Elizabeth Warren vows to take on corruption before crowd of 20,000 at Washington Square

Well?

I'm liking her more and more.

Wake me up when the bird lands on her podium. This shit about crowds was all the BernieBros posted in 2015 and 2016. That is when they weren't complaining because the Democratic Party wouldn't alter the rules that were already in place when Saint Bernie decided to run as a Democrat. I hate this shit, even though I like Warren.

Good line on the body there. Maybe she should have had the neck fixed last year. Then she really would be a "youthful" old lady.

It's easy to talk big at rallies and on debate stages. What has she actually gotten passed/implemented as a Senator that addresses the issues she talks about?

That goes double for Sanders and his "free stuff."

Trump kept blathering on about bringing back coal and constant winning. We've seen how that played out.

Let me tell you what she did.

She FORCED the credit card companies to stop charging an over the limit fee for ccs. The credit companies would let you go over a few bucks then hit you with an astronomical fee. (Debit cards can still do this but you have to now opt in, thanks to her)

She also FORCED them to add the line under the amount due about the time it will take to pay off the card and suggest a slightly higher payment amount that will pay off balances sooner.

Lots of detailed stuff like that which helps families and gives the predator banking activities some pushback.

Google the CCFB

This doesn’t come across well in a speech but someone in her crew needs to highlight these accomplishments.

Also, keep in mind that Biden has always been on the side of credit card companies and corporations because of his home state of Delaware.

He was AGAINST adding the information about the time it would take to pay off your cc.

And that did exactly nothing, r6. Interest rates on cards are now outrageous. But sure, adding window dressing is something to point to.

I'm going to vote for Liz (I've said that from the moment she kicked off her campaign), and I admire her greatly.

I truly think that she is the best Democratic candidate this year. Highly intelligent, passionate, fierce, and sincere.

And a crowd of 20,000 is nothing to sneeze at.

That said, it's 20,000 in New York City.

I would love to see 20,000 in Ohio, or Pennsylvania, or Indiana, or Oklahoma, or Texas.

That's when I'll be sure that there is a true movement for her out there.

Hopefully, once the trailing candidates are weeded out, and it's left between Liz, Biden and Bernie, she'll finally pull ahead. Which I believe that she will.

I have my serious doubts she can win any of those states that were close enough for Trump to cheat in 2016. I hope I'm wrong.

She's fucking amazing. She's the first candidate I've ever given money

I like her too. My friend - he is a Democrat but sort of apolitical - thinks she is too far left. I told him her policies are a starting point, they will be negotiated and more centrist by the time they ever become a law.

Don’t all candidates in one form or another say this? Drain the swamp?

The great thing about Warren is that she actually has policies. This is also her downfall.

A. She sounds really schoolmarmish when she describes her policies in detail. (see Al Gore).

B. The fact that she has specific policies gives the Republicans something specific to attack.

Every single member of the US Congress since at least 1913 is a war criminal, a thief, and a traitor to the American people.

Live her. Go Liz!

And no it’s not easy to get 20,000 people no matter where it is. And it was short notice. People were showing still all the way till the end.

This is a movement.

Politico:

The 20,000 estimation for the rally, which packed Manhattan's Washington Square Park, comes from the Warren campaign, but it does not yet appear to have been corroborated by the New York City Department of Parks and Recreation.

I think 20,000 is too low. It seemed like 50,000, especially toward the end.

It makes sense that the number wasn’t confirmed. I bet it was double that.

[quote]The 20,000 estimation for the rally, which packed Manhattan's Washington Square Park, comes from the Warren campaign, but it does not yet appear to have been corroborated by the New York City Department of Parks and Recreation.

There is no way that 20,000 can fit into Washington Square Park. And even if they could, Fifth Avenue dead ends into WSP. You think those richie riches on 5th Avenue are going to put up with the overspill standing in front of their co-ops?

Officials put the crowd at 8,000 to 10,000.

I originally thought it was going to be Joe Biden, believe now believe she is going to be the ultimate nominee.. And I am onboard with that.

I gave money to LBJ's 1st run (2nd term). I gave money to FDR.

I’m warming up to her, but she has characteristics closer to failed Democratic candidates than to the successful ones. I also feel like ending private insurance is going to be an issue that makes winning exponentially harder. Even if she pulls it off, I don’t see how she governs or avoids a revivified Tea Party.

Maybe I am too invested in the past. But it usually is the easiest way to predict the future.

The problem with Warren is that she is going to "over promise" to try and beat Bernie Sanders. Reparations? Sure! Free stuff? Sure. Close down oil production due to climate change? Sure

Then when she gets the nomination, she's not going to be able to explain how she's going to pay for it and start pulling back on promises, thereby re-electing Trump.

Just call her Back Peddle Betty!

No thread? Oh goodness!

It's NYC. When she gets this crowd in Bumfucke, call me.

I support Warren (or pretty much whoever isn’t Trump), but I get a little uncomfortable when masses of people start chanting. Even if it’s for something I totally agree with.

I know a lot of people who went. All were wowed.

She looks amazing these days. Her hair has more warmth and her face is flawless.

I think she ditched the pale blue blazers for a while. Let’s hope.

She took selfies for 4 hours after the speech.

4.

Hours.

She is the real deal.

What's that corporate oversight bureau she established but wasn't allowed to run? R6 was that the CCFB? Why was that?

It won't happen. The Very Olds aka Boomers will insist on voting for somebody with dementia and the Somewhat Olds, aka Xers, will vote along with them like they always do.

OF COURSE there were no threads. Your typical datalounge reader votes his pocketbook. Because wallstreet is afraid of Warren because she is for fairplay and an equal shot for the little guy, this turns off your average datalounge reader. You will see many posts about Warren promising FREE STUFF to voters. This is a catch phrase for the entitled pricks to scare away support for her and maintain the status quo with either trump or biden.

[quote] she has characteristics closer to failed Democratic candidates than to the successful ones

If you're thinking that she's similar to Al Gore and John Kerry, you might be right.

But they were not flawed candidates. Gore won the popular vote, and Kerry had a ton of support. They were both highly intelligent and very experienced nominees. The American voting public just happens to be incredibly dumb.

When Warren wins the nomination, everything will hinge upon her selection of a Vice-Presidential running mate.

Gore made a HORRIBLE mistake by choosing Joe Lieberman. HORRIBLE. And that was proven, by Lieberman's eventual defection from the Democratic Party.

Kerry chose smartly with Edwards, but as we saw later on, that could have been disastrous.

Warren cannot pick a female running mate. That will spell her doom.

She might not even be able to pick a minority running mate, because a female+minority ticket might be too much for Flyovers to handle.

She almost has to go with a white guy, and a pretty centrist white guy, at that. Especially given that she's so progressive.

I'm thinking that Tim Ryan, Jay Inslee, Seth Moulton, or John Hickenlooper. She might be able to bring Mayor Pete on-board, but that could be risky. I was thinking Beto is another possibility, but he's so damned flaky.

[quote]Then when she gets the nomination, she's not going to be able to explain how she's going to pay for it and start pulling back on promises, thereby re-electing Trump.

[bold]Why doesn't she lay out specific policies??[/bold]

*3000 pages of specific policies*

[bold]Why doesn't she lay out specific policies??[/bold]

*3000 more pages of specific policies*

[bold]Why doesn't she lay out specific policies??[/bold]

Jesus. American voters are fucking idiots with the attention span of a fruit fly. We deserve Trump.

I think my dream ticket right now is Warren and Mayor Pete, R34. Pete is young enough that he can also be President one day. But yeah, I do get the risks there too!

That particular troll has been shitting all over several threads, R35, demonstrating a complete lack of understanding of politics, economics, health care, etc. And the comment you cite is particularly stupid because a) Warren has already explained how she's going to pay for it, and b) there's not a chance in hell that she will "start pulling back on promises."

That's literally one of the dumbest things I've read on DL today, and that's saying a lot.

The old gal is a total fraud. She talks a good talk but what has she ever done for all the poor folks she's promising things like a hefty social security raise and free college? Mrs. Warrenn is definitely a 1% member... Has she ever given any substantial money to feed, house or educate the less fortunate? Does she walk the walk or is she just all talk?

Oh, you poor thing, R38. Is that really the best you can do as an attack on Warren? That's just pathetic. It looks like we have some competition for the dumbest post on the thread.

To give you one example, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau was her idea and she was the one who set it up under Obama. As for your question on charitable giving, I recommend Google, as her financial records are a matter of public record.

[quote] Why doesn't she lay out specific policies?? *3000 pages of specific policies* Why doesn't she lay out specific policies?? *3000 more pages of specific policies*

As we found out with Hillary Clinton, nobody's got time to read all that shit.

Crowd size has been debunked by NYC police department as the park only has the capacity of about 10k. 👀

Beto could humanize her R34

And guess which tangerine-tinted political figure/reality TV show host is disputing Warren's crowd numbers?

Turns out Warren did donate around 5% of her almost million dollar income the year before deciding to enter the race . That was up substantially from prior years (3% range on average). She's quick to spend our money but she doesn't put her money where her mouth is. I would guess the book deal will make her millions after she loses the race.

[quote]But they were not flawed candidates. Gore won the popular vote, and Kerry had a ton of support. They were both highly intelligent and very experienced nominees. The American voting public just happens to be incredibly dumb.

John Kerry was a weak candidate. Howard Dean had the passion and a support base that was growing, but the media made sure to take him out of the running with that stupid shouting video. And of course the democrats were so concerned about beating Bush and so worried about him getting a second term that they ran to the safest, most non threatening candidate they could think of. And that's exactly what reflected in the voting turnouts.

Sound familiar? As Shirley Bassey sings "It's just a little bit of history repeating itself".

She's been my candidate from Day 1. Also there were many other gays there as well.

Clinton will enter the race by Christmas...Mark my words. These old pussies don't have what it takes. We need a girl with balls... Great Big BALLS and that is Clinton.

8 to 10k sounds about right and it's a respectable crowd, even in NYC. But the reflex to exaggerate is a bad sign.

I'm surprised that nobody mentioned her Colbert appearance. It's quite obvious that she's ducking something with her very vague healthcare plan.

[Quote] Consumer Financial Protection Bureau was her idea and she was the one who set it up under Obama

And Obama didn't let her run it. You can be sure the DNC and the establishment neoliberals prefer Biden.

Here’s the deal:

We should get behind a Warren/Pete ticket. The sooner the better.

We could make Kamila Harris the AG

And give Amy K. Secretary of Education.

Biden Department of State

And find gigs for the rest of them.

Bernie would probably want to continue to serve the great state of VT if not at the top of the ticket.

I would also vote for a Biden/Warren ticket if it meant merging the two wings of the party in order to unify the party and save democracy.

Definitely no to Liz. She's a panderer to the leftist fringe. Especially with the reparations bullshit.

Biden Warren would be proposing a gerontocracy. Biden especially comes across as OLD. You can smell that old man smell just watching him on television.

[quote] Biden Department of State

[quote] Biden Department of State

Biden would never go for SOS.

It's President or nothing.

This is his last shot, and he's taking it.

Warren is a candidate for office. Say whatever to get elected.

I urge people in this thread to ignore all the Warren bashers.

They are clearly either Russian-bots or right wing cunts trying to undermine our Democracy.

We all know that Warren is the best candidate to be Donald DUMP, and these people are TERRIFIED of her. Absolutely TERRIFIED.

You can hear them trembling through their pathetic posts.

R57 Democracy is about being able to FREELY express an opinion. Obviously, that fact escapes you, comrade.

Thanks for the lecture on Democracy, Comrade R58.

Now back to your gulag and go fuck yourself.

R59 Thanx for the example of juvenile behavior. People should know who and what Warren supporters are.

[quote] People should know who and what Warren supporters are.

And likewise, we should also know who the ENEMY is. Namely, you and your right-wing, treasonous, Russian cunt-licking ILK.

We need a person of color on the ticket. Someone exciting.

[quote] We need a person of color on the ticket. Someone exciting.

Sorry, but Corey Booker, Kamala Harris, and Julian Castro are not what I would call "exciting."

[quote]And Obama didn't let her run it.

*sigh* Are you really that ignorant or are you just pretending, R49?

Datalounge is not a "Democracy," R58. Nor is anyone obligated, in any scenario, to listen to you or to take you seriously. And when you post comments like:

[quote]Unfortunately, that "offensive and immature practice" is indicative of "progressive" discourse used to dismiss any opinion outside accepted group think, often reinforced with ignorant hyperbole. Troll and deplorable are but two of a glut of juvenile pejoratives seen regularly on DL. And right here on this thread.

[quote]You "progressives" keep right on negativizing "conservatives". See how far that gets you come Nov 2020.

[quote][italic]"Mr. Trump’s divisive conduct has normalized prejudices."[/italic] So has Warren's.

[quote]UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE [bold]FAILS[/bold] IN COUNTRIES WITH POPULATIONS OVER 20 MILLION. The FACT still remains that, regardless of whether administration is regional or national, the smaller the population to administer, the more successful the scheme, the bigger the population, the more likely its failure....

What you have demonstrated is that you're either stunningly ignorant or a sociopathic troll and your remarks entitle you to ... nothing.

R65 Shooting the messenger when you have no response to the message. No surprise then that you're a mindless Warren acolyte. And a bigot and supporter of bigotry. Pathetic.

Actually, r66, I did, in fact, respond to the "message," such as it was, by a) pointing out that Datalounge is not a Democracy, b) that even in a Democracy situation, you are not entitled to be heard or to be taken seriously, and c) your remarks clearly demonstrate that that you should, in fact, not be taken seriously.

Your response to this was to ... "shoot the messenger." Which just confirms that you're a sociopathic troll. I did love the accusation of "bigotry," though, an accusation that you know to be completely false. So we can add deliberate lies to your list of sins. Pathetic.

Hate to state the obvious, but: Elizabeth Warren is Hillary Redux.

No she isn't. She has fire and passion, Hillary didn't. I like Hillary but Liz can tell you why she needs to be president. Hillary really couldn't.

Presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg criticized Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s (D-MA) “evasive” answer on the costs for her health care plan at the last primary debate.

“She is known for being straightforward and was extremely evasive when asked that question. If you are proud of your plan and it’s the right plan you should defend it in straightforward terms,” Buttigieg said.

Buttigieg was appearing on CNN’s The Lead with Jake Tapper Thursday afternoon to tout his new Medicare “for all who want it” plan, which is similar to Joe Biden’s proposal. Both plans seek to introduce a public option to achieve universal coverage while keeping a private insurance system in place.

Both Warren and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) support Medicare for All, which would establish a wide ranging public system replacing private insurance. Warren has refused to say if middle class taxes would go up under her health care plan.

Her dissing men was really stupid.

A nearly 70 year-old uber-populist who spent most of her adult life supporting and voting for New Deal destroyers Reagan and Bush 41 and all manner of monstrous Republicans while I watched so many of my friends die of AIDS while being ignored by the feds who might at least have aided their suffering!

Why do I remain so unimpressed and suspicious? Why doesn't ANYONE ever ask her what made Reagan so wonderful in '84, and which of his policies she thought were so wonderful?

I think as a lifelong Democrat (No "Road to Damascus" conversions here!), I deserve to know!

[quote]A nearly 70 year-old uber-populist who spent most of her adult life supporting and voting for New Deal destroyers Reagan and Bush 41 and all manner of monstrous Republicans

R72

[quote]According to Warren, in the six presidential elections she voted in before 1996, she cast her ballot for just one GOP nominee, Gerald Ford in 1976.

So she did not vote for Reagan or Bush or Bush Jr. and in 1996 she became a Democrat.

r73 So did she vote for a democrat after 1976 ?

I do NOT believe any "diehard" conservative did not vote for Reagan.

She is LYING. Her story makes no sense.

So because you don't like the truth, it must be LYING? Right.... You need help. Badly.

[quote] So she did not vote for Reagan or Bush or Bush Jr. and in 1996 she became a Democrat.

Liz is a bit of a stranger to the truth. Let's not forget she passed herself off as a Native American because her mother told her she had high cheek bones. You know she's lying because her lips are moving.

I like that she's drawing crowds. But, would she support a nominee if it isn't her?

Is she gonna pull a Bernie if it isn't her?

Um, R77, blatantly lying like that *really* doesn't help your cause. It just makes you look like an ignorant troll.

Oh, wait....

I hope she continues to do so whether or not she's elected. She's so smart. Someone should make a documentary about her causes.

All of us have had the "history" our family told to us. Only a petty person like Trump and his supporters would turn a family story into a lie. I've been told I am 100% Irish. I've said that for years, but I bet if I took a DNA test that would shatter what I was told for years.

[quote]All of us have had the "history" our family told to us. Only a petty person like Trump and his supporters would turn a family story into a lie. I've been told I am 100% Irish. I've said that for years, but I bet if I took a DNA test that would shatter what I was told for years.

There's a difference between believing what your family said about your history and actually using that information to secure special status for employment. What she did was wrong.

She did not benefit from her story R82.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Man, talk about a non-story.

[quote]Mrs Warren lists 10 ingredients for the cold omelet, while Mr Franey lists only four, but the preparation of the omelet is nearly identical, with both detailing the use of a 'seven-inch Teflon pan.'

Omigod!!!! They both specified a seven-inch pan (standard size for an omelet)!!!! That's it!!!! Burn her!!!!!!

Our trolls are getting pretty desperate, aren't they? Resurrecting a Daily Fail article from 2012? Pathetic.