Can Elizabeth Warren defeat Donald Trump? (1 Viewer)

[timschochet]

Liz Warren takes center stage Wednesday night. I began this process believing that, much like Bernie Sanders, I disagreed with Warren on most issues. But I have to admit that over time she has won me over. More and more of what she says makes sense to me. I also sense (though I don’t know) that she is basically a decent and good person (sorry @HellToupee I know you’ve claimed the opposite for years but I’ve asked you over and over to back it up and you haven’t.) She’ll have the opportunity on Wednesday to really shine and maybe challenge Biden for the nomination. And based on what I hear I wouldn’t mind supporting her. 

But all of this leads to my bigger concern: can she really beat Trump? There’s at least one poll that shows Warren beating Trump in Texas. Frankly I just don’t believe that poll. My intuition and all of my years of following politics tell me that if Warren wins the nomination it will be a repeat of Nixon vs McGovern in 1972: Trump will be re-elected easily because the public is more afraid of leftist politics than they are of Donald Trump. 

Please convince me that I’m wrong about this; I’d love to be wrong. 

 

[joffer]

In the popular vote...sure

in the Electoral....50/50

 

[timschochet]

In the popular vote...sure

in the Electoral....50/50

Obviously electoral is all that matters. 50/50 doesn’t make me feel very confident. 

 

[timschochet]

Here’s a key question: earlier @Maurile Tremblay made the assumption, which I generally agreed with, that a lot of Bernie supporters aren’t really Democrats and they will not support any other candidate who wins the nomination: it’s really “Bernie or Bust.”

I agree this is true of Biden but is it true of Warren as well? Because if it isn’t that could increase her odds it seems to me. 

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Of course she can.  Trump is the most beatable incumbent since just about anybody (Ford is the only person who I can think of who even comes close).  Anybody who gets the Democratic nomination will be rightly favored over Trump.

I despise Warren.  She is definitely one of the people who I do not want to win the nomination.  But she'll be favored over Trump if she makes it to the general.

 

[Ghost Rider]

A thread where the OP challenges another poster to prove a politician is a good person is bound to go well.  

 

[knowledge dropper]

Easy win for Trump and won’t cost him much money.  Just show the beer drinking video on continuous loop.  

 

[timschochet]

A thread where the OP challenges another poster to prove a politician is a good person is bound to go well.  

I didn’t. I asked  HellToupee to back up his claim that she is especially awful (he has called her one of the most disingenuous people ever.) I wanted to find out if there’s something about her I’m unaware of. 

 

[timschochet]

Easy win for Trump and won’t cost him much money.  Just show the beer drinking video on continuous loop.  

You keep bringing this up- like Trump eating Mexican food or Romney singing “Who Let the Dogs Out” or Hillary pretending to be the old black lady? 

Honestly this nation has real problems. I don’t think the public cares about this authenticity crap at all. I know I don’t. 

 

[jonessed]

Vote her in.  Let’s find out.

 

[Ghost Rider]

I didn’t. I asked  HellToupee to back up his claim that she is especially awful (he has called her one of the most disingenuous people ever.) I wanted to find out if there’s something about her I’m unaware of. 

That’s not what you said in the OP (unless you want to go edit it now). 

 

[boots11234]

LOL.  No.  Trump has no competition and is going to destroy any of the current democrats. Promising free stuff is not a path to victory. 

 

[Summer Wheat]

In the popular vote...sure

in the Electoral....50/50

Who cares about popular vote.  Electoral vote as that is the only one that matters and not sure Warren is the one to do it. If jobs and economy are still strong and we are in no stupid war not sure she could beat Trump.

I know most don`t care for Biden but I think he beats Trump regardless.

 

[[scooter]]

I don't think any woman can beat Trump. Or, at least, I don't think any of the current Democratic candidates who are women could beat him. And I think Warren would do worse than Harris or Klobuchar, primarily because Warren has more baggage than those two.

 

[Ghost Rider]

To answer the question, yes, she can, but the Democrats have to be smart and talk up what they can and will do rather than playing the “trump sucks, vote for us just because we’re not him” card. That’ll work with their base, but not with The independents who ultimately decide presidential elections. 

 

[tommyGunZ]

To answer the question, yes, she can, but the Democrats have to be smart and talk up what they can and will do rather than playing the “trump sucks, vote for us just because we’re not him” card. That’ll work with their base, but not with The independents who ultimately decide presidential elections. 

That’s good, because in addition to pointing out how awful Trump is, Liz Warren is laying out policy plan after policy plan detailing her agenda.  The narrative that Democrats are relying on “we’re not Trump” to win in 2020 is completely false.  

 

[Ghost Rider]

That’s good, because in addition to pointing out how awful Trump is, Liz Warren is laying out policy plan after policy plan detailing her agenda.  The narrative that Democrats are relying on “we’re not Trump” to win in 2020 is completely false.  

Who said that was their narrative?

 

[tommyGunZ]

Of course she can.  Trump is the most beatable incumbent since just about anybody (Ford is the only person who I can think of who even comes close).  Anybody who gets the Democratic nomination will be rightly favored over Trump.

I’m not sure about this. Trump is the most popular President among the Republican base, perhaps ever.  If you subscribe to the base wins elections theory - Trump is a very, very strong candidate.  

 

[tommyGunZ]

LOL.  No.  Trump has no competition and is going to destroy any of the current democrats. Promising free stuff is not a path to victory. 

Actually it is.  These days the Republican platform starts with Republicans promising to give you more “free” money (in the form of deficit funded tax cuts).  

 

[boots11234]

I’m not sure about this. Trump is the most popular President among the Republican base, perhaps ever.  If you subscribe to the base wins elections theory - Trump is a very, very strong candidate.  

Look at the rallies.  People waiting literally days to see him.  I feel sorry for democrats.  As much as you hate him, he is loved as much by his base.  He will win.  I have no doubt.  Democrats are in for a painful election.

 

[boots11234]

Actually it is.  These days the Republican platform starts with Republicans promising to give you more “free” money (in the form of deficit funded tax cuts).  

So getting to keep money I've earned is now 'free money'?  This in a nut shell is why I'd never be a democrat.  They do not believe its the people who earn the money.

 

[timschochet]

Look at the rallies.  People waiting literally days to see him.  I feel sorry for democrats.  As much as you hate him, he is loved as much by his base.  He will win.  I have no doubt.  Democrats are in for a painful election.

His base is not enough for him to win. For that, he needs to also attract independents and discontented Democrats. That’s what happened in 2016. If it’s Warren will it happen again? That’s the question I’m asking here. 

 

[[scooter]]

Actually it is.  These days the Republican platform starts with Republicans promising to give you more “free” money (in the form of deficit funded tax cuts).  

So getting to keep money I've earned is now 'free money'?

Look, I'm an anti-tax conservative, so I sympathize with this viewpoint. But from an economic standpoint, a tax cut MUST be accompanied by a proportional spending cut. Otherwise, the money that you think you're "keeping" is really just a high-interest loan from your future grandchildren.

And Trump and the Republicans have done little to close the gap between spending and taxing. They've basically stolen the Democratic concept of "tax and spend", except that it has been changed to "tariff and spend". But they're still spending like libs.

But Republicans don't want to admit it because they've discovered that their own variation of "free stuff for voters" plays well in red states.

 

[timschochet]

Look, I'm an anti-tax conservative, so I sympathize with this viewpoint. But from an economic standpoint, a tax cut MUST be accompanied by a proportional spending cut. Otherwise, the money that you think you're "keeping" is really just a high-interest loan from your future grandchildren.

And Trump and the Republicans have done little to close the gap between spending and taxing. They've basically stolen the Democratic concept of "tax and spend", except that it has been changed to "tariff and spend". But they're still spending like libs.

But Republicans don't want to admit it because they've discovered that their own variation of "free stuff for voters" plays well in red states.

Close the gap? They’ve widened it. Trump has increased spending. 

 

[wikkidpissah]

No.

If we appointed Warren the Democratic candidate today, she could prevail against a rapid-devolving President and his possibly-capped constituency. But she won't get there. I expect her to have her best debates in the early go-rounds because they will be declarative and her ideas and enthusiasm will carry her. Once the field has winnowed and the debates become examinatorial, the gap between her message and her thought processes will again be exposed, the falseness will ring Hillary alarms and she will offer a veritable Lucy's treadmill of gotchas to her foes. Toast.

 

[pantherclub]

There is a 0.0% chance Warren wins when its all said and done.

 

[boots11234]

Look, I'm an anti-tax conservative, so I sympathize with this viewpoint. But from an economic standpoint, a tax cut MUST be accompanied by a proportional spending cut. Otherwise, the money that you think you're "keeping" is really just a high-interest loan from your future grandchildren.

And Trump and the Republicans have done little to close the gap between spending and taxing. They've basically stolen the Democratic concept of "tax and spend", except that it has been changed to "tariff and spend". But they're still spending like libs.

But Republicans don't want to admit it because they've discovered that their own variation of "free stuff for voters" plays well in red states.

I agree.  It's sad.  Both parties like to spend our money, frankly the democrats are just more forthright about it.  Republicans need to reign in spending but sadly I dont see this president doing that.  However, I see no democrat ever even considering it.

 

[timschochet]

I agree.  It's sad.  Both parties like to spend our money, frankly the democrats are just more forthright about it.  Republicans need to reign in spending but sadly I dont see this president doing that.  However, I see no democrat ever even considering it.

Didn’t military spending go down under Obama? 

 

[boots11234]

Didn’t military spending go down under Obama? 

That is the ONE area democrats love to cut...and the only area they love to cut.  So IMO it doesnt count.  

Frankly that is one of the area's the Federal government was originally suppose to have domain over.  The Federal government continues to get bigger and bigger which IMO is not good for the nation.

 

[squistion]

His base is not enough for him to win. For that, he needs to also attract independents and discontented Democrats. That’s what happened in 2016. If it’s Warren will it happen again? That’s the question I’m asking here. 

It depends. Some months back Doris Kearns Goodwin posted an op-ed or a tweet in which she said that what ended Joe McCarthy's popularity was that the American public reached a saturation point with his antics and said "Enough is enough." She predicted that this will eventually happen with Trump too. If that is the case, then no matter who the candidate is, he or she will attract independents and even discontented Democrats who can't stomach the alternative, which is another 4 years of Trump.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

I can't believe she's even a candidate.  She tried to claim she's a minority.  If this is the best the D's can put forward then just keep the current mess.   Do better.

 

[Gustavo Fring]

She doesn't stand a chance.  If the Dems want another 4 years of Trump, they will nominate Liz.  

 

[urbanhack]

Yes. 

 

[[scooter]]

Didn’t military spending go down under Obama? 

That is the ONE area democrats love to cut...and the only area they love to cut.  So IMO it doesnt count.  

Of course it should count. Fiscal responsibility should be encouraged at every level.

Instead of dismissing the Democrats, a better approach would be to say "That's a good start, now how about we work on cutting other departments?"

 

[James Daulton]

A rock could beat Trump if dems turnout.  As a matter of fact that'd be a pretty close race in more ways than one. 

 

[squistion]

I can't believe she's even a candidate.  She tried to claim she's a minority.  If this is the best the D's can put forward then just keep the current mess.   Do better.

Actually she didn't, but carry on. She claimed she had Native American ancestry (which her siblings affirm was part of their family folklore) but never claimed that she was a Native American or tried to claim tribal membership.

If she makes it so far as to be the nominee, I hope Trump starts his "Pocahontas" name calling as he will find to his detriment, as did Scott Brown, that while energizing his base, this will turn off independent and undecided voters.  

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

Actually she didn't, but carry on. She claimed she had Native American ancestry (which her siblings affirm was part of their family folklore) but never claimed that she was a Native American or tried to claim tribal membership.

If she makes so far as to be the nominee, I hope Trump starts his "Pocahontas" name calling as he will find to his detriment, as did Scott Brown, that while energizing his base, this will turn off independent and undecided voters.  

Wrong again, chief.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/elizabeth-warren-apologizes-for-calling-herself-native-american/2019/02/05/1627df76-2962-11e9-984d-9b8fba003e81_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.b81622cc1313

 

[HellToupee]

Actually she didn't, but carry on. She claimed she had Native American ancestry (which her siblings affirm was part of their family folklore) but never claimed that she was a Native American or tried to claim tribal membership.

If she makes so far as to be the nominee, I hope Trump starts his "Pocahontas" name calling as he will find to his detriment, as did Scott Brown, that while energizing his base, this will turn off independent and undecided voters.  

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

I realize that we’re all still freaked out about 2016, but there’s no reason to think Trump can win re-election against anyone.  The guy barely squeaked out a win last time and he’s been an unbelievably awful President.  Of course Warren can beat him, as can any of the Democratic candidates.

 

[squistion]

We have been told not to use this emoji by itself without comment as it is considered trolling.

 

[John Blutarsky]

Wrong again, chief.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/elizabeth-warren-apologizes-for-calling-herself-native-american/2019/02/05/1627df76-2962-11e9-984d-9b8fba003e81_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.b81622cc1313

In February 2019 the Washington Post surfaced Warren’s 1986 registration card for the State Bar of Texas, on which she identified her race as “American Indian.”

 

[AAABatteries]

I think there’s a good chance that anybody that gets the D nomination can defeat Trump because he’s so unpopular with so many people.  He’s also very popular with his base so it’s not guaranteed either way. I think that’s why many, including Tim I believe, have been saying Biden is the safe pick.  I’d say Warren would be the 2nd most volatile candidate on the D side after Bernie - trying to predict how those candidates will energize both sides of the aisle will be difficult.  

The question for the Democrats is - do I play it safe or go for the fences.  But even that is a little tricky as it will also impact voter turnout.

My personal guess is that a white, male centrist is the best “bet” to win and that isn’t Warren.

 

[jonessed]

In February 2019 the Washington Post surfaced Warren’s 1986 registration card for the State Bar of Texas, on which she identified her race as “American Indian.”

That takes some serious cajones

 

[HellToupee]

We have been told not to use this emoji by itself without comment as it is considered trolling.

Please squistion the laugh wasn’t at you it was the comparison of the Warren/Brown race with regards to Trump/Warren. I’ve seen it a lot and it’s meaningless. You or me were beating Brown in that race , it’s just how MA works. 

I do realize I should’ve added as to why

 

[squistion]

Wrong again, chief.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/elizabeth-warren-apologizes-for-calling-herself-native-american/2019/02/05/1627df76-2962-11e9-984d-9b8fba003e81_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.b81622cc1313

That was for claiming Native American ancestry "chief" on a card for the Texas bar association. It was not for something that was to be published by the Texas bar and was for internal record keeping only for the Texas Bar IIRC.

https://www.npr.org/2019/02/06/692103008/elizabeth-warren-apologizes-for-latest-revelation-of-native-american-claims

As she has previously, Warren told reporters Wednesday that she grew up believing she had Native American ancestors. "This is our family story, and it's all consistent from that point in time," she said in response to a question about whether there are other documents that may show similar claims. "It's important to note I am not a tribal citizen," Warren said, "and I should have been more mindful of the distinction with tribal citizenship and tribal sovereignty."

 

[John Blutarsky]

That was for claiming Native American ancestry "chief" on a card for the Texas bar association. It was not for something that was to be published by the Texas bar and was for internal record keeping only for the Texas Bar IIRC.

https://www.npr.org/2019/02/06/692103008/elizabeth-warren-apologizes-for-latest-revelation-of-native-american-claims

As she has previously, Warren told reporters Wednesday that she grew up believing she had Native American ancestors. "This is our family story, and it's all consistent from that point in time," she said in response to a question about whether there are other documents that may show similar claims. "It's important to note I am not a tribal citizen," Warren said, "and I should have been more mindful of the distinction with tribal citizenship and tribal sovereignty."

Nice backpedal

 

[jonessed]

Nice backpedal

This one is pretty black and white.  Sometimes it’s better to just admit you were wrong.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

That was for claiming Native American ancestry "chief" on a card for the Texas bar association. It was not for something that was to be published by the Texas bar and was for internal record keeping only for the Texas Bar IIRC.

https://www.npr.org/2019/02/06/692103008/elizabeth-warren-apologizes-for-latest-revelation-of-native-american-claims

As she has previously, Warren told reporters Wednesday that she grew up believing she had Native American ancestors. "This is our family story, and it's all consistent from that point in time," she said in response to a question about whether there are other documents that may show similar claims. "It's important to note I am not a tribal citizen," Warren said, "and I should have been more mindful of the distinction with tribal citizenship and tribal sovereignty."

Hope you didn't tear an ACL on that pivot.  

 

[NCCommish]

I’m not sure about this. Trump is the most popular President among the Republican base, perhaps ever.  If you subscribe to the base wins elections theory - Trump is a very, very strong candidate.  

Trump's base isn't big enough to win him an election by itself. That's simple math.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

I’m not sure about this. Trump is the most popular President among the Republican base, perhaps ever.  If you subscribe to the base wins elections theory - Trump is a very, very strong candidate.  

He trails every candidate in head-to-head polling and his approval numbers have been sharply upside-down ever since he was sworn in.  I get what you're saying, but Trump is pretty wildly unpopular outside of his base.