It occurs to me that it would be very good for Warren to give a strong & vocal defense of Biden.

[elocs]

Let's face it, at this point the race seems to be primarily between Biden and Warren who are polling neck and neck with one another while other candidates are collectively a distant third.
I think it could only help her to vigorously defend Biden against all Trump charges against him aside from being the right thing. It's one thing for Democrats to be critical of one another but when someone from the outside comes against any one of them they all need to stand together in defense of that person. This would emphasize how all of us on the Left need to stand behind, support without reservation, and vote for the nominee of the Democratic Party.

[Voltaire2]

1. How about we focus on Trump instead?

There is no need to defend Biden, and in fact it just plays into Trump's game plan.

[emulatorloo]

3. Trump's game plan is to damage Biden and soon Warren

Dems candidates need to stand up to that.

[blm]

5. Trump thought he killed off Warren's campaign last winter.

She fought back on her own.

She attacked Trump for what he did. She doesn’t have to make a show of protecting Biden and Biden wouldn’t want that when his campaign wants to bring back centrist Dem men who voted for Trump.

[emulatorloo]

6. Ok.

[Cha]

9. Warren would be "protecting" our Democracy..

Biden can stand up for himself.

I know you don't see it that way but that's the way I see it.

I know Joe Biden would be standing up for her by name.. and it may yet come to that.. First they came for Joe Biden and I did... ?

[blm]

10. Which is why she lashed out at Trump's actions on Ukraine.

Last edited Fri Oct 4, 2019, 08:08 PM - Edit history (1)

She shouldn’t make it about protecting Biden when Biden’s campaign is about reaching out to centrist male voters who voted for Trump in 2016.

First Trump went after Warren and thought he was rid of her. I recall lots of Dems and media saying that Trump succeeded.

I think Warren is handling it well by respecting Biden’s campaign plan while attacking Trump for the actions he took.

“After the Mueller report, Congress had a duty to begin impeachment. By failing to act, Congress is complicit in Trump’s latest attempt to solicit foreign interference to aid him in US elections. Do your constitutional duty and impeach the president,” Warren wrote.

The senator from Massachusetts also wrote that the president of the United States is committing crimes while in office with impunity. “A president is sitting in the Oval Office, right now, who continues to commit crimes. He continues because he knows his Justice Department won’t act and believes Congress won’t either. Today’s news confirmed he thinks he’s above the law. If we do nothing, he’ll be right,” she said.

[Cha]

13. Oh year.. I figured it was about "politics" when

it's actually about our Democracy.

Senator Harris knows better and I respect her for that.

[blm]

17. Well, Warren supporters have been told for months that rust belt men won't

Vote for her or any woman, but, they would vote for Biden, so we need to make Biden the nominee. Since Biden’s campaign plan is to get those votes of former Trump voters, then they would be glad Warren is respecting their campaign by NOT making it a show of defending Biden, and, instead, making it a general attack on Trump’s lawlessness and his attack on our democracy.

We all stand by Biden against Trump. It IS about democracy and Warren made her statement against Trump’s attack on our democracy without attempting to be seen as protecting Biden, whose campaign does NOT want that image of needing protection.

You guys need to keep your snipes at Warren straight. If you want it posted every day that she can’t get rust belt Trump voters while only Biden can, then his campaign sure as heck doesn’t want to be seen as needing defense from that same liberal woman.

[Cha]

28. Adam Schiff says it best..

Link to tweet

Btw, if EW wins the Nom I will most enthusiastically work and vote for her.

[blm]

31. I said it's about democracy, too. I don't know why you think Warren

or Schiff need to defend Biden personally instead of maintaining their focus on Trump’s attacks on our democracy, our norms, and our laws.

Warren slams Trump’s lawlessness reUkraine and some people think that opens the door to attacking her for respecting Biden’s campaign plan that includes rust belt men who don’t see women as viable leaders.

As far as I know the campaigns want to be seen defending themselves, as Warren did earlier this year, and Biden is doing now.

[Cha]

12. Yes, emulatorloo.. Like Senator Harris has.. I have

no doubt that Joe Biden will be standing up for Senator Warren when it's her turn to get smeared.

The previous smears of EW by trump are nothing compared to when/if she becomes the candidate the gop fear the most.

[Thekaspervote]

35. This!!

[Cha]

7. It's the right thing to do.. this is about

more than Biden it's about our Democracy.

Senator Harris gave a strong defense for Biden and our Democracy.

[emmaverybo]

22. +1000

[blm]

4. She lashed out at Trump's actions.

Biden is doing a good job of defending himself and the lion’s share of media is with him in batting down Trump’s attacks. That is unlike what media did to Hillary where they helped spread Trump’s lies.

Some of the ‘guys’ the Biden campaign hopes to attract away from Trump might view defense from a ‘girl’ as a perceived weakness.

[onetexan]

15. hmm i liked your first couple of sentences. You didn't need to add the "girl" dig.

Both are honorable Senators with have illustrious and accomplished political careers. They do defend one another, albeit they are political candidates running against each other. Note the word Honorable. They are Democrats, not Republicans without a conscience.

[blm]

20. I meant it as sarcasm.

Some Biden supporters here post every day that Warren can’t win rust belt voters who voted for Trump, but, that Biden will get their vote. That’s why I added the sarcastic ‘girl’.

[LakeArenal]

8. Oh geez. Biden doesn't need protection from anyone

Warren doesn’t need help either.

If Democrats would quit smearing Democrats and concentrated all efforts toward trump Nothing dump says about either would matter at all. I’m not sure any thing he says about anything matters beyond 39% of the idiots that idolize trump.

All candidates have the same goal. Visualize that.

[blm]

11. Exactly my point. Thanks.

[jcgoldie]

14. Oh no.. Warren didn't stand up for Biden enough!

weak tea

[Cha]

16. Biden would be standing up for her by name..

And, if EW gets in trump's sights again because he fears her the most I'm sure he will be.

It's about our Democracy that trump is destroying with his extorting Ukraine and China to help smear Biden.

Senator Kamala Harris gets it.

[Thekaspervote]

36. You nailed it!!

[Cha]

41. Mahalo, Kasper.. i appreciate that Senator

Harris gets it!

[Cha]

40. That has NOT one thing to do with this, roody..

you should know better.

[Celerity]

45. 'Biden would be standing up for her by name..'

Sorta like his surrogate Ed Rendell did right before the last debate when he sandbagged her in the WaPo?




I think Biden is more electable than Warren, BUT you cannot have it both ways. It is a two-way street.



https://apnews.com/73de568472154b5ab7c2bf2a671012b5

Biden is heading to Philadelphia later Thursday for a fundraiser. He’s backed by city party elders, including former Gov. Ed Rendell, who once called Biden “Pennsylvania’s third senator” because of his willingness to help Democrats in the state when Pennsylvania had two Republican senators.

I like Elizabeth Warren. Too bad she’s a hypocrite.

By Ed Rendell

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/i-like-elizabeth-warren-too-bad-shes-a-hypocrite/2019/09/11/409d5ed0-d4d3-11e9-86ac-0f250cc91758_story.html

I like Elizabeth Warren. I like her a lot. Too bad she’s a hypocrite.

I think Warren (D-Mass.) has been a great senator, and her work in setting up the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau was terrific. The CFPB is the best protection that ordinary Americans have from financial institutions that prey on them. In fact, I like her so much that when she ran for Senate in 2018, I co-chaired a couple of fundraisers for her and donated a combined $4,500 to her campaign.

Shortly after announcing her candidacy for the Democratic presidential nomination in February, Warren said she would shun high-dollar fundraising events. “That means no fancy receptions or big money fundraisers only with people who can write the big checks,” Warren wrote in an email to supporters.

Now, Warren has every right to make that pledge even if she had obtained significant contributions from donors in the past. Doing that didn’t make her a hypocrite. But there are two other reasons why the description applies.

snip



https://www.phillymag.com/news/2019/09/12/elizabeth-warren-ed-rendell-hypocrite/

snip

And, actually, Rendell admits in the anti-Warren op-ed that Barack Obama was also hypocritical when it came to how he talked about fundraising versus how he actually filled his campaign coffers.

Of course, you don’t get to have a Democratic Party machine-heavy résumé like the one Rendell has without being a hypocrite yourself.

Just last year, columnist Solomon Jones shined a light on Rendell’s own hypocrisy, wondering how Rendell could support safe-injection sites when he had such a strong record of incarcerating crack users back when he was district attorney of Philadelphia.

In 2010, after Obama appeared on The View, Rendell said that such appearances cheapened the office of the presidency. Thanks to Rendell’s ubiquitous appearances on a Philly-based NFL TV talk show, he was labeled a hypocrite for his remarks about Obama.

And Bob Brady, back when he was both a sitting congressman and the head of Philly’s Democratic Party, said that Rendell was a hypocrite after Rendell blasted Brady for not doing enough to curb the power of Philly’s ward leaders. He remarked that Rendell “liked the power of the ward leaders when they were endorsing him for governor and mayor.”

Not to mention the fact that Rendell’s candidate Biden has been blasted as a hypocrite on matters much more serious than anything Rendell could possibly throw at Warren. But who’s keeping score?

snip



Will Bunch, the Pulitzer Prize-winning national columnist for the Philadelphia Inquirer thought even less of it:

Link to tweet

[caraher]

18. I appreciate what Harris has said

But I think there's no one-size-fits-all response, beyond the fact that everyone has to keep the pressure on Trump, and some sound reasons to leave aside the Biden name.

The main problem I see with defending Biden "by name" is that saying anything at all about Biden may suggest that there's actually something there. Every mention of a bogus narrative, even in refutation, elevates its cognitive salience, which in turn can feed "both sides" media coverage. This is a case where there simply aren't two sides. As we all know, Trump's assertions of corruption are completely baseless and can be reasonably classified as "not meriting the dignity of a response."

The full story is Trump's corrupt attempts to abuse his office for personal political gain. As soon as the narrative expands to include Biden, you muddy the waters.

[TidalWave46]

19. I would try to determine what would be best for me politically.

And I would do that.

[highplainsdem]

21. It would be good for ALL our candidates to give a strong and vocal defense of Biden.

IMO it would show character, party loyalty, AND awareness that Trump will go after ANY of our candidates he sees as a threat, so any of them who are doing well could be subjected to the same kind of attacks, which makes it important to show a united front NOW.

Choosing to NOT defend Biden could be interpretend in a lot of ways, few if any of them positive.

[emmaverybo]

23. Agree standing up for Biden, by name, would "show character, party loyalty, AND awareness that

Trump will go after any of our candidates...” A united front will help defeat Trump.A united front
says no, you can’t pick us off that easily.

Trump is depending on candidates to put their political self-interest first even during crisis. Harris and others have pushed back against his cynicism.

Warren has avoided.

[Cha]

30. Since you put it that way! Well stated, emma..

It would put up a "united front".. and then when trump smears comes after any one of the other candidates.. all the Dems can stand up for them by name.

Link to tweet

[pnwmom]

24. She has stood up for Joe. But she also supports strong conflict of interest laws and, unfortunately,

Hunter Biden didn't follow the basic rule of avoiding even the APPEARANCE of a conflict of interest. If he had, the R's wouldn't have any ammunition to throw at his father.

Joe Biden did nothing wrong -- but Hunter should have gotten his father's okay before he got involved in international deal making while his father was VP.

So this situation put her on the spot. She would NOT want her VP to have a son on the board of a foreign country -- but how can she answer this reporter's question (2nd video) without seeming to criticize Biden?

Link to tweet

?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1177004505726107648&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fpluralist.com%2Felizabeth-warren-joe-biden-ukraine%2F

[Cha]

29. Oh yeah.. blame Hunter.. that's helpful..

but not for Democracy.

[blm]

33. It's not blaming Hunter. It's knowing that given the actions of both

Chris Heinz and Hunter Biden, you would prefer that a family member of anyone on your team would consider the APPEARANCE of conflict as it provides fuel for your political enemies.

Hunter didn’t act illegally as far as anyone knows, but, you have to admit that Chris Heinz was the more thoughtful family member here.

Warren shouldn’t change her platform on these issues to accommodate Hunter Biden’s decision. Her platform conforms to the decision made by Chris Heinz.

I think Warren is being very cautious with these questions so she DOESN’T compromise her platform or say anything that could be twisted against Hunter Biden. Reporters are trying to catch any hypocritical moment on the campaign trail. If you can find a way to perfectly explain why Hunter Biden’s decision to enter that deal doesn’t conflict with Warren’s longheld views and current platform, then please post it here and send it to her campaign.

[BeyondGeography]

43. Exactly right

Corruption isn’t just illegal and socially unacceptable, it can also be legal and socially acceptable. Warren is trying to address all of it.

[Thekaspervote]

37. Yup!!

[Cha]

39. That's been tried before, Kasper.. doesn't

work!

[cwydro]

25. I don't think Biden needs defending.

That seems to indicate that there’s something to the idiot’s attacks.

Better to ignore his bullshit; coming to Biden’s “defense” would just make the shitstain happy, knowing he’d hit a Dem nerve.

[Blue_true]

27. Why should she? Joe is doing a good job defending himself. nt

[DrFunkenstein]

34. Remember When Biden Defended Warren Against "Pocahontas" Attacks?

I can't seem to recall that.

[Baclava]

42. Don't tell her what to do! Nobody tells her what to do, she will run her campaign her way

These sideswipe attacks are ridiculous

I smell fear in the air over Liz's powerful surge, lol

[musicblind]

44. I agree, but I don't feel her response has been inappropriate.

She's clearly on Biden's side just as Biden is on her side.