Do you think Elizabeth Warren is a good senator? (Clinton: rentals, attorney)

[Pilot1]

Originally Posted by in_newengland

For the most part I think she's pretty good. I don't want her for president though because I don't think she would win and I don't think the country is ready for someone so far to the left. The country isn't even ready for a woman president. This country has stepped so far backwards that I think we need some nice guy moderate type to run for president, someone who can unite us if that is even possible now.

But if Elizabeth Warren remains our senator, I think she can get things done. It's up to us to contact her and let her know what we want.

I don't think being a "woman" matters at all to CT (and I did live there), nor to the country. I believe it is the personality, and politics of the candidate. But, you're right Warren is too far left, and comes off as be disingenuine, somewhat like Hillary. A poor me, identity politics, victimization candidate. Like many other politicians both D, and R, her first priority is staying in power, and enriching HERSELF.

[porterhouse]

Originally Posted by MMS02760

She is not bought and paid for by US corporations.

Don't kid yourself, Sen Warren has plenty of corporate and Wall Street donors. She is also heavily beholden to labor unions.

[in_newengland]

Originally Posted by Pilot1

I don't think being a "woman" matters at all to CT (and I did live there), nor to the country. I believe it is the personality, and politics of the candidate. But, you're right Warren is too far left, and comes off as be disingenuine, somewhat like Hillary. A poor me, identity politics, victimization candidate. Like many other politicians both D, and R, her first priority is staying in power, and enriching HERSELF.

Right now, with the country moving so far to the right and even feminism being in doubt and abortion taken away, I think a man would be a more promising candidate for president. But Elizabeth Warren is a good senator although I do wish she'd calm down a little and also stop with the identity politics. We need more people who can bring us together and id politics separate everyone into little groups. Little groups that feel like victims and whom the rest of us supposedly hate.

I do like her and I think she means well and is a good senator. Just needs to rein it in a bit.

[massnative71]

Group says Elizabeth Warren has failed vets | Boston Herald

[StuartGotts]

Originally Posted by massnative71

Group says Elizabeth Warren has failed vets | Boston Herald

The Herald has been pushing this "story" for months. Its a classic attack, next they'll say she kicks puppies.

When Scott Brown(R)was running for senate the Herald had a puff piece almost every day. It was starting to be called the "Scott Brown Herald"... I'd never seen one person get the front page as often!

Bottom line is the Herald is a far right rag so objective news about Warren is never going to happen. (THey still bring up Ted Kennedy almost every other day!)

[Beachykeen917]

I really like her. She and Stephen Lynch have taken some concrete action advocating for south shore residents who oppose the toxic compressor station being pushed by FERC and Spectra/Enbridge, which is way more than Charlie Baker has done.

She is articulate, well informed and well spoken. It's not her fault she has to deal with a Congress led by Mitch McConnell. 🙄

I don't think she is perfect. She would never run for president because she has been so demonized by the right (as previous poster said) - plus who could stand to listen to Trump's Pocahontas schtick for a year...so old and tired...but he just keeps dragging it out. God forbid he talk substance. I think at this point she knows her role for the Democratic party and she plays it well.

I am an independent - certainly not socialist - so silly the way people have to assume someone is an extremist if they have a differing opinion. Because, yes, we are all socialists running around the state waiting to take over with our hidden agenda. 😂

At this point, I respect anyone who speaks in complete sentences, references factual information and actually speaks about relevant issues. Just this week she was on the south shore looking at the Fore River area (#wherescharlie?) and held a town hall in carlisle. I call her office on occassion and it seems fairly responsive.

Would love to know how much people who dislike her actually engage with her office (or any other legislators) on issues that are important to them or if they just listen to the Trump/Fox/Brietbart machine play the same old tune.

[masshawk]

She's one of the few who ISN'T all talk and she has actually achieved legislation that helps average people. She's made it so hearing aids are easier to get over the counter (read: cheaper), made it easier for returning vets to get civilian jobs, and made it harder for financial advisors to screw over retirees who trust them with their savings. I think she sometimes gets too hyperbolic and dramatic with her language, and I wish she were less partisan, but she's one of the few members of Congress who has consistently advocated for working people over powerful people. If I had a criticism of her before, it was the same one of most "to a hammer, everything looks like a nail" Democrats – the answer to everything isn't always more government programs, more government spending, or more regulations. But recently she's shown she's willing to reduce regulatory hurdles with the hearing aid legislation.

She's not a good candidate for President because she's most effective exactly where she is. A senator can be aggressive in their language and openly take sides. A (good) president, in my opinion, should be more conciliatory and work with everyone.

[massnative71]

Originally Posted by StuartGotts

The Herald has been pushing this "story" for months. Its a classic attack, next they'll say she kicks puppies.

When Scott Brown(R)was running for senate the Herald had a puff piece almost every day. It was starting to be called the "Scott Brown Herald"... I'd never seen one person get the front page as often!

Bottom line is the Herald is a far right rag so objective news about Warren is never going to happen. (THey still bring up Ted Kennedy almost every other day!)

The Herald a "far right rag" LMAO! They didn't even endorse Trump, and they have consistently with liberal Republican Charlie Baker over the more ideological and conservative previous party leadership.

It has also been well covered by many publications, her two-faced talk on stuff like Wall Street and veterans. She is another Hillary...

[Pilot1]

Originally Posted by in_newengland

Right now, with the country moving so far to the right and even feminism being in doubt and abortion taken away, I think a man would be a more promising candidate for president. But Elizabeth Warren is a good senator although I do wish she'd calm down a little and also stop with the identity politics. We need more people who can bring us together and id politics separate everyone into little groups. Little groups that feel like victims and whom the rest of us supposedly hate.

I do like her and I think she means well and is a good senator. Just needs to rein it in a bit.

Feminism is not in doubt. I don't see, nor hear anyone trying to roll back rights for women, and I marched for the ERA in 1976 in Washington DC. But, I agree with you, Warren's rhetoric is not helping her, and a less divisive message would help. Many of us right or left want the same basic things. Why don't candidates focus on that?

[Shrewsburried]

Originally Posted by Pilot1

Feminism is not in doubt. I don't see, nor hear anyone trying to roll back rights for women, and I marched for the ERA in 1976 in Washington DC. But, I agree with you, Warren's rhetoric is not helping her, and a less divisive message would help. Many of us right or left want the same basic things. Why don't candidates focus on that?

Not in the mainstream, but there's an odd reversal happening among the younger cohorts fueled by the whole SJW backlash. You won't hear it or see it in educated social groups, but you'll see it in online platforms like Reddit which skew younger than city-data.

What I find interesting is that populist candidates (Sanders, Trump, Warren, etc.) have more or less the same narrative, yet many identify strongly with only one. As independent, I find it all a bit absurd.