFN for China, despite concerns over human rights: Strongly Favors topic 13
Build a rule-based global trading system: Favors topic 13
Rated 17% by CATO, indicating a pro-fair trade voting record: Strongly Opposes topic 13
YES on removing common goods from national security export rules: Favors topic 13
YES on granting normal trade relations status to Vietnam: Favors topic 13
NO on extending free trade to Andean nations: Strongly Opposes topic 13
YES on establishing free trade between US & Singapore: Favors topic 13
YES on establishing free trade between the US and Chile: Favors topic 13
NO on implementing CAFTA for Central America free-trade: Strongly Opposes topic 13
YES on free trade agreement with Oman: Strongly Favors topic 13

Opposes topic 14:
Maintain US sovereignty from UN
(-3 points on Economic scale)

US support & no-fly zone, but UN troops on ground in Darfur: Strongly Opposes topic 14
Support UN reform because US benefits: Opposes topic 14
Engage in world affairs, including human rights: Strongly Opposes topic 14
Keep Cuban embargo; pay UN bills: Opposes topic 14
2002 Iraq speech criticized both Saddam and U.N.: Opposes topic 14
2002: Attacking Iraq "not a good option" but authorized it: Favors topic 14
Urged President to veto UN condemnation of Israel: Favors topic 14
Voted against Levin Amendment: it gave UN veto over US: Favors topic 14
Dems believe in fighting terror with cooperation: Strongly Opposes topic 14
Restore habeas corpus for detainees in the War on Terror: Opposes topic 14
YES on preserving habeas corpus for Guantanamo detainees: Strongly Opposes topic 14
YES on requiring CIA reports on detainees & interrogation methods: Strongly Opposes topic 14
NO on removing need for FISA warrant for wiretapping abroad: Strongly Opposes topic 14

No opinion on topic 15:
Expand the military
(0 points on Social scale)

There is no safe haven for the terrorists: Favors topic 15
Our troops are stretched; so increase size of military: Favors topic 15
Rated 100% by SANE, indicating a pro-peace voting record: Strongly Opposes topic 15
Extend reserve retirement pay parity back to 9/11: Favors topic 15
Improve mental health care benefits for returning veterans: Favors topic 15
YES on requiring on-budget funding for Iraq, not emergency funding: Opposes topic 15
YES on limiting soldiers' deployment to 12 months: Opposes topic 15

Strongly Favors topic 16:
More enforcement of the right to vote
(+5 points on Social scale)

Presidents should reveal donations to their foundations: Strongly Favors topic 16
Voter suppression revives old demons of discrimination: Favors topic 16
Stand for public financing and getting money out of politics: Strongly Favors topic 16
Move to public election financing, not banning lobbyists: Strongly Favors topic 16
Verified paper ballot for every electronic voting machines: Favors topic 16
Called for ban on all soft money in 2000 campaign: Favors topic 16
Prohibit 'voter caging' which intimidates minority voting: Favors topic 16
YES on banning campaign donations from unions & corporations: Favors topic 16
YES on banning "soft money" contributions and restricting issue ads: Favors topic 16
NO on establishing the Senate Office of Public Integrity: Opposes topic 16
NO on allowing some lobbyist gifts to Congress: Strongly Favors topic 16

Favors topic 17:
Stay out of Iran
(+2 points on Social scale)

OpEd: More aggressive than most Dems on foreign policy: Opposes topic 17
Smartest strategic choice is peace: Favors topic 17
Extend peace treaties to Palestinians, Syrians & Lebanese: Favors topic 17
Foreign aid spending is only 1%; lead by remaining engaged: Strongly Favors topic 17
Up to the Iraqis to decide the future they will have: Favors topic 17
Demand Bush to explain to Congress on his plan on Iraq: Favors topic 17
Deauthorize Iraq war, and don’t grant new war authority: Strongly Favors topic 17
Phased redeployment out of Iraq, beginning immediately: Strongly Favors topic 17
Withdraw troops within 60 days after taking office: Strongly Favors topic 17
Voted for Iraq war based on available info; now would not: Favors topic 17
Progressive Internationalism: globalize with US pre-eminence: Favors topic 17
No troop surge: no military escalation in Iraq: Strongly Favors topic 17
Require Congress' approval before military action in Iran: Favors topic 17
YES on authorizing use of military force against Iraq: Strongly Opposes topic 17
NO on redeploying troops out of Iraq by July 2007: Strongly Opposes topic 17
YES on redeploying US troops out of Iraq by March 2008: Strongly Favors topic 17

Strongly Favors topic 18:
Prioritize green energy
(-5 points on Economic scale)

$100B per year by 2020 for climate change mitigation: Strongly Favors topic 18
$100B per year by 2020 for climate change mitigation: Strongly Favors topic 18
Remove energy dependence on countries who would harm us: Strongly Favors topic 18
Stands for clean air and funding the EPA: Favors topic 18
Reduce air pollution to improve children’s health: Favors topic 18
Ratify Kyoto; more mass transit: Strongly Favors topic 18
Supports tradable emissions permits for greenhouse gases: Favors topic 18
Keep efficient air conditioner rule to conserve energy: Strongly Favors topic 18
Establish greenhouse gas tradeable allowances: Strongly Favors topic 18
Rated 100% by the CAF, indicating support for energy independence: Favors topic 18
Designate sensitive ANWR area as protected wilderness: Favors topic 18
Set goal of 25% renewable energy by 2025: Strongly Favors topic 18
Let states define stricter-than-federal emission standards: Strongly Favors topic 18
Gas tax holiday for the summer: Opposes topic 18
NO on terminating CAFE standards within 15 months: Strongly Favors topic 18
YES on targeting 100,000 hydrogen-powered vehicles by 2010: Strongly Favors topic 18
YES on removing consideration of drilling ANWR from budget bill: Favors topic 18
YES on reducing oil usage by 40% by 2025 (instead of 5%): Strongly Favors topic 18
YES on disallowing an oil leasing program in Alaska's ANWR: Strongly Favors topic 18
YES on banning drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge: Favors topic 18
YES on factoring global warming into federal project planning: Favors topic 18
YES on removing oil & gas exploration subsidies: Strongly Favors topic 18

Opposes topic 19:
Never legalize marijuana
(+2 points on Social scale)

Medical marijuana now; wait-and-see on recreational pot: Opposes topic 19
Medical marijuana maybe ok; states decide recreational use: Opposes topic 19
Divert non-violent drug offenders away from prison: Strongly Opposes topic 19
Address drug problem with treatment and special drug courts: Strongly Opposes topic 19
End harsher sentencing for crack vs. powder cocaine: Opposes topic 19
Require chemical resellers to certify against meth use: Favors topic 19

Strongly Favors topic 20:
Stimulus better than market-led recovery
(-5 points on Economic scale)

Wealthy should go back to paying pre-Bush tax rates: Favors topic 20
Want to restore the tax rates we had in the ‘90s: Favors topic 20
Help people facing foreclosure; don’t just bail-out banks: Strongly Favors topic 20
Minimum wage increases haven’t kept up with Congress’ wages: Strongly Favors topic 20
Co-sponsored bills totaling $502B in spending thru 2005: Strongly Favors topic 20
End Bush tax cuts;take things away from rich for common good: Favors topic 20
Social issues matter; wrong time for tax cuts: Strongly Favors topic 20
Use tax dollars to upgrade infrastructure, not for stadium: Strongly Favors topic 20
America can afford to raise the minimum wage: Strongly Favors topic 20
Just Say No to GOP tax plan: Strongly Favors topic 20
YES on increasing tax rate for people earning over $1 million: Strongly Favors topic 20

[AtomicKitten]

37. Please stop spamming this wall of text.

Why can't you just link to it?

You post these all the time and their length makes it obnoxious.

[blkmusclmachine]

68. +1

[cheapdate]

40. Thank you for that.

By most accounts, people who know her describe her as warm and compassionate. She's widely seen as a competent and effective leader.

Like Barack Obama, she's a conventional Democratic politician with a conventional outlook on government and society. She's not a molotov cocktail throwing radical. I'd rather vote for an actual eco-anarchist radical like Dave Foreman or Derrick Jensen, but sadly they will not be on the ballot.

I'll vote for Hillary without hesitation is she's the party's nominee.

[Faryn Balyncd]

12. What is it about the present tense that you don't understand?

[RBInMaine]

45. If that is your argument you are truly scraping the bottom of the proverbial barrel.

My goodness, is that your argument? Do you really think she wasn't talking about NOT running in 2016? Sorry, but that is insanity.

[djean111]

17. Why are you so vehement about this? I promise you, those of us who would love Warren to run

are NOT going to shrug and say, oh, well, is there room for me on the Hillary bandwagon.
Personally, I want Warren or someone LIKE Warren, I do not see Hillary as an acceptable alternative, and, since we are two years out,
no need to stop hoping.
And, um, you really don't get to tell others to stop doing anything, you do not have the authority to tell people to move on, but you do get to just not click on Warren-related OPs, or, I believe, you can set things up so that anything with Warren in the headline does not show up for you.

Insanity is thinking that you can tell other DUers what to do, IMO.

[earthside]

30. Signs of insecurity.

Indeed, the Hill-nuts do protest too much.

I think they must fear at some deep level that Hillary is the same flawed candidate she was in 2008; that she is center-right; that she is too connected to Wall Street; that she is still Alice Walton's favorite Democrat; that the Rose law firm and Whitewater are still part of her political baggage; etc.

Otherwise, why would they be so insistent that we all just throw-up our hands, give-up on a draft movement and not be eager activists for a potential candidate we really like?

Are they are so politically naive not to know that a seemingly reluctant candidate is always the most appealing candidate? Warren at this point is certainly being smarter and more agile than Hillary Clinton. If I were Warren and had decided to run, this is exactly how I would be building my support against an establishment, corporate campaign machine like Clinton's.

I think that the OP itself is a warning sign of what the Hillary campaign means: a kind of steamroller, inevitability strategy that, if not challenged for the nomination, will spell certain defeat in November 2016.

[tweeternik]

35. ...

Thank you!

[RBInMaine]

44. I am vehement about living on the planet Earth and not in an alternative universe.

She isn't running and has said so repeatedly. On what planet do you live?

[djean111]

54. On a planet where another person does not get to dictate what I should hope for.

As a matter of fact, hearing that Jamie Dimon personally called members of Congress, to seal a deal on a bill that Citigroup wrote? - That seems like pure Clinton stuff to me, and now I do not feel I can ever support her, and I am questioning what the Democratic Party stands for. This is difficult for me, because I had been thinking that hey, the Dems in Washington are just in a difficult place, but now, somehow, I see complicity. This is waaaaay past something that pointless scolding from a member of DU can fix, believe me.
Oh, and like I said, I am for anyone not like Hillary. You have no idea who else I would support. And being enthusiastic about Warren is pretty much the only way to send a message to the DNC these days, they have all the money they need from the likes of Jamie Dimon.

[RBInMaine]

61. Rational people put their hopes in realities and not fantasies. She isn't running. Deal with it.

Your life won't end with the absolutely undeniable reality that she isn't running. Adults deal in reality.

[magical thyme]

18. It gets clearer when she adds "in 2016," or "now or ever," or "in this lifetime or the next."

Present tense is just that. Especially in the world of politics. Stating that "I am not running" one week does not preclude stating, the following week, "last week I was not running. this week I am." It also does not preclude being drafted and accepting.

She is a brilliant person and a brilliant communicator. She understands the difference.

[RBInMaine]

46. That argument is beyond ridiculous. She has repeatedly said she isn't running. Please, enough crazy.

[magical thyme]

57. what is your problem? why are you so afraid of even the slightest possibility of her running?

Or of some anonymous stranger on the internet thinking she might run?

Seriously, you're the crazy one. Why do you even give a flying fuck what a few dozen or hundred anonymous posters on the internets think?

[RBInMaine]

62. If she ran, great. That's obviously not the point. But she is not running,so YOU stop the insanity.

You don't get it. If she ran I would be thrilled. Bring her on. The POINT is that she IS NOT RUNNING. It is absolute and undeniable. So let's stop the insanity of this nonsense and all these posts about Warren running, because she is NOT running. THAT is the point.

I have a right to my views as much as the others constantly pumping this fantasy about Warren, and plenty of people here agree with me. It is called a forum and exchange of opinions and ideas. That is what this forum is about. I have the right to refute all these silly crazy posts about Warren running for President as they do posting them.

If you don't like it, tough.

[magical thyme]

63. you're the one who doesn't get it. what is the point of your thread?

very strange.

[postulater]

19. Scott Walker isnt running either. But that doesnt

stop me from opposing him.

[polichick]

20. You're sounding more and more desperate about this. Shakin' in yer boots!

[RBInMaine]

42. Sounds like you are having difficulty understanding plain and repeated English.

Do you need an English lesson? Is it the "NOT" or the "RUNNING" you don't understand? I would welcome her to the race IF she were RUNNING. But she isn't. Case closed.

[polichick]

58. Your consternation about the subject is way over the top - telling.

[Boomer]

21. For her sake, I hope she doesn't run

I wouldn't wish the presidency on anyone I admire and respect. It's a grueling, thankless job with a weight of responsibility and surrounded by constraints.

Elizabeth Warren has too much integrity to be president.

But if she DID run, I'd vote for her in a heartbeat.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

26. It very easily gets clearer.

The minute she adds 'Nor will I run for President in 2016'.

A lot of politicians parse every word they say very carefully. She has steadfastly kept her statements about running in present tense.

And they are true. She is not currently running for President.

Will she? We don't know for certain until she says either 'Now I am' or 'I WILL not', or the deadline to register passes without her so doing.

And no matter how many times she says it in present tense, that doesn't change.

[RBInMaine]

43. Oh my. That's your argument? It would be easier to argue with a dining room table.

Sorry, but your response is just not grounded in any sense of reality.

[Cal33]

27. "the planet Earth and not fantasyland is under our feet, and move on." Move on to WHAT? There is

something you don't seem to understand. Many of us think that should the Repubs. take over all three branches
of Government in 2016, this time they would make an all-out push for killing Democracy in our nation, and
installing an Oligarchic Dictatorship in its stead. They did not do so the last time under GW Bush because they
did not think a coup at that time would have been successful. So they bided their time. But today, they are
much stronger than they were 8 years ago.

For the Repubs. to win in 2016, it might very well mean the death of Democracy as we've known it. For the
Third-way to win, death of Democracy in our nation would be delayed for a while. -- hopefully it will be delayed
long enough until future elections would produce a government that will produce REAL change.

I am all for changing right now, because time is not on our side. Elizabeth Warren, in my opinion, is the best
person to do it. If she won't run, I'd be glad to have some other people who are willing to try: Sanders, Franken,
Grayson, Biden, O'Malley......

You probably don't think our Democracy is that close to death. Well, I do. And I don't wish to witness it without
putting up a fight. The best that the Third Way can do is to prolong the death of Democracy in America by a little.
It has shown to be a failure. We need more than the Third Way. We need total change, or our goose will be cooked!

[1StrongBlackMan]

29. I keep reading about "the death of democracy" ...

and republicans doing an all-out push for killing Democracy in our nation, and installing an Oligarchic Dictatorship in its stead.

Do you really think the establishment of an oligarchic dictatorship is going to be a political process?

[Cal33]

34. Aren't most Republicans and many Democrats already working for Corporate America? As the saying

goes: "Who, do you think, is really ruling America?" Aren't they already having many of our government
people in their payroll and telling them what to do? These are the guys and dolls who never run for public
office themselves. They prefer to be behind the scenes, pulling the strings. The public officials jump when
Corporate America tells them to jump. We have already been described as being a totally corrupt nation
today.

I think America reached its height of development during World War II and for the decade after WW II.
Europe was in shambles, and the Marshall Plan helped to rebuild Europe. Other nations over the globe
received our help, too. We were highly regarded the world over.

Probably beginning with Johnson and Nixon, large-scale corruption and crooked ways and means began to
be used more and more often. Corporations have always been trying to corrupt the nation since way back
when. Teddy Roosevelt fought against them, and was partially successful. But they were gaining in power
under the Republican presidents that followed. (Teddy Roosevelt began as a Republican president, but he
eventually quit that Party). FDR came along and pushed them back again. Eisenhower didn't do too much,
but he did warn the nation to "beware the Military-Industrial Complex." Kennedy was assassinated -- he
apparently was too independent, and avoided getting America into wars large-scale, which was what the
MIC wanted. Johnson complied. Then came Nixon.

I believe the corporations have been gaining in political power more and more ever since. I think they will
strike when they find that conditions are right. I do admire their patience and long-term planning abilities in
all areas, both big and small.

For example: The top 5% of the nation own something like 90% of the wealth of the nation today. This took
a long time to achieve, but things are accelerating in the last few decades. They control 90% of the news
media, and are able to lie convincingly to about half of the nation. The Democrats have nothing to compete
with in this area. They've managed to keep a large portion of the American people misinformed and dumbed
down. The quality of our school system has become abysmal. Dumbed-down people are more easily
controlled.

As for some other areas: (1) I sometimes wonder why have our police departments been militarized - any
ulterior motives in their minds? (2) Why does the National Rifle Association go to such extreme lengths to
try to prevent reasonable laws from being enacted, such as the sale of all kinds of deadly automatic weapons
to civilians - weapons that are never used to hunt animals with? (3) Many Democrats don't own guns. Could
we say the same of Republicans? If it should come to a conflict between the two, who will have the advantage?

Yes, the Republicans have been planning for all of this into extreme lengths and details since a long, long time.
And they never stop planning.

[RBInMaine]

48. Move on to the fact she isn't running and to stopping this insane nonsense.

[Cal33]

59. I have already moved on. If she doesn't run, there are other Progressives and Liberals. I've

mentioned Sanders, Franken, Grayson, O'Malley. In the meantime I'm hoping Elizabeth would
change her mind.

I would even vote for Hillary, if she should be the one to run against the Republicans. So, what
is your beef?

[Bjorn Against]

31. It is ridiculous to see people get so worked up about this

The primaries are more than a year away, if Warren wants to join the race she will run and if she does not want to run her supporters will find someone else to vote for on primary day.

Either way there is no reason to get upset at her supporters for trying to encourage her to run. Whether Warren decides to run or not I am sure that she is honored to have so many people saying they want her to be the next President.

It seems to me the people who get so insistent that she will not run and demand people stop suggesting her as a candidate are doing so because they know that if Warren were to run she would be a very formidable challenger to Hillary. I think Hillary supporters are terrified of the possibility of a Warren candidacy and they want to do everything they can to make sure people stop encouraging her to run.

Warren will make the final decision however, not Hillary supporters. If she wants to run she will announce at some point in the next several months, if she doesn't announce her supporters will find someone else.

[Cal33]

38. "I think Hillary supporters are terrified of the possibility of a Warren candidacy ...." You're

probably right.

[Autumn]

36. PSA This is a December 4, 2013 article. Because it irritates a few folk here to post old articles

without the disclaimer, I'm hoping she has spent the last year thinking and will change her mind. I do love that picture of her. Anything is possible.

[RBInMaine]

49. Please read things. This is ONE time. She has said it repeatedly including last summer. ENOUGH.

[Autumn]

60. I understand how you feel. Ive had more than enough myself.

That's why I'm a Bernie Sanders supporter.

[AtomicKitten]

39. Present tense. Not a Shermanesque statement.

Hell, maybe Al Gore will run. That would be vewy, vewy interesting.

[RBInMaine]

51. She has REPEATEDLY said it. It is insane to think she doesn't mean 2016.

[AtomicKitten]

69. So you're saying there's a chance?

[Jamaal510]

41. People

on other political sites probably laugh at us as some DUers still argue about EW running, despite her saying no more than once. I don't expect all the speculations to stop until the primaries officially start and EW is nowhere to be seen on the campaign trail. Also at this point, if she were to change her mind, it would look bad anyway, and her potential opponents could paint her as a flip-flopper and as dishonest.

[RBInMaine]

50. Yup.The crazy train just keeps on chugging no matter how many times they're presented with reality

[De Leonist]

52. There is already a named and known Progressive running for President in 2016

and that would be the one and only Bernie Sanders. From what I understand Warren and Sanders are pretty close in political positions so maybe the Warren crowd would be better off putting it's energy there.

Just a thought.

[djean111]

55. If Bernie declares, I will be there. The people whose hair is on fire about Warren support really

want a clear field and total submission to a Hillary candidacy. If Bernie officially declares, the eye of Mordor will turn to him and start intoning that Bernie has not got a chance, what planet are we from.

[djean111]

56. I would submit that bein unpleasant to people and calling them crazy gets exactly ZERO support for

any other candidate.

No skin off your nose what other people are doing two years out, you know, and you are not the Thought Police.
Right now, the stridency of this sort of thing makes me feel that the people getting all insulting and officious are not a group I want to be a part of. Sort of desperate-sounding, really. If you don't want to read about Warren support - then don't read about Warren support. That seems so fucking simple.

[RBInMaine]

64. It is CRAZY when people deny the deniable. If you don't like THAT "then don't read it."

If you want to be in denial when Warren repeatedly says she is not running, then be in that denial. But yes, that is completely irrational thinking. It is like saying on a bright sunny day that the sun isn't shining. That's crazy. And there is no other way to describe it.

I know it is hard for some people to accept undeniable reality. But that it what rational adults do. Warren isn't running. How do I know? Because she has REPEATEDLY SAID SO WITH HER OWN MOUTH. It's on the record, REPEATEDLY. What more do you need? In fact, at this point if she changed her mind she would look STUPID. If you want to waste time and energy on pipe dreams that's your right, but it's certainly not rational behavior.

[djean111]

65. Noted. And ignored. You should really calm down about this.....

and yeah, it is my right. And I don't think you get to decide what is rational - next thing you know, I will be told to support Hillary because of a poll two years out. Now THAT is not rational, given what happened with her last time out.
Hey, cheer up - Warren supporters will likely go to some other Progressive or liberal or non-Corporate would-be candidate who actually declares. Warren, at this point, is symbolic. Can't you understand that?

[still_one]

53. First of all the article is from 2013, and that should be made clear because people can change their

mind within a year, however, in interview after interview she has reiterated that she will not run for President in 2016.

Regardless, of that, you will not convince a "true believer" that she will not run. In fact I believe even if all the nominee announced, and debated, there would still be a faction that would believe that she would still get drafted at the convention.

I agree it isn't going to happen, the best reason being is because she wants to stay in the Senate for sometime. She realizes that she can get the most accomplished and make a real difference doing what she is doing for some time. Eventually, after she has spent at least a couple of terms in the Senate things may change, but she knows her best chance to get the changes she wants done are as a Senator

[Fearless]

66. Neither is Hillary. Now.

[world wide wally]

67. ...and some people have greatness thrust upon them.

[Kablooie]

70. That's only one persons opinion.

she might be wrong.