Biggest Loser: Elizabeth Warren

[cawacko]

Now this is coming from the right but I'm opening to hearing arguments from those on the left if they disagree with the conclusion of the column and the results for progressives.




Biggest Loser: Elizabeth Warren

Outside deep-blue districts, the election proves a wipeout for progressives.


Tuesday’s midterms served up mixed results, handing both parties big wins and big losses. It will take some time to sort out what it means. Yet the evening did nonetheless provide one total, complete, unalloyed loser: Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren.

For a decade Ms. Warren, 69, has been busy trying to remake Washington in her progressive image. Her role in creating a new financial regulatory apparatus gave her outsize influence over the bureaucracy. Her successful 2012 Senate bid gave her a megaphone to rail against “billionaires, bigots and Wall Street bankers”—and Donald Trump. The left begged her to challenge Hillary Clinton in 2016 and rebrand the Democratic Party as a populist, progressive force. Ms. Warren demurred, leaving the field to Bernie Sanders.

She instead carefully designed this year’s midterms as her launchpad to the presidency. Ms. Warren seeded into key races several handpicked progressive protégés, in particular Richard Cordray, former director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (who ran for Ohio governor), and a former law student, Katie Porter (who ran in a California House district). Ms. Warren geared up a shadow war room, built ties with some 150 campaigns, directed millions of fundraising dollars to select candidates, and thereby earned chits. She dispersed staffers to early primary states and crisscrossed the country herself. A week ago she was dominating Ohio headlines at rallies for Mr. Cordray. If Mr. Trump was on the ballot nationally, Ms. Warren was on it in the Buckeye State.

The lead-up to Tuesday had already been brutal for her. Hoping to elbow her way back into the headlines after Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation, Ms. Warren chose in mid-October to release a five-minute video and piles of documentation aimed at proving she really is at least 1/1,024th Native American. The ridicule was ruthless, matched only by the anger Democrats directed at her for distracting from the election.

But Tuesday compounded the disaster. Ms. Porter—who campaigned in Orange County on single-payer health care, expanded Social Security and debt-free college—flamed out to two-term Rep. Mimi Walters. In Ohio, Mr. Cordray lost to Attorney General Mike DeWine. And in Indiana, in what many claimed was the closest of that state’s House races going into the midterm, Republican Rep. Trey Hollingsworth blew out Warren-endorsed Liz Watson, 59% to 41%.

These results reflected a national collapse by progressive candidates. National Journal’s Josh Kraushaar put together a list of nine progressive candidates as a “test” of “lefty strength.” They included gubernatorial candidates Andrew Gillum of Florida and Ben Jealous of Maryland and Leslie Cockburn, who ran in one of Virginia’s most vulnerable Republican congressional districts. They went 0 for 9. Indeed, outside safe Democratic districts, the left-wing movement took a complete bath—including in House races in Nebraska’s Second, New York’s 24th and Pennsylvania’s First districts. Progressive candidates were Democrats’ biggest gift to Republicans Tuesday night.

But by far the biggest repudiation of Ms. Warren was in her own liberal state. She endorsed a ballot initiative that would have mandated nurse-to-patient ratios in hospitals; voters destroyed it, 70% to 30%. She rallied for Democratic gubernatorial candidate Jay Gonzalez, who lost to Republican Gov. Charlie Baker by 34 points. And while Ms. Warren dispatched her own Senate challenger on Tuesday, she underperformed the state’s top Republican. Some 1.7 million voters went for Mr. Baker; 1.6 for Ms. Warren.

She put on a brave face Wednesday, when she told a crowd at Brown University that many Democrats coming to Washington ran “on a very progressive agenda that government is an important part of our lives.” She failed to mention that nearly all of them won in deep-blue districts that would have voted for a ferret with a D next to its name. These are not areas that win the presidency. The center-left think tank Third Way reports its team watched “every one of the 967 ads that Democrats ran in competitive House districts since Labor Day, and just two candidates mentioned either Medicare-for-all or single payer.” Both lost.

Elections have a way of clearing the board, bringing forth new faces that eclipse those from prior cycles. That—along with Ms. Warren’s terrible night—is what should concern her. Democrats didn’t get the blue wave they wanted, but they are still fired up to beat Mr. Trump in 2020. And they showed a thirst for new names and personalities that might get them there. The Democratic bench has over this past year become wider and deeper—Cory Booker, Kamala Harris, Andrew Cuomo, Eric Holder, Kirsten Gillibrand, Deval Patrick, Michael Bloomberg.

Ms. Warren? She is looking more like old news.


https://www.wsj.com/articles/biggest...d=hp_opin_pos1

[Getin the ring]

She may be the most irrating woman on the planet, and that's a planet that includes Pelosi and Maxine bubble lips Waters

[Sailor]

Now this is coming from the right but I'm opening to hearing arguments from those on the left if they disagree with the conclusion of the column and the results for progressives.




Biggest Loser: Elizabeth Warren

Outside deep-blue districts, the election proves a wipeout for progressives.


Tuesday’s midterms served up mixed results, handing both parties big wins and big losses. It will take some time to sort out what it means. Yet the evening did nonetheless provide one total, complete, unalloyed loser: Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren.

For a decade Ms. Warren, 69, has been busy trying to remake Washington in her progressive image. Her role in creating a new financial regulatory apparatus gave her outsize influence over the bureaucracy. Her successful 2012 Senate bid gave her a megaphone to rail against “billionaires, bigots and Wall Street bankers”—and Donald Trump. The left begged her to challenge Hillary Clinton in 2016 and rebrand the Democratic Party as a populist, progressive force. Ms. Warren demurred, leaving the field to Bernie Sanders.

She instead carefully designed this year’s midterms as her launchpad to the presidency. Ms. Warren seeded into key races several handpicked progressive protégés, in particular Richard Cordray, former director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (who ran for Ohio governor), and a former law student, Katie Porter (who ran in a California House district). Ms. Warren geared up a shadow war room, built ties with some 150 campaigns, directed millions of fundraising dollars to select candidates, and thereby earned chits. She dispersed staffers to early primary states and crisscrossed the country herself. A week ago she was dominating Ohio headlines at rallies for Mr. Cordray. If Mr. Trump was on the ballot nationally, Ms. Warren was on it in the Buckeye State.

The lead-up to Tuesday had already been brutal for her. Hoping to elbow her way back into the headlines after Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation, Ms. Warren chose in mid-October to release a five-minute video and piles of documentation aimed at proving she really is at least 1/1,024th Native American. The ridicule was ruthless, matched only by the anger Democrats directed at her for distracting from the election.

But Tuesday compounded the disaster. Ms. Porter—who campaigned in Orange County on single-payer health care, expanded Social Security and debt-free college—flamed out to two-term Rep. Mimi Walters. In Ohio, Mr. Cordray lost to Attorney General Mike DeWine. And in Indiana, in what many claimed was the closest of that state’s House races going into the midterm, Republican Rep. Trey Hollingsworth blew out Warren-endorsed Liz Watson, 59% to 41%.

These results reflected a national collapse by progressive candidates. National Journal’s Josh Kraushaar put together a list of nine progressive candidates as a “test” of “lefty strength.” They included gubernatorial candidates Andrew Gillum of Florida and Ben Jealous of Maryland and Leslie Cockburn, who ran in one of Virginia’s most vulnerable Republican congressional districts. They went 0 for 9. Indeed, outside safe Democratic districts, the left-wing movement took a complete bath—including in House races in Nebraska’s Second, New York’s 24th and Pennsylvania’s First districts. Progressive candidates were Democrats’ biggest gift to Republicans Tuesday night.

But by far the biggest repudiation of Ms. Warren was in her own liberal state. She endorsed a ballot initiative that would have mandated nurse-to-patient ratios in hospitals; voters destroyed it, 70% to 30%. She rallied for Democratic gubernatorial candidate Jay Gonzalez, who lost to Republican Gov. Charlie Baker by 34 points. And while Ms. Warren dispatched her own Senate challenger on Tuesday, she underperformed the state’s top Republican. Some 1.7 million voters went for Mr. Baker; 1.6 for Ms. Warren.

She put on a brave face Wednesday, when she told a crowd at Brown University that many Democrats coming to Washington ran “on a very progressive agenda that government is an important part of our lives.” She failed to mention that nearly all of them won in deep-blue districts that would have voted for a ferret with a D next to its name. These are not areas that win the presidency. The center-left think tank Third Way reports its team watched “every one of the 967 ads that Democrats ran in competitive House districts since Labor Day, and just two candidates mentioned either Medicare-for-all or single payer.” Both lost.

Elections have a way of clearing the board, bringing forth new faces that eclipse those from prior cycles. That—along with Ms. Warren’s terrible night—is what should concern her. Democrats didn’t get the blue wave they wanted, but they are still fired up to beat Mr. Trump in 2020. And they showed a thirst for new names and personalities that might get them there. The Democratic bench has over this past year become wider and deeper—Cory Booker, Kamala Harris, Andrew Cuomo, Eric Holder, Kirsten Gillibrand, Deval Patrick, Michael Bloomberg.

Ms. Warren? She is looking more like old news.


https://www.wsj.com/articles/biggest...d=hp_opin_pos1

She was declared winner in Massachusetts with 1% of the votes tallied. No bullshit. How the F(&* does that happen?

[Nordberg]

Yep she squeaked out a win 60.3 perc to 36.3. yep, she is through.

[cawacko]

Yep she squeaked out a win 60.3 perc to 36.3. yep, she is through.

didn't even attempt to read the article did you; hell you didn't even read the two line heading of the article

[Sailor]

Yep she squeaked out a win 60.3 perc to 36.3. yep, she is through.

Which is amazing. Would you like to know why she never runs on her actual record in Senate? She has not done jack shit.

[Getin the ring]

She was declared winner in Massachusetts with 1% of the votes tallied. No bullshit. How the F(&* does that happen?

ahh, but remember the moon bats of Massachusetts hailed Ted Kennedy as hero for over 5 decades, even in his death they built monuments to him.

A man who drove someones daughter off a bridge and left her at the bottom of the ocean overnight while he walked home and slept his drunk off. But yet the were on the front line crucifying Kavanaugh for an unsubstantiated claim that he merely bounced on a fully clothed girl as a teenager.

So Pocahontas kind of fits right in there

[cawacko]

Which is amazing. Would you like to know why she never runs on her actual record in Senate? She has not done jack shit.

The article isn't about her Senate race. It's about the progressive candidates she supported around the country and their failures.

[Sailor]

The article isn't about her Senate race. It's about the progressive candidates she supported around the country and their failures.

I know. I read it. Just commenting to Nordberg.

[jimmymccready]

Warren has the GOP by its little balls and squeezing hard.

[Sailor]

Warren has the GOP by its little balls and squeezing hard.

Not even close.

[Getin the ring]

Warren has the GOP by its little balls and squeezing hard.

what a nut bag ^^^

nothing would make the GOP happier than for Pocahontas to run for President

[Adolf_Twitler]

I think the Democrats and the Republicans may have to re-think 2020.

More young people are showing up at the polls! And if you ask the younger folks who they want, they pretty much say they want younger candidates.

I am looking for the Democrats to select someone much younger next time.

And I honestly believe that a younger Republican candidate will run against Donald Trump and easily win their nomination.

We've seen the last of the Baby-Boomer presidents! It's a whole new world out here today!

[Sailor]

I think the Democrats and the Republicans may have to re-think 2020.

More young people are showing up at the polls! And if you ask the younger folks who they want, they pretty much say they want younger candidates.

I am looking for the Democrats to select someone much younger next time.

And I honestly believe that a younger Republican candidate will run against Donald Trump and easily win their nomination.

This are good points.

[cawacko]

I think the Democrats and the Republicans may have to re-think 2020.

More young people are showing up at the polls! And if you ask the younger folks who they want, they pretty much say they want younger candidates.

I am looking for the Democrats to select someone much younger next time.

And I honestly believe that a younger Republican candidate will run against Donald Trump and easily win their nomination.

We've seen the last of the Baby-Boomer presidents! It's a whole new world out here today!

Any idea how old the people she backed that lost were?