Elizabeth Warren: Is Hillary Clinton a Progressive?

[Baobab]

[elleng]

1. 'We gotta see.'

Compare with Biden's 'endorsement' of Sanders' way.

[HooptieWagon]

2. No. She's a neocon.

[GoneFishin]

3. No, she is not a progressive. Good TYT segment.

[CoffeeCat]

4. What Elizabeth said is exactly what Bernie just said

Bernie recently said that if he would endorse Clinton, he would first need to understand more clearly and have assurances about how HRC would govern. In other words, he wouldn't just give an endorsement away.

Warren is saying the exact same thing when asked about Clinton's Progressivism. She said we'll have to see, and that's what campaigns are about.

Clinton and Warren are trading barbs.

Hillary hit Warren with that shot across the deck in that WaPo article, about not choosing Warren as VP; and digging further about Warren's views, which were cast in a negative light. Warren never indicated she wants to be considered for VP; she hasn't even endorsed Clinton--which is precisely why the "We wouldn't pick Warrren anyway" slam was made publicly.

Nice, huh?

[Pharaoh]

8. ^^this^^

[leveymg]

10. The only way Warren would accept VP would be to replace HRC as nominee.

I get the sense there may be some maneuvering by others to do just that in anticipation of the Comey Report. The FBI is going to find Hillary violated her security agreement.

[CoffeeCat]

11. I was actually wondering

if they aren't paving the way for Biden. Look at all of the very public, wonderful things that Biden has said about Bernie.

Biden/Bernie?

I share your assessment. I think she's toast.

[shalafi]

5. Not only no,

but FUCK NO.

She is not Presidential material. She's an walking, talking bag of scandals and waste of everyone's time.

[onecaliberal]

7. ^^^That^^^

[Baobab]

15. The more people see of her the more they dislke her

Also, Americans don't like being manipulated.

[bkkyosemite]

6. Sanders/Warren 2016

[rhett o rick]

9. pleez no. The VP slot would be a waste on Warren. Leave her in the Senate.

[Baobab]

12. The banking industry, which has Hillary's ear more thn any other, hates Warren

there is no way Hillary would run with Warren. And vice versa. the two are as different as they come.


I expect Hillary to pick a man, not a woman.

Realistically, Hillary would not want anybody with more respect than she has so her choice of candidates is very slim.

In fact I cannot think of anybody. Also, frankly, who would want to run with her when the chance of having your career destroyed by a scandal is high.

Al Gore - has he endorsed Hillary? Just curious.

[jpmonk91]

14. No

Hillary is for Reaganomics. That's not liberal at all

[Baobab]

16. "globalism"

According to a fellow DUer, in the 1980s she was an advocate for this: (this paper is about the WTO Services Agreement which has provisions to do this that have been stalled repeatedly going back the last 20 years but now they are included in more recent trade deals, you can read the text on wikiileaks)

For a deeper understanding of how migration could equalize the price of labour in two trading
countries, consider figure one (from Senior Nello, 2005:145): There are two countries, Home
and Foreign. The total quantity of labour in the two countries is shown by the distance OhOf.
Before a fully free migration is allowed the distribution of labor is OhL in Home and OfL in
Foreign. The marginal product of labour is higher in Home than in foreign because the
capital/labor ratio is higher in Home. This is shown in the figure by the higher position of the
MPLh curve compared to the MPLf curve. Because of this the wage is higher in Home, at Wh
compared with the wage in Foreign at Wf. In short: Home symbolizes a developed country with
high automatization and high wages and Foreign a less developed country with abundant supply
of labour, low automatization and low wages. If migration is fully free between the two
countries and the workers are identical workers will migrate from Foreign to Home in pursuit of
higher wages. The migration will finally result in an equalized capital/labor ratio in the two
countries and thus equal marginal products of labor and equal wages, illustrated in the figure by
the wage level W' which could be seen as the world market price of labor as the world only
consists of the two countries Home and Foreign. The migration is illustrated in the figure by the
distance LL' which is the amount of workers that will move from Foreign to Home so that the
new distribution of labour becomes OhL' in Home and L'Of in Foreign.

Wages will thus decrease in Home and increase in Foreign resulting in a loss for the indigenous
workers in Home illustrated in the figure by the area a but a gain for the capital owners of the
areas a+b. In Foreign the workers get an increased income of areas c+d+e while the capital
owners lose areas d+e. The result in total is a net gain for the two countries by areas b+c which
is a gain resulting from higher efficiency in the use of the total resources of the two countries.
This simplified model of reality shows not only that there is a net gain but also that the
migration has clear redistributional effects, something that will be discussed below

[jillan]

17. This whole meme her campaign is going with of Warren being her VP pick is ludicrous!

On so many levels, but the biggest being Warren stands for everything Hillary is not.