Elizabeth Warren says she won't get 'Hillary'd' in 2020

Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts has no intention of being "Hillary'd" in the 2020 Democratic presidential primary.

That was the phrase, used as shorthand by a student asking about sexist attacks during a CNN town hall Monday night, that prompted Warren to recall her successful 2012 campaign to unseat Republican Sen. Scott Brown.

It was a campaign, Warren said, that almost never happened. Democrats were telling her she ought to run, that she'd make a great senator. But there was a catch: Most of them were confident Warren would lose, and didn't mind telling her.

"People said to me, you're going to lose because Massachusetts in 2011, according to conventional wisdom, was not ready to have a woman senator or governor. We never had and people said it's just not going to happen, not at least for another generation," she said.

"I heard that," Warren remembered on Monday, "as 'Get in this race, right now.' Which is what I did."

Warren said the early coverage of her campaign was "about what I'm wearing, it's about my hair, it's about my voice, it's about whether or not I smile enough -- I didn't."

Warren said she resolved to make "something count, every single day," and said whenever she saw a little girl on the campaign trail she would go up to her, kneel down, and say, "Hi, my name is Elizabeth, and I'm running for Senate because that's what girls do."

"And then we would pinky swear to remember," Warren continued. "And so every night when I went home, no matter what the day had been like, I would count up how many pinky swears we'd done during the day."

Yeah - I think with the democrats, especially these days, they are just vehicles, empty packages, that a consort of handlers thinks they can promote because the empty package has certain branding on the cardboard box. So on her own she was nothing, but the resume had the Indian and the consumer-protection and the woman and the progressive and the Harvard and the blah blah. The emptier they are the better, because then they can fill 'em up with whatever they want the voters to think.

I'm sure those who invested in Lizzy are disappointed by what they finally got, but now they'll wring whatever they can out of their investment. If she controls 10% or even 5% or 3% of the primary vote, that's a heck of a lot of power and money for her handlers/investors and they'll cash it in by selling their endorsement to whatever candidate they can.

So for most of these candidates, it's not about winning, it's about power and influence with the one that wins, or for the little guys, maybe book that nets them half a million and some power if in fact they deliver something of value along the way to the loss.

Throughout history, human kind, in groups, is disgusting :-)

That is clearly what's behind Ayn's notion that the evilest word in the English language is 'we.' It's not that groups are always bad, and in fact they are necessary and certain types of voluntary groups are almost always beneficial. But while mankind has achieved much through cooperation, it's also the source of most of his misery throughout history.

Progressives, who throughout history have changed their name constantly to erase the past, are usually the vehicle of the most disgusting evil. I count histories fascists among them, there is nothing 'right' or 'conservative' or even truly nationalist in a Hitler or other so called far righty. For them, the country was just a vehicle to power, the nation and its people was ancillary. They were not for their country or it's people, that was just the platform they used to rise to power.

But alas, you didn't ask me for a vain exposition! Too late!

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.