Politico: Republicans “trying to make Warren the face of the Democratic Party”

[Mr. Morden]

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/02/elizabeth-warren-democrats-midterms-235238

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[NeverAgain]

And yet, she persists.

[uti2]

This is another element to add to the Warren = Democratic Ted Cruz analogy. This is what democrats tried to do to the GOP before Trump showed up, of course against Trump, Hillary took the opposite strategy by praising Paul Ryan, which had terrible downballot implications.

[Bojack Horseman]

Considering we have Donald Trump to run against, this isn't going to bode well for Republicans.

[JA]

We'll have to wait to see how Warren's approval rating fairs and how she may affect other races in 2018. I hope she proves to be a positive force for our party, but she does seem to be highly controversial and may perpetuate the problems with voters that we had thanks to Clinton.

[The_Doctor]

This is a stupid long term move. You're going to make Elizabeth Warren, who has made her raisson d'etre on economic issues the face of the Democratic Party? Look at her issue focus and issue set. They're economic, which is highly attractive to the working class folks in 2024. Why would you want to make her the face of the Democratic Party and force the Democrats to defend her if it would just make them economic populists (like what she wants?)

It's smarter to make a social SJW the face of the Democratic Party.

[DPKdebator]

Just because someone electrifies the base doesn't mean that everyone else will like her.

[uti2]

Just because someone electrifies the base doesn't mean that everyone else will like her.

No one liked Gore, but he still won the popular vote, and would've obviously won the electoral vote too if he had electrified the base.

[Blackacre]

This is a stupid long term move. You're going to make Elizabeth Warren, who has made her raisson d'etre on economic issues the face of the Democratic Party? Look at her issue focus and issue set. They're economic, which is highly attractive to the working class folks in 2024. Why would you want to make her the face of the Democratic Party and force the Democrats to defend her if it would just make them economic populists (like what she wants?)

It's smarter to make a social SJW the face of the Democratic Party.

It's because there's a bit more to Warren than just that. In terms of her policy priorities, yes she is a Sanders-type progressive populist focused on economic issues. However, Because she is a woman from MA who supported HRC, and because of her own speaking style, the GOP thinks it'll be easy to impose the optics of a SJW Dem onto her, make her look like a social SJW instead of an economic liberal.

She's a good boogeywoman for the GOP as long as that's the narrative that sticks. If that narrative doesn't stick to her and she's shown to be the economic leftie that she is, this will backfire tremendously for the Republicans.

[UWS]

So that means that maybe Warren should not be the nominee in 2020.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

So that means that maybe Warren should not be the nominee in 2020.

That Republicans believe Warren's message to be a loosing one does not necessarily indicate such is true. This time last year, Democrats were pursuing a similar strategy in regards to Donald Trump, and look where that got us. Singling Warren out as the personal embodiment of the opposition movement could just as easily become an asset if Trump and the party at-large are unpopular with the voting public three years from now.

[World politics is up Schmitt creek]

Singling Warren out as the personal embodiment of the opposition movement could just as easily become an asset if Trump and the party at-large are unpopular with the voting public three years from now.

This is the key point, I think.

[Phony Moderate]

Warren joined the Democratic Party because she felt that the Republicans weren't sufficiently pro-market, so maybe that's the reason (bearing in mind Trump's economic populism and all).

[Confused Democrat]

This is a stupid long term move. You're going to make Elizabeth Warren, who has made her raisson d'etre on economic issues the face of the Democratic Party? Look at her issue focus and issue set. They're economic, which is highly attractive to the working class folks in 2024. Why would you want to make her the face of the Democratic Party and force the Democrats to defend her if it would just make them economic populists (like what she wants?)

It's smarter to make a social SJW the face of the Democratic Party.

It's because there's a bit more to Warren than just that. In terms of her policy priorities, yes she is a Sanders-type progressive populist focused on economic issues. However, Because she is a woman from MA who supported HRC, and because of her own speaking style, the GOP thinks it'll be easy to impose the optics of a SJW Dem onto her, make her look like a social SJW instead of an economic liberal.

She's a good boogeywoman for the GOP as long as that's the narrative that sticks. If that narrative doesn't stick to her and she's shown to be the economic leftie that she is, this will backfire tremendously for the Republicans.

They won't have to do much selling to Republicans since she's already a boogeywoman among the GOP base. Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity rip on her almost daily during their talk radio shows, and Donald Trump successfully caricatured her during the 2016 general.   

This midterm strategy of tying incumbent Democrats to Warren is not about turning off moderates; it's about turning out the base i.e. Trump supporters.

Nevertheless, I think this strategy is going to royally backfire and turn out the Democratic base instead.

[publicunofficial]

Congressional Republicans have tended not to bring specific policy disagreements they have with Warren and instead just blanket her as a "wacky liberal". A good strategy?

[Mr. Smith]

The more things change, the more the current Republicans keep making the same mistakes the Watergate babies and McCarthyites did with St. Ronnie.

[DPKdebator]

This is a stupid long term move. You're going to make Elizabeth Warren, who has made her raisson d'etre on economic issues the face of the Democratic Party? Look at her issue focus and issue set. They're economic, which is highly attractive to the working class folks in 2024. Why would you want to make her the face of the Democratic Party and force the Democrats to defend her if it would just make them economic populists (like what she wants?)

It's smarter to make a social SJW the face of the Democratic Party.

It's because there's a bit more to Warren than just that. In terms of her policy priorities, yes she is a Sanders-type progressive populist focused on economic issues. However, Because she is a woman from MA who supported HRC, and because of her own speaking style, the GOP thinks it'll be easy to impose the optics of a SJW Dem onto her, make her look like a social SJW instead of an economic liberal.

She's a good boogeywoman for the GOP as long as that's the narrative that sticks. If that narrative doesn't stick to her and she's shown to be the economic leftie that she is, this will backfire tremendously for the Republicans.

People I know generally hate Warren more for her personality and speaking style than her political and economic positions (something that I agree with to an extent).

[Adam Griffin]

FYI, it wouldn't surprise me if this is the real reason they're trying to malign her; not necessarily to connect the Democratic Party to her, but to connect her to the Democratic Party:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Progressive]

Oh please. Donald Trump and Mike freakin' Pence are in the White House. I'd take Mike Gravel over Trump.

[Fuzzy Says: "Abolish NPR!"]

This is a stupid long term move. You're going to make Elizabeth Warren, who has made her raisson d'etre on economic issues the face of the Democratic Party? Look at her issue focus and issue set. They're economic, which is highly attractive to the working class folks in 2024. Why would you want to make her the face of the Democratic Party and force the Democrats to defend her if it would just make them economic populists (like what she wants?)

It's smarter to make a social SJW the face of the Democratic Party.

It's because there's a bit more to Warren than just that. In terms of her policy priorities, yes she is a Sanders-type progressive populist focused on economic issues. However, Because she is a woman from MA who supported HRC, and because of her own speaking style, the GOP thinks it'll be easy to impose the optics of a SJW Dem onto her, make her look like a social SJW instead of an economic liberal.

She's a good boogeywoman for the GOP as long as that's the narrative that sticks. If that narrative doesn't stick to her and she's shown to be the economic leftie that she is, this will backfire tremendously for the Republicans.

People I know generally hate Warren more for her personality and speaking style than her political and economic positions (something that I agree with to an extent).

I agree with the highlighted sentiment.

I don't hate Liz Warren; I just find her annoying.  The Pocahontas thing doesn't help, either.  It's a richly deserved insult for a politician caught being a poser and a phony.  That's a problem Sherrod Brown hasn't encountered to date.

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

This could be a bad idea, after all look at how happy many Democrats were to see Trump win the primaries.

[henster]

Its like if Ds 2014 strategy was tying Rs to Cruz or some other crazy Rep, she does not even have universal name ID.

[BaldEagle1991]

This could be a bad idea, after all look at how happy many Democrats were to see Trump win the primaries.

By that logic, Elizabeth Warren is gonna be our 46th President.

[Shadows]

I don't see Republicans gaining from this. But why are they not targeting Bernie?

If only Bernie was 10 years younger, he has a genuine image of being a person who is pro-poor & middle class, who cares about people & can connect with the working class.

I think they will try to pain Liz Warren as a coastal Mass elite which is more difficult with Bernie !

[Stranger in a strange land]

I don't see Republicans gaining from this. But why are they not targeting Bernie?

If only Bernie was 10 years younger, he has a genuine image of being a person who is pro-poor & middle class, who cares about people & can connect with the working class.

I think they will try to pain Liz Warren as a coastal Mass elite which is more difficult with Bernie !

Because the Brooklyn Accent, messy hair, and ill-fitting suits are markers of authenticity. He really means what he says, and he connects to voters precisely because he's so rough around the edges. Going after him would backfire. Warren is a much more tempting target because she's a liberal professor from Massachusetts, and because she's a woman, they can Hillary her as being shrill.