@Pricknick He once again already said he would.

It's just my opinion but I believe she is hungry for a position of power that will enhance her already well finaced life.
I have no issue with those that have much. I do however, have an issue with those that have much and want more.
She strikes me as not only a liar, but a chalatan in full disguise.
We will see if the demonrats again position an insider over the popular. If Sanders again fails and fully supports the corronation, as he did in 2016, he is twice the fool.

@Not Henry Kissinger @snoopydawg

As for Warren...

it was only a matter of time before she finally got around to boiling the rabbit.

The accusations came out of thin air and were something that no one in their right mind would think was true. This tells you a bit about the people who do believe it huh? And for the Clinton News Network to push the story by asking her what she thought about Bernie saying that a woman cannot be president after he denied he said that made it all the more obvious.

lol...

she is getting her shit rocked hard, and no amount of reminding us that she is a woman, formerly of colour, is moving the needle with voters.

I agree that she saw her numbers going down down down and pulled this stunt to sabotage Bernie for ByeDone. If she gets to play VP it will unite the never Bernie's with ByeDone's campaign. I don't think that the DNC gives a rat's ass whether ByeDone wins or Trump does as long as Bernie doesn't. But hey...what if this ploy was to get people all upset about sexism again and Hillary gets to come in and save the day? I'd put nothing past the scheming democrats who's job it is to keep their donors happy.

@snoopydawg

Warren tried to get Bernie to respond awkwardly, it didn't work, so CNN sat on the audio for a day debating if it helped her.

TV journalistic integrity at it's finest. https://t.co/Qa3uZLdtFi

— Nate's Liver - Commentary (@SilERabbit) January 16, 2020

Listen to her tone of voice. Was this part of the setup too? And look at how Bernie exists the stage.
Female dawg and all that! I am thoroughly disgusted with what Warren did. How does one throw anyone away like she did? Ugh!

@snoopydawg First, I don't think she is playing to lose (or for VP or any other slot), nor do I feel her campaign thinks they are over. We can think that, but I'd say it's still pretty up in the air for her at this point. She's not in Klobachar territory yet.

Second, I don't think Warren endorsing Bernie, should he be the nominee, is a given at all. 2016, anyone? While I understand the media reporting their non-aggression pact and how chummy they've been to this point would make it look that way, I don't believe she really believes in Sander's issues.

Third, in 2016 she was able to endorse Clinton without trashing Bernie (though some would argue the endorsement itself was a middle finger.) Again, the story has been all about how much the two are on the same page and her going against him like this just to avoid an endorsement really makes no sense.

And fourth, if she was looking for an out, as the author implies, surely she could find one without wrecking her own personal standing in the process. Since she still seems to be trying to appear as a "progressive" of some stripe, it makes no sense to stab the head of the Democrat's progressive wing in the back.

Just doesn't add up to me. I really think the simplest answer is likely. Her numbers are slipping so they decided to go negative. It's an old playbook and sometimes works, especially when you have a compliant media willing to work with you.

(sidenote: this post was autoremoved from r/SandersForPresident*, anyone a member from there that can tell me why?)*

​

I've seen a lot of these responses:

"She's trying to convince progressive voters to go for her instead of Bernie as a desperation move."

"It's a media-fueled argument that actually isn't as bad as it seems."

"It's a misunderstanding due to language."

"We know Bernie, he'd never say anything like that; she's committing political suicide by doubling-down on this statement."

"It's over, forget about it, lets move on."

----

I think we're missing the point of this feud/attack.

Just a few days ago, we had posts talking about Warren slipping hard in the polls and how she should drop out and endorse Bernie, that progressives stick together and win this thing, etc. I think the real reason this story was propagated was to make a character attack against Bernie so that Warren won't have to endorse Bernie anymore.

Liz is, overall, an above-average candidate. She's many people on this sub's #2. Her followers are mainstream progressives. But we've seen that she's had flashes of establishment: taking corporate money, billionaire donors, endoring M4A as a "framework", giving the nod to Hillary in 2016, etc. We've seen how she's corporate; she's lip service to policy that Sanders has championed for a looooong time.

I don't think this was a hail mary attempt at saving her campaign. In fact, I think it was her surrender. Warren will probably drop out in the coming weeks. She has a lot of backers. Her endorsement of a candidate has a lot of weight. And it's a "no-brainer" that before this entire fiasco, she was likely to endorse Bernie.

However, with this attack on Bernie's character, it makes it easier for her **not** to endorse Sanders, and give nod to Biden. I specifically use the word "easier" because I believe she's gone full establishment.

If she flat-out endorsed Biden without this "feud," people would be on to her about being establishment. With this feud, she avoids that rebranding and can say, "As much as Bernie and I agree on policy and are outsiders, I can't in good conscience endorse him after his 'a woman can't be president' comment."

She takes a "moral highground," making her look even stronger while still dropping out and supporting the establishment.

Link

@Centaurea That quote from Rumi sounds a lot like a pivotal point in the movie "The Invasion Of The Body Snatchers". Really.

on the onstage interplay between Warren and Sanders after the debate. The vlogger suggests that Warren knew their mics were still hot and may have been trying to bait Bernie into an argument to use against him.

@Wally

comes to mind here. That's a psychological model of dysfunctional human behavior in which the roles of victim, rescuer, and persecutor constantly switch among the members of the dysfunctional system. The victim turns into the rescuer. The rescuer turns into the persecutor. And so on.

Women historically have had a lot to endure. But the former victims of injustice have turned into the perpetrators of injustice.

Those tweets you posted are not the product of a healthy psyche. They show someone who is projecting her own issues into a situation that does not involve her. There's no rational, logical thinking in those tweets. Just a lot of obsession.

If you don't recall this tweeter, see here. She also now writes a weekly column supporting Warren in The Guardian.

I think if a woman candidate had a base of support that sent rape and death threats to people who were thinking of voting for someone else in the primary, the behavior of this base would be considered a valid subject of discussion and the candidate would have to answer for it.

— Moira Donegan (@MoiraDonegan) January 15, 2020

Material Retaliation (“Refund Warren”)
Denial and Gaslighting(It never happened)
Minimizing Harm (it happened but it wasn’t that bad)
Victim Blaming (how could she do this to him)
Himpathy (that poor man)
Invented Nefarious Motivations (what’s she really after?)

— Moira Donegan (@MoiraDonegan) January 14, 2020

@JtC

if Bernie wins the nomination it's a sure bet Liz Warren wont be his VP pick.