Anyone have any idea what this is all about?
This is the cover article for the Nov. 25 issue of The New Republic, but is this something that people have actually been talking about, or was the writer just bored and decided to make something up.
I did a quick glance at the article, and it completely avoids the tidbits that make you even think someone is considering a run at the presidency. There is a reference to New Hampshire, site of the first presidential primary, but there’s no indication that Warren is testing the mood there. All the story says is that Warren is in a neighboring state and folks in the Granite State have seen her ads.
The word Iowa doesn’t even appear in the article. Iowa’s where the first caucuses are. Anyone who even thinks about politics knows that is someone is considering a run, they’re getting their machines together in Iowa and New Hampshire. We know already that Hillary Rodham Clinton, Rand Paul, Ted Cruz and Chris Christie have already been in New Hampshire and Iowa. That means they’re running for president. I should look this up, but would anyone want to pace a bet against Joe Biden having visited either of those states recently? I didn’t think so.
But here’s the New Republic, with it’s Elizabeth Warren as a “Being John Malokovich” substitute, saying that Hillary is in trouble because Elizabeth Warren can wipe out her presidential prospects.
And let’s conveniently ignore the fact that this happened:
All of the female Democratic senators signed a secret letter to Hillary Rodham Clinton early this year encouraging her to run for president in 2016 – a letter that includes the signature of Sen. Elizabeth Warren and other senators who are mentioned as potential candidates, two high-ranking Democratic Senate aides told ABC News.
The letter, organized at the urging of Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., was meant to be a private show of support from a group of 16 high-profile former colleagues and fans who are now senators, urging Clinton to do what much of the Democratic Party assumes she will, the aides said.
The existence of the letter was not revealed publicly until this week, when Sen. Kay Hagan, D-N.C., mentioned it at an event in New York City on Monday. That was an apparent slip-up that prompted a round of apologetic e-mails from her Senate office to other offices on Capitol Hill, according to the aides.
Oh, and let’s call bulllshit on the “was meant to be a private show of support” part of this ABC News report. When 16 senators sign ANYTHING, they know it’s going public.
So I go back to my original question. What’s this all about? Are writers eager to create conflict in the political realm were none exists? It’s like we’ve already have the faux Benghazi scandal, which the GOP is going to hammer Hillary with when she actually makes a run because that’s the only thing they can dredge up (Drudge up would be a better term) to slow her down. But that’s a Republican attack point, which is to be expected and will be ignored by Democrats.
But if you have a “Guess what! Hillary is a woman and a Democrat, and there’s another woman who’s a Democrat who can take her down” scenario, well, By Golly, we got ourselves a Dem on Dem girl fight. Think about it, no one’s going to get excited if it’s a guy challenging Hillary. It has to be a woman to make things spicy.
What would be great though, is if Hillary got the nomination and he named Elizabeth Warren as her running mate. Wall Street, the GOP and all of Wingnut Land would have a stroke.
And I still love this Elizabeth Warren parody ad:
- Elizabeth Warren Is The New Russ Feingold Or Howard Dean And That’s Bad News For Hillary Clinton, Again (huffingtonpost.com)
- Why Elizabeth Warren should scare Hillary Clinton (washingtonpost.com)
- Democrats quietly throwing presidential support behind Elizabeth Warren: report (nydailynews.com)