Hillary or Warren...

[Ljube]

Is Hillary the Dems' Mitt Romney?


I think she is.

[Bull Moose Base]

Warren has done more in the past few days to suggest she's considering a run than she has before. I still maintain she'd have a harder time winning a primary than a general. Not sure what the theory that she couldn't win a general election is based on. Maybe the same thing that drove the conventional wisdom that Obama was too liberal to win a general election. I actually think Warren would be a stronger nominee than Clinton against a Republican establishment candidate like Bush, Romney or Christie. Not sure that's true against an outsider Republican nominee but Warren would be favored against any of them regardless.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Warren, of course.

It will be hilarious to see Hillary supporters wondering what to do with the shiny gender card they had that is suddenly useless in a Hillary vs. Warren race.

[badgate]

It will be hilarious to see Hillary supporters wondering what to do with the shiny gender card they had that is suddenly useless in a Hillary vs. Warren race.

[IceSpear]

It's clearly the gender card + name recognition that is keeping Hillary 38 points ahead of Warren in Massachusetts.

[exopolitician]

Warren by a mile. Here's why:

Fresh face, no toxic connections to the Obama WH and she excites the base. Something Hillary wishes she could do.

She's a fighter, willing to take on the White House and Congress over multiple issues important to her and relevant to public interest. She is charismatic, and would run an aggressive campaign on economic issues that most voters agree with.

She's not Hillary Clinton.

 
Her only downside is her lack of foreign police experience, which is why Webb would be a great running mate for her. (imo)

[IceSpear]

Fresh face, no toxic connections to the Obama WH and she excites the base. Something Hillary wishes she could do.

Hillary does excite the base. If she didn't, she wouldn't be polling like an incumbent president. It's not 2008 anymore.

[exopolitician]

Fresh face, no toxic connections to the Obama WH and she excites the base. Something Hillary wishes she could do.

Hillary does excite the base. If she didn't, she wouldn't be polling like an incumbent president. It's not 2008 anymore.

Due to name recognition. Warren (or anyone willing to run against Clinton for that matter) just needs extra exposure. A healthy primary fight would do that, and honestly I believe Warren would do exceptionally well once the campaign starts. She's already done so much within the past 48 hours to dominate news cycles, the pressure for her to run is soon going to be overwhelming.

[IceSpear]

Fresh face, no toxic connections to the Obama WH and she excites the base. Something Hillary wishes she could do.

Hillary does excite the base. If she didn't, she wouldn't be polling like an incumbent president. It's not 2008 anymore.

Due to name recognition. Warren (or anyone willing to run against Clinton for that matter) just needs extra exposure. A healthy primary fight would do that, and honestly I believe Warren would do exceptionally well once the campaign starts. She's already done so much within the past 48 hours to dominate news cycles, the pressure for her to run is soon going to be overwhelming.

You're right that some of it is name recognition. But that doesn't explain away a 50 point lead. In Warren's home state where their name recognition is roughly the same, Hillary still has a huge lead.

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=197741.0

[exopolitician]

Fresh face, no toxic connections to the Obama WH and she excites the base. Something Hillary wishes she could do.

Hillary does excite the base. If she didn't, she wouldn't be polling like an incumbent president. It's not 2008 anymore.

Due to name recognition. Warren (or anyone willing to run against Clinton for that matter) just needs extra exposure. A healthy primary fight would do that, and honestly I believe Warren would do exceptionally well once the campaign starts. She's already done so much within the past 48 hours to dominate news cycles, the pressure for her to run is soon going to be overwhelming.

You're right that some of it is name recognition. But that doesn't explain away a 50 point lead. In Warren's home state where their name recognition is roughly the same, Hillary still has a huge lead.

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=197741.0

Two years out with no officially announced candidacies? I'm not worried.

MoveOn is apparently holding a rally in Des Moines this Wednesday. Really interested to see how that turns out:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/BL-WB-51493

[Xing]

Warren would be like a dream candidate for me, but I'll admit that Hillary has a better chance of winning the general election.

[justfollowingtheelections]

I agree with those who say that Warren has a better chance of winning the general election than Hilary.  She's a fresh face in politics unlike Hilary, and she can run as an outsider, much like Obama did.  I'm still not sure she will run though.  I know she was an early Hilary supporter so I really don't know if she would run against her.  At a recent appearance on the Bill Maher show he said Senator Warren you will be a great president or something to that extent but she didn't respond.  I guess she must be thinking about it but I don't know if she wants a bloody primary.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Just saw a Ready for Warren ad on Youtube.

[henster]

Is no one concerned by the fact Warren has ran only one political race in her entire life? Her 2012 campaign wasn't impressive and Obama's coattails largely carried her to victory but the gaffes and missteps were notable including the Native American stuff. I mean you just can't win one political race and jump right into a Presidential campaign. Obama, Hillary, Romney, Bush, Walker etc. all have had extensive political races over their lives and suffered losses and difficult campaigns Warren has not.

[Bull Moose Base]

Warren has been pretty gaffe-free over the past year while Hillary has made a couple bad ones. I'm not  worried about Hillary as nominee but it's not an advantage she has over Warren. But Warren is still not very likely to run.

[checkers]

Warren, though I'm inclined to believe her when she says she's not running.

[Dr. Cynic]

Warren.

If Clinton is the nominee, I'm voting third party.

[Blair]

Didn't all the dems say the same in 2008? Don't vote Obama because he'll lose, don't vote Obama he's inexperienced, don't vote Obama he's too extreme.

Hiliary is part of the 90's, heck she just about fitted into the 2000's. As Edward Kennedy said in 2008 we need 'new leaders' for the generation-not another member of a corrupt dynasty.

To the poster who said you need campaigning experience Warren has won an election to the senate in her own right-Eisenhower didn't have any experience in 1952 and he survived, Carter had a governorship race in Georgia, and GWB had a 1994 race that David Duke could of won. All Hilary has is a liberal New York seat in 2000 that could of gone to any democrat (Cuomo, JFK jr etc) and a a failed 2008 run. Heck look at Hilary in 2008-do we want that?

[Progressive]

I like both, but I'm ready for President Hillary Clinton.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

The one who didn't vote in favor of what will hopefully remain the greatest war crime of the 21st century.

[Intell]

Both are good, but Hillary would make a great POTUS.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

Is no one concerned by the fact Warren has ran only one political race in her entire life? Her 2012 campaign wasn't impressive and Obama's coattails largely carried her to victory but the gaffes and missteps were notable including the Native American stuff. I mean you just can't win one political race and jump right into a Presidential campaign. Obama, Hillary, Romney, Bush, Walker etc. all have had extensive political races over their lives and suffered losses and difficult campaigns Warren has not.

Um the Native American stuff was pretty much entirely brought up by Scott Brown, not Warren herself. If anything it was a reflection of the ineptitude of Brown that he thought repeatedly campaigning on the "Elizabeth Warren is a fake Indian" theme would carry him to victory.

And yes, you can just win one political race and jump right into a presidential campaign. In fact you don't need to win any prior races, but she did win, and being a U.S. Senator will check the box of having won and held a high office American voters demand these days (although Warren would have been perfectly qualified to run for president without ever having served in the Senate).

George W. Bush had substantial experience running in elections and governing, he lost his first race for Congress, but was successfully elected twice as Governor of the largest state in the 48 contiguous United States.....and was a total disaster of a president.

I think the number of political races/offices a candidate has in their past is largely irrelevant. President of the United States is a unique job that no other job could adequately prepare one for, so any newly elected POTUS is going to require on-the-job training before settling into the office.

[henster]

Is no one concerned by the fact Warren has ran only one political race in her entire life? Her 2012 campaign wasn't impressive and Obama's coattails largely carried her to victory but the gaffes and missteps were notable including the Native American stuff. I mean you just can't win one political race and jump right into a Presidential campaign. Obama, Hillary, Romney, Bush, Walker etc. all have had extensive political races over their lives and suffered losses and difficult campaigns Warren has not.

Um the Native American stuff was pretty much entirely brought up by Scott Brown, not Warren herself. If anything it was a reflection of the ineptitude of Brown that he thought repeatedly campaigning on the "Elizabeth Warren is a fake Indian" theme would carry him to victory.

And yes, you can just win one political race and jump right into a presidential campaign. In fact you don't need to win any prior races, but she did win, and being a U.S. Senator will check the box of having won and held a high office American voters demand these days (although Warren would have been perfectly qualified to run for president without ever having served in the Senate).

George W. Bush had substantial experience running in elections and governing, he lost his first race for Congress, but was successfully elected twice as Governor of the largest state in the 48 contiguous United States.....and was a total disaster of a president.

I think the number of political races/offices a candidate has in their past is largely irrelevant. President of the United States is a unique job that no other job could adequately prepare one for, so any newly elected POTUS is going to require on-the-job training before settling into the office.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/rosiegray/7-awful-moments-from-elizabeth-warrens-native-ame

The Native American stuff shows what an inexperienced pol she is, it was handled poorly by her and the campaign. I recall seeing a video of her running away when asked about the her thoughts on the Palenstinian conflict, that does not look like a pol who's ready for a Presidential run.

[IceSpear]

Warren has never really cared too much about foreign policy issues to begin with. That's probably another reason she doesn't want to run.