Posted on 10/17/2018 4:15:01 AM PDT by RoosterRedux
A lot of smart people believe that Elizabeth Warren, the senator from Massachusetts, is the front-runner for the Democratic nomination in 2020. A recent New York magazine profile by Jonathan Chait claimed that she’s winning the invisible primary — building campaign networks, rolling out policy proposals, wooing insiders, intimidating rivals.
*snip*
I am not a Democratic insider or a campaign professional, so for all I know Warren may indeed be impressing her intended audience.
*snip*
But running for president in the age of Donald Trump requires, above all, an ability to handle what John Heileman and Mark Halperin once called “the freak show” (back when it was considerably less freaky). It requires a deftness dealing with scandals and gaffes and accidental blunders, an ability to know when you have a wrestling move that justifies getting down in the mud and when you’re better off sitting on a top rail and acting superior to the pigs.
*snip*
[W]hat Warren should have done when the story resurfaced, what she obviously should have done, was to simply express mild regret for letting her enthusiasm for family lore carry her away into identifying as someone who might possibly receive affirmative-action consideration, apologize to Cherokee groups for any offense, and literally never speak of the matter again. And if and when Donald Trump started up his Pocahontas jibes, she should have simply ignored him and talked about the many issues where he’s on the wrong side of public opinion.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
So out of curiosity who do you think is the front runner?
It’s hard to believe because the party has lunged so far Left and has so many mentally challenged, bomb-throwers like Booker and Harris. Also, its on to imagine them nominating an Old White Straight Male (just the kind of people they insist are irrelevant).
On the other hand, that is also why it is so easy to believe. Biden is a clown, but compared to everyone else in the field, he comes off looking like the good, sane alternative. However, I do not expect that he’ll get the nomination as he won’t “excite” minorities enough.
Despite his popularity, I don’t think Bernie has a chance in Hades of getting the nomination. Just like in 2016, he will run & get a good following, get screwed out of delegates, and end up supporting the nominee in exchange for some under-the-table payout.
Gray Beaverhs but one recourse
She must go on the View and cry
If White Privilege is real, why did Elizabeth Warren lie about being an Indian?
My take is either Warren, Harris, or Booker ends up with the nomination.
The author's only bone to conservatives is to acknowledge that someone with a very distant claim to ethnic ancestry ought not be the one to take the "first of" title.
-PJ
Now Warren has joined Avenatti in that loser’s gallery, for absolutely no good reason that I can see.
BECAUSE YOU ARE F...ING BLIND. She joined the losers because, wait for it, ....SHE'S AN ENORMOUS LOSER.
Cherokee claims are not based on genetics but actual bloodlines with familial documentation. As a RSP (remarkably stupid person) she has fallen into the Donald’s trap of trying to verify her exotic claims with DNA, thereby directly assaulting Tribal membership tradition. She has brutalized native American tradition, culture, and membership.
A lot of people believe that to even be a contender, the next Democratic nominee has to have a vagina. It’s the way the Democratic party thinks.
It is probably Mrs Bill if she goes for it.
Harris’s non Natural Born status won’t even be mentioned this time around. Natural Born has been excised from the Constitution.
Good one!
Harris’s non Natural Born status won’t even be mentioned this time around. Natural Born has been excised from the Constitution.
Author failed to put ‘smart’ in quotes in the first sentence.
Because it fit with their ‘diversity’ narrative and benefitted them. Usually some dean or other administrator who want to tout their credibility and keep their position.
Because questioning her racial/ethnic background on the basis of her physical appearance would violate Federal anti-discrimination laws. Seriously.
>>By the time the 2020 campaign starts, Trump will have tarnished the entire Democratic field.<<
No need. They are tarnishing themselves. :)
Death trumps precedent
Front runner:
If you plot the ‘Rat front runners for POTUS, the next in line is Cortez.
Bear in mind, the last one was a dark horse, and had just entered into a first term in the Sinate. So, plotting the next point on the line to crazy of the ‘Rats, you’ll find the next step would be a dark horse that just entered the House.
Substitute the hanky panky of getting your opponents divorce records released with winning against a long-standing comrade ‘Rat.
All Cortez has to do now is be sure and win in November against a write-in ‘Rat. Once that is done, she is a shoo-in for 2020.
NYT is so objective that they thinking her talking about “the issues” will negate the need to discuss why a country should have as a leader a woman who used significant lies, fraud to advance herself politically and financially at the expense of others.
People in far lesser position who have lied on their resumes have been fired. Maybe the article should investigate how many people Harvard let go or kicked out of school for false claims.
Tribal connections?
Native Indian’s reliance on only verbal proof doomed them. They had no written language. Verbal is flawed.
And “tribal connections” that Indians claim is just their word against others. Who are they trying to con?
Their claim to ancestry is no better than another persons.
And that’s the truth.
It is ironic that Indians rely on Non Indian techniques to justify their existance.
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.