Posted on 12/15/2014 9:41:46 AM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
If you had to imagine the communications between the two of them over the last few months what do you suppose they are up to? Leave you ideas in the comments.
Three pieces were linked at the Drudge Report today on the rising Idol of the progressive political cult, first by Michael Goodwin at the New York Post: “Elizabeth Warren poses a challenge to Hillary in 2016“:
The polls say it’s Hillary’s turn, but I’m starting to believe 2016 could be 2008 all over again, with Warren taking the nomination from her the way Barack Obama did.
As Mark Twain said, “History may not repeat itself, but it does rhyme.” So it is with the political dynamic, then and now.
Clinton acted entitled, and Obama offered a charismatic alternative. She represented the tired past, he a fresh future.
A possible Warren sequel to that historic upset has been taking shape for months, but it has now crystallized. The first-term senator’s rallying cry against what she called “a giveaway to the most powerful banks” almost scuttled the budget bill in the House before bipartisan support allowed her to have it both ways.
She comes out of the wreckage as the standard-bearer of progressive populism without being blamed for shutting down the government. Her GOP doppelgänger, Ted Cruz, should have been so lucky.
Second, at the Washington Post: “Elizabeth Warren was told to stay quiet, but she didn’t – and it’s paying off.” Third, another at the Post, ”Amid Warren buzz, Clinton might do well not to wait too long to announce 2016 bid.”
Here’s audio from Warren on NPR:
(AUDIO-AT-LINK)
NN RADIO HOST: “Would you tell these independent groups, ‘Give it up.’ You just never going to run.”
WARREN: “I told them, ‘I’m not running for president.’”
NN RADIO HOST: “You are putting that in the present tense tough. Are you never going to run?”
WARREN: “I’m not running for president.”
NN RADIO HOST: “You’re not putting a ‘never’ on that?”
WARREN: “I’m not running for president. Do you want me to put an exclamation point at the end?”
(VIDEO-AT-LINK)
What do you think? Is Warren a challenger for Clinton in 2016? Or is the Jarrett-Obama/Chicago-Alinskyite wing of the Democratic Party going to make peace with the House of Clinton ascending again?
The female voter of America will be brainwashed to vote for Warren just as they were for 0bama in 2008. It’s some sort of mass hypnotic trance with Sandra Fluke waving her ‘War on Women’ wand.
” Or is the Jarrett-Obama/Chicago-Alinskyite wing of the Democratic Party going to make peace with the House of Clinton ascending again?”
Jerrett is a leftist thug, who tells Obama what he can or can’t do, and whom he can or can’t see. If you check her job history since college, she failed at every one of them. Utterly failed! Of course, she has all the dirt on Obama, so he is stuck with her.
I have posted many times that the factions who derailed Clinton in 2008 are again working to derail her.
==
The Dems lucked onto something with Obama. They got a candidate that the opposition feared criticizing.
They have been looking for another ‘minority’ type to run with similar results. If a female, they get the ‘sexism’ card to play against any opposition.
That is kind of a neat trick in politics — a method of neutralizing the opposition. It, the race card, has worked with Obama for 2 terms. The sexism card could get them another 2 terms.
The Clintons and Obama hate each other, but Obama wants a Democrat to be the next President (since a Republican will try to undo some of his damage to the country whereas a Democrat won’t). So he has an obvious interest in having someone other than Hillary be the Democrat nominee.
By the same token, the DNC and the media will again select the GOP candidates, and will decide who is to run against Hillary. Once again, they will choose the weakest from the field of candidates.
All 0bama cares about is having someone in the WH who will keep his crimes covered-up. I think he trusts Warren more than Hillary..
Today democrats want another extreme leftists liar to win for what's between or/not between her legs...(glass half empty or full..)
How soon 'til the press starts telling us she's really quite conservative? (It's how the New York Times and all their sycophants sell radical leftist haters to the country.)
I think Valerie is trying to find where the Hispanic and African heritage is in Warren’s background, to go along with her obvious American Indian pedigree(/s)
Kamala Harris would be good for two ethnic categories (black and Asian) but she probably sees herself as a future Supreme Court justice and might want to avoid electoral politics.
Of course the other option would be to have Warren and Sharpton.
Old Val likes her 24-7 Secret Service detail.
Wait for Obunghole to throw a huge wrench into the works.
They are trying to make Hillary happy while they plan behind her back.
I still think Warren will concoct some fake background as she did already to make claim she is ethnically pure.
Once a lie is out there, what diff does it make to tell some more?
Lying is a resume enhancer for Democrats.
To keep the CHAOS alive.
And Warren (or Bernie Sanders) can make Hillary look relatively moderate. Clinton triangulation again.
I hope she runs. I think the far left has overplayed their hand as they always do. The country has gotten a look at far left policies in action and this time they will reject it overwhelmingly.
It would be refreshing to see her carry...Minnesota.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.