• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Elizabeth Warren for President(?)

Underhill

Underhill

Well-Known Member
esmith said:
Well if Warren ran for President against Hillary she would have to go to the far far left to separate herself from Hillary. Do you really think that she can martial the necessary votes from the far far left to defeat Hillary? Now if Hillary doesn't run, that will open up the Democratic primary to many more contenders who will run to the right of Warren, and again do you think there are enough votes in the far far left to give her the nomination.
My ideal 2016 Presidential field would have Warren for the Democrats, Cruz for the Republicans, and a Libertarian/Independent yet to be determined.
Click to expand...

I remember saying the exact same thing about Obama 8 years ago...
 
esmith

esmith

Veteran Member
esmith said: ↑
Well if Warren ran for President against Hillary she would have to go to the far far left to separate herself from Hillary. Do you really think that she can martial the necessary votes from the far far left to defeat Hillary? Now if Hillary doesn't run, that will open up the Democratic primary to many more contenders who will run to the right of Warren, and again do you think there are enough votes in the far far left to give her the nomination.
My ideal 2016 Presidential field would have Warren for the Democrats, Cruz for the Republicans, and a Libertarian/Independent yet to be determined.
Click to expand...

Underhill said:
I remember saying the exact same thing about Obama 8 years ago...
Click to expand...

However, this is would be a totally different scenario than the 2008 primary. There is no "first" in this instance and neither woman is as glib as Obama is....especially Hillary.
 
Underhill

Underhill

Well-Known Member
esmith said:
However, this is would be a totally different scenario than the 2008 primary. There is no "first" in this instance and neither woman is as glib as Obama is....especially Hillary.
Click to expand...
I agree, but I think Warren is what the people (or at least more people) want. The question is whether or not they will recognize it in the face of the Clinton machine.
 
Revoltingest

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
The Clinton political machine.....
cosby_clinton_2.jpg
 
Monk Of Reason

Monk Of Reason

༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ
I have still been waiting on a good solid argument against her. Hell she even used to be a Republican. Her goal, at least in the past, was to support a strong market and economy first and foremost and then everything else secondary. That way we could actually get to the secondary without simply causing more problems. Then she changed her opinion on the effectiveness of the Republican strategy and went to the Democrats. She actually has decent ideas on how to assist the growth of the economy and to protect its stability.

And I agree with her on the social issues as well. People need more freedom in who they choose to love and what they do in their personal time. Small businesses should not be crushed by massive corporations simply because they can. Ect.
 
Revoltingest

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Monk Of Reason said:
I have still been waiting on a good solid argument against her.
Click to expand...
Looking around the internet, I still don't see much that she actually stands for. And her executive experience looks light...no business, but plenty of giving gubmint hand-outs.
Hell she even used to be a Republican.
Click to expand...
Oh, boy....the embodiment of Big Two politics.
Her goal, at least in the past, was to support a strong market and economy first and foremost and then everything else secondary. That way we could actually get to the secondary without simply causing more problems. Then she changed her opinion on the effectiveness of the Republican strategy and went to the Democrats. She actually has decent ideas on how to assist the growth of the economy and to protect its stability.
And I agree with her on the social issues as well. People need more freedom in who they choose to love and what they do in their personal time. Small businesses should not be crushed by massive corporations simply because they can. Ect.
Click to expand...
Goals are fine things, but the devil is in the implementation agenda.
 
Jayhawker Soule

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
metis said:
Exactly, and the "guilt by association" game simply is so bizarre. Gee, I wonder how many shady people that I have met and talked with over my 69 years? Matter of fact, I think you're one of them! :eek:
Click to expand...
^ Well done! Now get back on vacation.
 
icehorse

icehorse

......unaffiliated...... anti-dogmatist
Premium Member
YmirGF said:
While true, that was before we endured the tenure of Obama. Hopefully, people have learned from this ordeal.
Click to expand...

It's off topic, but you've piqued my curiosity... what Obama-driven hardships have you had to endure?
 
Revoltingest

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
metis said:
Exactly, and the "guilt by association" game simply is so bizarre. Gee, I wonder how many shady people that I have met and talked with over my 69 years? Matter of fact, I think you're one of them! :eek:
Click to expand...
By having me on <ignore> you missed the wonderful joke that Jay set up for me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top