Accurate as usual. WaPo:
Sen. Elizabeth Warren called Donald Trump a “loser” who could nonetheless win the White House if voters don’t rise up to stop him.
That was the takeaway from a tweet-storm Monday in which Warren (D-Mass.) pointedly criticized the business mogul and Republican presidential front-runner.
Trump “knows he’s a loser,” Warren tweeted. “His insecurities are on parade: petty bullying, attacks on women, cheap racism, flagrant narcissism. But just because [Trump] is a loser everywhere else doesn’t mean he’ll lose this election.”
“Many of history’s worst authoritarians started out as losers — and [Trump] is a serious threat,” Warren wrote.
Trump responded by invoking a past controversy over Warren’s claim she has Native American heritage. “The Indian? You mean the Indian?” Trump said at a news conference Monday in Washington. …
Warren is making a concerted effort to take on Trump this month. Last Monday, she used Facebook to call Trump a demagogue and a “bigger, uglier threat every day.” On Thursday, she told MSNBC she takes Trump “very seriously” and said he is promoting a “form of hate.” Over the weekend, she joked that it would make for a “perfect reality-show match-up” if Trump wins the nomination and chooses Scott Brown, former senator in Massachusetts, as his running mate: “‘Celebrity Apprentice’ meets ‘The Biggest Loser.’ ”
If the Republicans weren’t reaping what they sowed, and so bad for our future overall, I’d feel sorry for them.
Also not sure she’s influencing opinion. All Warren fans I know are already solid anti-Trump.
But if she wants to get into a pissing match with Trump, I’ll watch.
It’s going to start to pile up on Trump, Warren puts together a nice combination of facts while she slammed him.
We need the whole post, here it is:
Trump’s response was weak, that’s all the master troll could come up with? His response was to take the even bigger loser, Scott Brown’s campaign attack. Where did that get Brown? A string of defeats, he’s now a loser and a joke.
Warren just said that if Trump took daddy’s money and if he sat there with his thumb up his ass instead of going into bankruptcy multiple times, which he defaulted on bonds that regular people had in their mutual funds, stole their money, he would have been richer. There are estimates that he would have been 10 billion dollar richer. That’s a successful businessman.
His comeback … ? Nothing. As Warren said, he knows he’s a loser and doesn’t have a response.
That’s got to be killing him. She keeps it up and Donald will eventually explode. Good for her.
This is the opening salvo in the general election and this particular salvo would not hurt Trump so much if made by a man.
Most people think it’s likely to be Trump v Clinton (I’m still unconvinced) and since Trump has demonstrated a clear misogyny, EW (likely as a proxy for HRC) is therefore trying to make his campaign implode by getting him to pull a bonehead statement a la Mourdock ’12…
I’m somewhat torn on the tactic: on the one hand it smacks of the same sort of vicious low-down behavior as the ‘swift boat vets’ of ’04 which I detested and is likely only to lower the discourse; but, on the other hand, EW isn’t making things up about Trump and his behavior.. he really is a loser who has a problem with women. On yet the third hand, I’m convinced that Trump lives in a reality distortion bubble far more distorting than that which most people live in…and when it pops he will snap.
Exposing him as what? A jerk? Big surprise.
which he is, his whole life.
Maybe people can quit calling me a negative cynic and follow our senior senator in figuring out real ways to beat this real threat? There is nothing to gloat about, progressives have a lot of hard work ahead as does our nominee.
Yes, it’s time to wake up. It’s also time to pay attention to what Ms. Warren did and did not do.
What she did was present a crisp, compelling, and devastating set of facts that strike directly at the core of his candidacy. Demonstrating that Mr. Trump is, in fact, a LOSER — specifically, as a business man — is a torpedo amidships of the USS Trump. One or two more, and look for the ammunition magazine to explode in a fiery inferno and the entire vessel to capsize and sink with all hands lost.
What she did not do is wring her hands about his supporters or imply that we need to in any way excuse or accept the racism, misogyny, xenophobia, and prejudice that has been his stock in trade. There is no angst in her commentary about “Reagan Democrats”, “angry white men”, or anything similar.
Ms. Warren has again modeled the path I would like to see ALL of us take — candidates, campaigns, and supporters.
I haven’t wrung my hands or endorsed any of these things, what I have said is there is a Venn diagram, an analogy you said you agreed with, of voters that are attracted to the racism, voters attracted to the trade and outside the corrupt system arguments, and voters in between. I think we absolutely can and should win the latter group rather than pre-emptively surrendering it to Trump or viewing his entire base of support as racists not worth or empathy or engagement.
I absolutely refuse to write off the white working class or Reagan Democrat. We simply will not regain a majority in the electoral college or Congress without them, and even if we could, it is morally right and just as a matter of politics to help the entire working class advance and rise. FDR didn’t write them off, neither will I, neither does Warren, neither should Clinton.
…certainly not Clinton to anyone who has actually listened. I fail to see why you cheer Warren on for aggressively calling out and exposing Trump, but pooh-poohed me when I have advocated the same thing.
You were calling out Trump aggressively as a racist, I simply said that strategy would fail, call him out for being a failed businessman who doesn’t care about working Americans. That’s what Warren did. Notice she did BOTH. I never said don’t call him out on his racism, I said don’t call him out on that to the exclusion of the economic angle. We need both.
Absolutely maximize latino and black turnout by talking about the racism, but also make sure he doesnt peel away crossover voters by talking about economics as well. I don’t see Hillary doing the latter nearly as well as Sen. Warren or Sen. Sanders have. She should learn from them though!
…put together a montage of his most offensive remarks, some of which were racist, but others were misogynistic, still others promoting violence. Using his own words against him I think is but one strategy that could be very effective. HRC is just getting warmed up when it comes to Trump, but if she pivots too quickly some will accuse her of taking the nomination for granted.
or whether it’s better to lease or own a car.
You think they’re going to be able to determine whether Trump should be considered a failure, because some hypothetical sum of money, if invested, would be greater than what he’s worth today? Oh and one of the most partisan people in the country said it, hardly an objective source.
More echo chamber stuff.
I repeat, calling a rich person a loser is not an effective line of attack.
When people can’t tell the difference between two things they look for learned and, yes, authoritative people to guide them. That’s leadership. That’s what Senator Warren is doing: leading. She is saying, for the benefit of people who can’t figure it out for themselves that Donald Trump is dangerous and mean, and a loser. She’s been instrumental, even before running for office, in helping protect people who can’t tell the difference between two things from being taken advantage of… in many cases these people were being preyed upon by people like Donald Trump.
It’s called leadership.
When you say people can’t figure things out, are you talking about that part of your base that only shows up for presidential elections? Maybe if you told them that there are elections every two years (and more often than that) they might show up. Apparently no one’s told them.
Virtually everyone is saying things about Trump. I’m just saying that Warren’s cred on this, and her line of attack, will be ineffective.
It has put the whole Warren background back into the news though, WaPo ran a recap. That story had died down with her election.
Scott Brown thought “the whole Warren background” would help him too. It didn’t.
I think it’s GREAT that “the whole Warren background” is back into the news. It demonstrates her point (that Mr. Trump is loser) eloquently — just as it did for Mr. Brown. Perhaps Mr. Trump will start calling her “Professor Warren” too.
I find it ironic that those who say they “support” and “resonate with” working-class people in America proceed to insult them by saying that they respond only to racism, sexism, xenophobia, and hate-speech, by saying that they don’t know the difference between a winner and loser, by saying that they don’t know what mid-term elections are, by saying that they don’t know the difference between fixed- and adjustable-rate mortgage, and so on.
To me, those assumptions reek of contempt, disdain, and elitism. I think Elizabeth Warren knows better, Bernie Sanders knows better, and Hillary Clinton knows better.
Don’t fool yourself. Her whole schtick is just a vehicle.
Clinton is also an elitist, weirdly enough riding on the backs on people of color.
Bernie on the other hand I find pretty genuine. Probably could have been a lot of things and made more money. Chose another path.
As TBD observes below, “There is a big difference between ‘elite. and ‘elitist’ “.
Ms. Warren and Ms. Clinton are members of an elite. Each came from distinctly working-class backgrounds, and each clawed their way to prominence by being excellent at what they do. The fact that some segments of America resent this success is, in my view, another example of how dysfunctional America currently is.
The biography of Elizabeth Warren demonstrates how wrong and unfair your attack is. Growing up in a working-class family in Oklahoma, she was able to graduate from high school at age 16, and enter George Washington University on a full scholarship. After two years, she got married and moved to Texas, where she got an undergraduate degree in speech pathology from the University of Texas. Is there something about any of this that reeks of “elitist” ANYTHING?
She ultimately landed a job teaching law at Harvard. She has specialized in consumer economics and bankruptcy for her entire political career, since 1978. That is hardly a “shtick”.
Your attack on Elizabeth Warren is incorrect and egregiously distorts the truth.
There is a large difference between being a part of an elite group and being an elitist. To be part of the elite is to be
An elitist is
I put Sen Warren in the first group, not the latter one. Just like I will pick a US Navy Seal who listens to his parents Johnny Cash on vinyl to cook my barbecue. He is an elite member of our world but he may never be the kind of person who looks down on the people he protects with his life.
There is a big difference between “elite” and “elitist.”
Either Clinton or Sanders is going to be the party’s nominee for President. Our part in the selection process is over, so nothing is to be gained by snarky attacks on either. We should demonstrate that we are better than the wack-jobs in the party of Goldwater and Nixon.
trying to stir things up. Warren elitist. That’s funny. Needed a laugh this afternoon.
one a US Senator and one a Harvard professor, who are worth $10 million plus aren’t elites….. Needed a laugh this afternoon.
PS Not a Trump supporter. Just think calling him a loser is a bad argument.
This line:
“[Donald Trump] might have more money today if he’d put his entire inheritance into an index fund and just left it alone.”
is understandable to anybody who is able to pull a lever or mark a ballot.
If that’s “echo chamber stuff”, then so is everything everybody says.
You can have all the high opinions of voters that you want. Voters that elected a Republican Congress for instance.
that if Trump did nothing, he’d be richer 10 billion richer than being a failure in business.
Warren vs Trump is just the 1% vs the 0.1%
She lives in a $5M home, he lives in a $100M home.
One of my closest friends resigned from the Republican party 25 years ago when he came out of the closet. He was told by them that he couldn’t be an openly gay rights activist and a Republican.
I welcomed him with open arms into the Democratic party and he has proudly supported us ever since to this day.
I asked him once what was the worst thing you could call a Republican but he didn’t answer me verbally. He made the letter “L” with his forefinger and thumb and held it in front of his nose. Finally, he whispered : “LOSER”.
I laughed so hard I fell off my chair. 🙂
P.S. I love Elizabeth Warren. She truly is : “The Lioness of the Senate.” You go, girl !
Fred Rich LaRiccia
Ever wonder how circumstances beyond the control of the political machine might affect the vote in Nov. scenario
Another attack similar to the recent Brussels attacks happens in late Oct.
Maybe in the US. Trump gets on TV and repeats his “Muslim ban”.
Who will the average Joe vote for?
Anyone who runs around condoning violence, race baiting, ignoring facts, self aggrandizing, is a loser, plain and simple. HOWEVER, politics in this country is really scraping the bottom of the barrel (dick size, really?), and I wouldn’t mind seeing Sen EW (currently my favorite politician on the planet) lift the rhetoric and form of argument, and annihilate Little Hands Donnie the silvered-spooned loser, with facts and argument and not name calling. Sure, I understand that she’s trying to bait bankruptcy-boy and speak to him in a language he understands, but she might set a better example for jerks like me if she tried to lift the debate up.