Elizabeth Warren announces 2020 presidential campaign
60 replies, posted
"Ain't nothing in the rules that says a dog can't run for president!"
Air Bud: Presidential pooch.
Well he does have to be 35 years of age so that kinda excludes him.
The Supreme Court ruled in Whitmore v. Pupper that the founding fathers intended dog years to be acceptable
in case anyone is wondering why 35:
What's so magical about the age of 35?
The idea that age brings wisdom and maturity is what the Founding Fathers had in mind when they spelled out in the Constitution that a president of the USA must be at least 35.
Some note that 35 was "older" when the Constitution was written because average life expectancy in the 1700s was much lower than it is today — about 40 years, though that's a misleading average that counts the many who died at birth or in early childhood. Founding Father and first president George Washington lived to the age of 67. Thomas Jefferson died at 83.
But there's a movement to let anyone old enough to vote, run for any office, including the presidency. France does this, and backers say it's only fair. Critics worry that some wildly popular young entertainer such as Justin Bieber (19) or Taylor Swift (23) might sweep into office on the youth vote. Not to fret. Another provision of the Constitution would block Canadian-born Bieber from becoming president, and since older Americans vote far more reliably than younger ones, there's not much chance (yet) of a president Swift.
a rabbit would probably make for a better president than the majority of the candidates we've got, but warren's not completely hopeless like crooked hitlery and has much less baggage
Seems like one of the best choices the US could have?
Which is depressing.
? She seems okay and would be fine if not the heritage stuff making her look bad.
Yeah if it's her against trump that's all he's going to talk about most likely. It's going to be brutal
Can't wait to hear a presidential candidate call their opponent a "mutt", that's going to be interesting.
Oh please god no, not another dumb neoliberal candidate.
If she ever got far enough to be in a debate, my guess would be a significant portion of it would consist of trying to deflect the whole Native American heritage scandal, some bit about banning all the scary guns, and maybe something about illegal immigration; while mostly giving vague catchphrases and pretending to support economic reforms without any real intention of doing so.
She was the brain behind the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and wanted to be its first administrator. She's the second most progressive besides Bernie and she's made results.
I support her. While she isn't the best option for the US, and I'd honestly want Sanders. The real fact is that Sanders is getting old, and I worry that Washington would take a toll on him. He's got the right mindset for the US, and he's gonna always be my first pick, but if I had to choose a second option for a Democratic nominee, it'd be Warren.
This race will be interesting, and I hope either Sanders or Warren make the cut. Anything to get Trump out of office.
Which is stupid, considering the sitting president is involved in multiple investigations and criminal activity.
Its highly likley a women will be on the ticket though, the midterms saw moderate GOP women defect in mass to the left.
I think that heavily depends on who else is running and what states are needed by time it's 2020.
Never mind I was wrong about her record and it looks like she co-sponsored several things with Bernie Sanders.
She has largely the same platform as Sanders had/would have.
I feel like a key difference is that many of the blindly anti-establishment lot would be willing to vote Bernie but not Warren. Afaik, somehow there were a lot of people that voted Trump that would've voted Bernie if he'd won, and I'm not sure those same people would switch sides for Warren. Granted, people who would consider Trump can't be called progressives, but in terms of practicality, I'd say it's better to have them than to not. Warren has already lost a skirmish against Trump, where Bernie hasn't really had any direct encounter with him yet so I feel she's going in at a disadvantage. Trump in the last elections found something that stuck and hammered it into his opponents, with Warren he's already found something that sticks.
But that's the thing, it's not really Warren's politics. It's the image of her politics.
Our president is the everyone's annoying, racist uncle on facebook.
Man making 15 false or misleading statements per day: I sleep
Woman who said that she was part native american turns out to be part native american: REAL SHIT
I was typing every single horrible thing and fuck up Trump has done and I don't want my post to go on for eons, so instead lets just remember Trump admitted to sexually assaulting people and it didn't do shit to him, yet Warren has one "fuck up" and it's the end of days.
It's so painfully obvious how much of a double standard there is when it comes to left wing politicians and right wing.
That's actually pretty funny though
You mean kinda like how when the right "says it how it is" they're perfectly in the right but if the left does it they're being uncivilized? (Even though 99 times out of a 100 the right example is them being racist or discriminatory while the left example is almost always pointing out hypocrisy or actual problems.)
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-47185724
She’s now officially formal running for President by doing rally as her first thing to do.
I hate that 'socialist' is considered a negative label by some people in the US.
The way I see it, she's the strongest against Wall Street and corporate corruption. Bernie is right there along side her, but I'd argue it's Warren's specialty when it comes to details.
I'm also a fan of her 2020 designs so far with that teal. https://elizabethwarren.com/
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
