Would Liz Warren fly in 2020?

Are you Kiddin'.She flies right now.
Not as high as - The Wizard of Oz - Wicked Witch of the West.Butts
close enough.

 

The bottom line is that Elizabeth Warren is not all that smart.
She never would have been hired at Harvard had she not lied about her DNA.

I suspect that they will go with another Black tool.

 

Corey Booker checks off a few leftie boxes.

 

Corey Booker is a wannabee Nuthin.Merely a Handsome Half-Black
like Obama with some priviledged - Uppity acquired - complex that
supposedly makes him an instant winner in the eye's of the Democrat
Party.Or the party who created and fashioned the Klu Klux Klan.
This is getting SO Old.Most Americans are sick to death of this crap.
The Left or the Democrat Party are STILL Racists.
Look at how they treat,talk about and demean The Only Black Senator.
Namely the humble and plain-spoken Republican Tim Scott of S.Carolina.
This Democrat Party is laced with Historic Bigotry.
Just because they deny it and the MSM goes along ... means nothing.
It's like OJ Simpson running around acting like he's exonerated.
Gets a few bodyguard types to help him Hold up and steal at gun point
valuables.They might have been his at one time,but then his own wife
was his at one time also.He was a very erratic control freak.
Like this Democrat party.

 

Before nominating Warren, I would look back at some history candidates from the Northeast has have had. They have been losers nationwide, winners in the northeast and west coast only.
2016 Hillary Clinton New York lost
2008/12 Obama Illinois won
2004 Kerry Massachusetts lost
2000 Gore Tennessee lost
1992/96 Bill Clinton Arkansas Won
1988 Dukakis Massachusetts lost

One has to go back to JFK in 1960 to find the last presidential candidate from the northeast, Massachusetts who won. The Democrats aren't the only party to run someone from Massachusetts and lose, Romney in 2012 for the GOP lost to someone from Illinois. Where were the winners from:
1964 LBJ Texas
1968/72 Nixon California
1976 Carter Georgia
1980/84 Reagan California
1988 Bush Sr. Texas
1992/96 Bill Clinton Arkansas
2000/04 Bush Jr. Texas
2008/12 Obama Illinois
2016 Trump New York, finally someone from the northeast won. But being both Trump and Hillary Clinton were from the northeast, one had to win. But neither was from Massachusetts either.

 

Is that you Kanye?

 

Warren has a ceiling of 30%.

 

Bats will fly out of Pocahontas's AZZ before she is ever elected president..

 

ABOUT LIZ

She most definitely has a chance, but it is too early to assess how much of probability of election, Liz has. Such is decided in the minds of voters, as this last election has shown us, sometimes in the last days of an election cycle.

Of course, it does not help to have all the "false news" (aka "lies") that simply muddy the already unclear waters. The Internet has few rules and even lesser "oversight". So, it is difficult to keep out trash-reporting the intent of which is simply to degrade a candidature's chances of election.

What is worse the general gullibility of the voting population, which has shown in this last election just how worrisome an issue that can be. Far too much money is spent on TV "commercialization" of a candidate, and the election often ends up like selling soap-powder, with candidates claiming that they "wash whiter than white". Whilst remaining very thin on "political detail".

MY POINT: The Facts

One sad aspect of this last election was spectacularly clear. Hillary was very evident about what she stood for, but how many people actually read her political stance as was presented on-line in detail. Moreover, the one important bit she borrowed from Bernie, and was KEY, went totally unnoticed.

It was when she agreed to include in her platform a government subsidy for the cost of a PostSecondary Education at any state-run institute of learning of the children of any family earning less than $100K per year. Now, the average family income in the US is actually a bit more than that sum. (See here.)

Today, we graduate from High School 85% of our students*. Of that amount, 60% obtain a four-year degree and 28% a two-year degree. (It is impossible to tell the "crossover" - that is those who have a two-year degree and then obtain a four-year degree. The statistics simply do not exist.) So, just multiply those numbers, and you get about 70% of our high-school graduates who are then obtaining either a 2- or 4-year diploma.

In fact, the average Class of 2016 graduate has a student loan debt of $37,172, up six percent from last year. Now, from that fact, understand how many students either try and fail to obtain the advanced degree, or simply do not try at all. (This latter group are the ones who most populate American prisons today.)

MY POINT: The Consequences

And, after the bleeding of low-end jobs in America since the Bamboo Curtain came crashing down in 1991, we should know how important that Advanced Degree is to obtaining a decent-job at a decent-pay.

And yet, we blew it. We elected a PotUS who could care less about the cost of an advanced degree that guarantees nowadays at least a decent middle-class standard-of-living.

Tell me how I've got it "all wrong". Especially the bit about how the statistics "are lying" ...

*Any of the following statistics regarding graduation rates can be obtained at the National Center for Education Statistics of the Department of Education.

 

Blah, blah, blah. Not a shred of factual evidence to support the accusations - just sarcasm.

She's a woman, a democrat and you just don't like her. That's YOUR problem, not hers ...

Moving right along ...

 

Four years older, 20lbs heavier and even uglier than she is now, yeah she'll fly if they just cut down on the aerodynamic drag her mouth creates.

 

I would expect nothing less from a twisted liberal Zealot...

Pocahontas lies....

Plain to see for the sane....

Again,

Bats will fly out of her AZZ before she is ever elected president...

 

To run for POTUS she will have to prove her claim to a native American heritage and I do not think she can do that short of DNA testing and I am betting she will go nowhere near that.

 

No. She is one hell of an ideologue, that makes Santorum look kinda moderate. Also, recent polling in her state has shown that a a plurality of voters do not think she deserves reelection, and you can be sure that isn't because she has been too soft or moderate or anything, it's because she's too much of an ideologue.

I have my own reasons for disliking her, which are entirely about policies and her grossly misinforming or deceiving the public about them, but I suspect that the reasons why voters in her home state aren't so warm to her are different.

 

she is worse than bernie sanders in terms of being principled, she sold him out to endorse clinton, and then sanders sold liberals out to endorse clinton.

the people who represent liberals are all fraudulent, the green party says the right things about crony capitalism but it also looks suspicious.

i think alex jones from infowars would be a good representative of liberals, even though he appears to be an alcoholic he is a very principled man from what little i have seen on him.

 

I'm sure she knows she has no claim to being a Native American. She's Certainly had a DNA test and knows she's no more Native American than my dog who I'm taking for a walk. If she could prove it, she already would have shoved the results up Trump's posterior.

This excuse for a politician faked minority status for employment gain. If she try's to run for POTUS, the right will hang her from the highest tree with the hypocrisy of her dishonesty. She's likely done for any hope of higher office.

 

The statement heard on the Senate floor this past week says it all. "Have a seat Senator (Warren)."

Goofy Warren's career peaked already.

Steve

 

Would Liz Warren fly in 2020?

Liz is "flying" already. And in 2020, she'll be ready. The only question that remains is: Will WE be ready?

We who? The Democrat constituency, that's who!

This last election shows that "we" (whatever that word means) were not. We let Hillary down in key-states. (And when a country can send a man to the moon, but not a woman to Washington, then we are not as "great" as we think :^)

Voter turnout rates historically:


Sixty-percent of the population is not bad, but compared to other "so-called" democracies it is nothing to blog about. If you'd like to see how others do, then look here: International Differences (in voter turnout rates). (Note how we have a longgggggggg way to go to catch up with ITALY at 90%!

 

PS: What happened in the infographic I posted between 1900 and 1932 such that our voter participation rate sunk by 30%?