Whether or not she decides to run, Elizabeth Warren’s themes have already made it into the discussion among top Democrats likely seeking the presidency in 2016. Even Hillary Clinton has adopted some of Warren’s rhetoric on economic issues.

Report from Yahoo News:

As Warren continues to insist she won’t run for president, and all of politics is waiting for Hillary Rodham Clinton to announce her candidacy, it was a notable omission during Warren’s speech at a conference sponsored by the AFL-CIO.

Bill Clinton famously declared “the era of big government is over” in 1996, and Warren’s indictment of three decades of economic policy referenced complaints among liberals that the policies of Democrats contributed to Wall Street excess in the past decade.

“Pretty much the whole Republican Party — and if we’re going to be honest, too many Democrats — have talked about the evils of ‘big government’ and called for deregulation,” Warren said, arguing the policies turned loose “big banks and giant international corporations” and “juiced short-term profits even if it came at the expense of working families.” [Emphasis added]

That sort of rhetoric has some liberals pining for Warren to enter the Democratic presidential contest, a move that would likely pit her against Hillary Rodham Clinton, the party’s leading contender should she enter the campaign as is widely expected.

It wasn’t just Warren who didn’t mention a Clinton by name. One panelist, Jennifer Epps-Addison of Wisconsin Jobs Now, won applause from the audience when she suggested the party was hurting itself by appearing ready to simply anoint the apparent favorite as its next presidential nominee.

The thing about Warren that is respectable is her honesty about where she stands. Many politicians, who may share her beliefs, are not so open about praising expanded government. Democrats in the party base are eating this up since Hillary Clinton is typically very discerning in her rhetoric to appear more moderate on economic issues and the scope of government.


  1. I find it ironic that it was government regulation which enabled big banks and giant corporations to hurt American families in the first place.

    Before the economic collapse of 2008 – The government via the ‘affordable housing’ related legislation forced banks to provide lending to American’s which normally would not qualify for purchasing a home. This gov’t regulation caused prices to rise abnormally, because there was abnormal demand. Then the gov’t regulation of oil drilling caused prices of gasoline and other fossil fuel related things to be driven high (lifting the offshore ban caused prices to plummet..this is how we know gov’t caused the problem)…this hurt working families due to high gasoline and heating oil prices.

    Then due to the high price in fuel, other food prices started rising because transportation costs were rising…which hurt working families and created what looked like inflation. Additionally, the gov’t instituted subsidization for ethanol gasoline,
    increasing the demand for corn, and the price for everything with corn
    products in it…again hurting working families.The Fed raised interest rates in response, which raised the mortgage prices for those with adjustable rate mortgages, lowered demand for new housing (causing prices to fall and people to get under water).

    The higher mortgage rates hurt working families and they started defaulting on mortgages for houses which were now underwater and they could not sell….the collection of the aforementioned regulations were doubly hurting working families here. Once they started defaulting on mortgages, government regulations required banks to hold these assets at zero value which cooked their books and caused them to freeze all lending…again hurting working families because of gov’t regulation.

    TRUE, government allowed banks to bundle mortgages and sell them like investments (this is NOT wrong). What was wrong was giving money to the companies who did such things. They should have allowed these institutions to dissolve, prices to reset, and new banks to emerge…but the gov’t regulators would not let that happen.

    and then we were in the thick of a perfect storm of government regulations, and the answer was more government regulations. In the midst of this gov’t created quagmire the ACA came promising businesses they would have to pay more for their same employees. Businesses slowed hiring…and working families were hurt again.

    Right now America has the lowest labor participation rate since Jimmy Carter, all because of government regulation, not the lack thereof.

    This argument holds no water until they give very specific examples of where the lack of gov’t regulation has caused problems on a national scale like this.

    If one goes to the ‘offshoring’ lie, then one must ask the question…why is it that companies find it less expensive to do things overseas? Is it not because of what the gov’t requires them to do on these shores? Aren’t people people, and real estate real estate?

    Not all gov’t regulation is bad, but they are not specific about what they want to do…they only give populist platitudes because if anyone knew what liberals really wanted and how they really wanted to do it…by and large the American people would reject it.

    • Josh:
      And things won’t change under the direction of these so called “Chamber of Commerce Conservatives” that just took control of the Congress. My way or the highway Boehner is making sure Conservatives don’t get any choice Committee chairmanships.

      • That may be true, but it really puts them in a tricky position. That positioning of policy got Bush Jr a low approval rating, and caused the Reps to lose majority in 06. One the one side, their voting base is against them, on the other the democrats are also against them (even though they may be for the policy…they want the power more).

        If these guys and gals really want to keep power, their only option is to go with conservatives and hold their nose….kind of like what conservatives do every time a moderate rep is nominated.

        Its the lesser to 2 evils…keep my power, and promote things I really don’t like or promote things i do like and have dems and my base push against me and lose my power.

          • Its something they’re stuck with. The tea party represents votes (and the philosophical majority of the country…even if the rest of the country doesn’t realize it), so to push against them is a losing battle. The establishment may be able to raise funds, but establishment can’t rally the base and end up with 2006 like Congressional losses, McCain and Romney like Presidential losses.

            Every time they buck the ideology of the pop-culture and democrats, they win landslide victories.

            Shoot – people think that Bill Clinton was some great politician, but really he never won more than 50% in the popular vote…he *never* would have been elected without the assistance of Ross Perot. Then he lost congressional majority immediately, never got it back. This caused him to drop his agenda, change to a small government mode (stating “the era of big government is over” in 1996).

            Then after this, they had surpluses till the end of his presidency.

            This not only proves that America hates liberalism, but that conservative/libertarian policies actually work!

            So, they’re on a losing side if they continuously oppose the tea party…and the tea party ain’t goin’ away, its only growing election by election.

            • Let me clarify my position here. I totally agree with your basic premise and back the Conservative movement.
              You however are explaining in theory how the system should work and I’m attempting to explain how it actually works. All we need to realize is between fixing how candidates are chosen to run in primaries, who is allowed to attend debates, primary delegate allotment, rules favoring incumbents and holding the strings to an enormous financial backing the establishment has the reins here. And they intend to do everything possible to keep it that way. Case in point the Mississippi primary this past fall between Sen. Thad Cochran and Chris McDonnell. Another case in point is the 2016 Arizona Senate primaries where Sen. McCain intends to purge the Tea Party from mounting an opposition candidate.
              I realize what you are saying but just see it from another angle.

            • You know, i’m not convinced it actually does work that way. If it did, then the Reps never would have lost in 2006, McCain and/or Romney would have won in 2008 and 2012. In those cases, the reps lost because the voters didn’t turn out.

              It may not be the case in *every* election truly the conservative candidates win, but it is a case that is growing in most states. Mr. Cochran (if i recall) only won because democrats voted in his primary…because he didn’t have the republican votes even with establishment support. McCain is supposedly good at flipping his positions when he runs and making promises he doesn’t keep. I really don’t think these kinds of things will last…especially if we get a real conservative in the WH who appoints a new RNC chair.

              Imagine Sarah Palin as the RNC chair!

            • I didn’t say the way things actually are is fool proof just that is the way the establishment GOP/RNC sees it working successfully. Of course there will always be some circumstances that will determine an election such as economic depressions, scandals, perpetual wars, or the public simply getting sick of the same ol’e face in an office. Having a lack of morals which at one time counted for something means little today. Therefore I can’t agree with your premise that Sen. McCain or Gov. Romney should have won.

              I really can’t see Gov. Palin being appointed RNC chairman now or in the future. In my opinion she has no chance because of the little respect afforded her by the members of the republican establishment wing and press over the past seven years. She exhibits exactly the extremist views the establishment wants to get rid of. She also made some career moves that would hurt her being appointed in my opinion. Unfortunately I don’t see any “real Conservatives” either qualified or willing to run for the White House. I do wish you luck with who ever you support.

            • Bobby, Bobby, Bobby — again you delve into the nebulous, kid, and disregarding the obvious, while trying to display your “know-how” in insider politics.

              Main Stream Media is slagging Palin non-stop, but this unjust beating has actually made her more likable and appreciated by Real Americans than ever before.

              Josh pointed out in a previous post that MSM is nowdays capitulating (no longer the UNITED concern for Liberal Brainwashing, but hodge-podge of whatever they think will sell enough commercials to keep them afloat).

              The proof is that Main Stream Media failed to elect the Dems — meaning.Real Americans are getting wiser!

              But, you kid, discount that ability….

              C- grade — sorry, kid.

            • Surfisher/Josh:
              The general public or “Real Americans” as you refer to them don’t vote for Speaker or RNC chairman. Case in point how did that mass phone in campaign to dump Rep. Boehner as Speaker work out?

            • Bob: Tea Party/ Libertarian movement is getting stronger each day — that’s the reality Josh and I tried to convey to nay-sayers like you.

              You seem pleased that the last minute phone-ups, and late letters that have yet to arrive, failed.

              I, on the other hand see great strides — that from the predicted 12-19 repubs to vote against Boehner, 25 Patriotic republicans did (only 4 short to stop his nomination and send it to a second round).

              No-one expects that the GOP/RNC will change from the top. These rhino establishment elitists will never let go of the prey they’ve sunk in their teeth. Like a pack of hyenas they’ll chew all the meat and than fight over the bones, JUST TO STAY IN POWER SOME MORE!

              The needed changes will be FORCED upon them from the bottom upwards — the grassroots movement is growing exponentially., and nothing you, or MSN could say to the contrary will stop it!

              Shame on all sell-out Republicans that voted for Boehner — ALL traitors to real Americans! Here are the stout 25 Republican Patriots in Congress that properly voted against Boehner the Rino — and their numbers will grow in the next election:

              Rep. Justin Amash, Mich.
              Rep. Rod Blum, Iowa
              Rep. Dave Brat, Va.
              Rep. Jim Bridenstine, Okla.
              Rep. Curt Clawson, Fla.
              Rep. Scott DesJarlais, Tenn.
              Rep. Jeff Duncan, S.C.
              Rep. Scott Garrett, N.J.
              Rep. Chris Gibson, N.Y.
              Rep. Louie Gohmert, Texas
              Rep. Paul Gosar, Ariz.
              Rep. Tim Huelskamp, Kan.
              Rep. Walter Jones, N.C.
              Rep. Steve King, Iowa
              Rep. Thomas Massie, Ky.
              Rep. Mark Meadows, N.C.
              Rep. Rich Nugent, Fla.
              Rep. Gary Palmer, Ala.
              Rep. Bill Posey, Fla.
              Rep. Scott Rigell, Va.
              Rep. Marlin Stutzman, Ind.
              Rep. Randy Weber, Texas
              Rep. Daniel Webster, Fla.
              Rep. Ted Yoho, Fla.
              Rep. Brian Babin, Texas

            • Bob — did you watch C-SPAN when the Boehner votes were cast, and afterwards?

              After getting his nose rubbed in by so many (150 year old record) rejections, and barely squeaking in as Speaker, Boehner opened Congress for session while being flustered, red faced and embarrassed.

              He stayed that way for about an hour — at least till the time I switched off the TV in disgust.

              First time I’ve seen a rino, anti-Real-Americans Establishment GOP scumbag FLUSTERED — precious!

              These scumbags now realize they are on the run!

            • Hmmmm…lets see just where Speaker Boehner stands ! He’s got the voters to give him a majority in the House this past Fall not by making any promises but by peddling his snake oil of their fear of left and disgust of the administration. He controls all legislation that comes to the floor not to mention the Committee and Sub-Committee chairmanships. He’s just been elected speaker WITHOUT ANY SERIOUS CHALLENGE. Chances are in 2016 he’ll wave the “Progressives will ruin the country” scare flag once a RINO is nominated to keep voters on the republican reservation. If one isn’t nominated he’ll sit back and do squat and let Sen. Cruz or Paul or whoever sink in the sunset and he’ll say we told you the Tea Party is weak. Don’t think he’d do this? Ask Chris McDonnell in Mississippi or Ken Cuccinelli in Virginia about true Conservatives getting any support from the RNC. And he did all this after conceding a trillion dollar budget and amnesty to the left in the past two months.

              Yep I can see you have him right where you want him !

            • Josh — 100% correct on your entire post !!!

              your: “The tea party represents votes (and the philosophical majority of the
              country…even if the rest of the country doesn’t realize it….)” IS SPOT ON !!!

              Josh, you need to keep on posting, and never slow down — the truth must be shown without stopping, if we are to save our Free republic!

              Kudos, again !!!

            • I haven’t been paying attention to the House politics for decades, but I don’t recall until the past few election cycle where the House had been anything much more than a Parliamentary system. There have been multiple times since Obama has been elected that Boehner started out to do something, but then the ‘Tea Party’ caucus and other conservatives would not give him the votes to do what he wanted.

              I am suspicious though of how conservative the house truly is, but it is undoubtable that it is growing…which is why Boehner, other rinos and demograts have been demagogging them. If they were just a nit, then they would say nothing.

              There is definitely growing unrest and unhappiness with Boehner. Let’s hope that someone credible takes it upon themselves to begin a campaign once it looks like the country will elect a republican for President.

              It could likely bring the conservatives out of the woodworks to vote both for president and congress…There is a good opportunity, if they are willing to take it….

            • Guest…Tea Party aside for a moment.

              America does note hate liberalism.Nor does America hate conservative/libertarian.
              Hate comes from a loss of reason and compassion for the opinion of another
              citizen. Bill Clinton was, and still is, a great politician. John
              McCain is a great politician. Who can forget his “maverick” days?

              By the way Bill Clinton won his first presidency with 43% of the votes (Abraham
              Lincoln only won 38.9% of the votes). Clinton received twice the
              electoral votes over George H W Bush. Ross Perot drew more votes from
              Clinton than he did from Bush. Clinton inherited a budget deficit of $250
              billion dollars from Bush41. In eight years, Clinton had created a budget
              surplus of $525 billion. This tidy sum was inherited by Bush43 and we know what
              he did with it. Clinton’s presidency created 22.5 million new jobs.
              Unemployment dropped from 7.5% to 4.0% by the end of his second term, the
              lowest in 40 years. Give the man his dues.

          • Bob: I don’t remember saying that the Tea Party had any influence over the GOP establishment, quite the contrary. The GOP-E has been trying to stomp down the TP, first rigging the rules, and this time, undermining TP candidates.

    • ALL major politicians are part of the 1%. I find the attacks on Warren for having money to be the extreme in hypocrisy, and nobody (who doesn’t hate her) is stupid enough to buy it.

      Are you saying Huckabee has no right to speak about religion because he is super rich, despite Jesus’ exhortations? I’m not. It would be just as stupid an attack.

      • Cool your synthetic indignation. No I’m not saying that. This is sort of a continuation of a photoshop post I did a while back.

        • Why did you enter both posts if you didn’t think it was important?

          I’m not a Warren fan, but I am indignant about frivolous and spurious attacks that distract from substantive issues.

  2. While Warren is the flavor of the month….
    No Democrat can win a National Election from the left….
    No Republican can win from the right….
    Consequently Warren would NOT be able to win the White House as much as Ted Cruz would not….

Comments are closed.