What does Warren have to do to make a comeback from here now?

well... the answer to OP's question of what warren has to do to make a comeback, take a big shot at bernie to swing the progressive vote back in her favor?

i mean, for the record, we dont understand the full context of anything. could have easily been him saying "look at all the extra obstacles hillary had to go through, being a female candidate probably cost her some votes, and we cant take that kind of chance in 2020"

its likely more of a comment on the electorate than on warren

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spurraider21

theres no issue with her wanting to put out her own thought-out release instead of giving a comment for another reporter to put in a story.

bernie comes out looking bad tbh... but warren with the "yes he said that but i want to keep it private" :lol... thats like the "no offense, but..." stuff

---

She waited for Bernie to deny it too before releasing it which makes him look bad.

Truthfully between Bernie's press secretary and speechwriter taking shots at her for the last few weeks and months and that mailer he brought it on himself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Quadzilla99

She waited for Bernie to deny it too before releasing it which makes him look bad.

Truthfully between Bernie's press secretary and speechwriter taking shots at her for the last few weeks and months and that mailer he brought it on himself.

---

at least we've got a debate tomorrow to hear them both talk about it on the same stage

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AaronY

---

Tulsi :lol

Warrens' best move would be to leak, through back channels, some shit that would cripple Biden. Her problem isn't Bernie. She needs to dump Biden so she at least has a shot. Once Biden is dumped, then she can focus on separating herself from Bernie. Maybe focus on his heart attack in a caring way.

Hope AOC says something stupid on this and makes it even worse lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AaronY

Hope AOC says something stupid on this and makes it even worse lol.

---

"In another country Warren wouldn't be in the same party as me, Omar and Tlaib. Especially if that other country was Iran"

Lis admits Bernie said he didn't think a woman could win

Warren Campaign Attacks Bernie (While Pretending He's Attacking Them)
https://youtu.be/hQ3gHlHxvko

Super pro Bernie supporter defends Bernie. What’s the world coming to?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boutons_deux

Lis admits Bernie said he didn't think a woman could win

---

#BelieveWomen

Saying "I don't think a woman can win" isn't the same as saying "A woman cannot win". The 1st is a comment on the political reality in the US during this era, and says more about the voter base than anything else. The 2nd could be a negative comment against women.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DMC

Saying "I don't think a woman can win" isn't the same as saying "A woman cannot win". The 1st is a comment on the political reality in the US during this era, and says more about the voter base than anything else. The 2nd could be a negative comment against women.

---

yep. see my posts at the top of this page

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spurraider21

yep. see my posts at the top of this page

---

But it's being spun the other way. This is why I think words are very important (as do you else you wouldn't be an attorney).

The shit deal isn't that a woman can or cannot win, is that the only choices anyone will really have are 80 year old white people. Since when did 80 year old, damn near senile people represent great leadership? Wisdom often comes with age, but that should become apparent by age 50. 80 is nursing home level.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DMC

But it's being spun the other way. This is why I think words are very important (as do you else you wouldn't be an attorney).

The shit deal isn't that a woman can or cannot win, is that the only choices anyone will really have are 80 year old white people. Since when did 80 year old, damn near senile people represent great leadership? Wisdom often comes with age, but that should become apparent by age 50. 80 is nursing home level.

---

:lol what?

why do you want to be an attorney? hmm, i guess i always thought words are important

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spurraider21

:lol what?

why do you want to be an attorney? hmm, i guess i always thought words are important

---

I don't want to be an attorney.

I think a debate starts with precise language so the reader can gauge intent honestly. After that semantics aren't as important, but there needs to be a foundation of accuracy in intent that's understood by both sides of the debate. I believe people who study law are often attracted to the order of things, maybe they have OCD, but if someone can just make a statement like "I don't think a woman can win" and it can be responded to as if someone said "A woman cannot win", then the debate has already failed. Sometimes disengenuous people do this, but sometimes it's an honest mistake that didn't need to happen if the language was more precise. Had someone said "In this day and age, it would be more difficult for a woman to win than for a man with the same platform because we haven't evolved as a society enough to overcome that", that would be hard to misconstrue. Maybe someone did say that and it was paraphrased into "a woman cannot win". When that happens, as it often does here, then the debate is basically over, unless the participants want to spend 2 or 3 pages haggling over initial intent.

There are many career fields that could benefit from more precise language. The problem is it becomes tedious after a bit, and the lay person won't even read it - but dumbing it down so the lay person can understand it or even wants to read it means contaminating with a higher probability of being misconstrued. We see that a lot here, on this forum - some intentional, some not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DMC

I don't want to be an attorney.

I think a debate starts with precise language so the reader can gauge intent honestly. After that semantics aren't as important, but there needs to be a foundation of accuracy in intent that's understood by both sides of the debate. I believe people who study law are often attracted to the order of things, maybe they have OCD, but if someone can just make a statement like "I don't think a woman can win" and it can be responded to as if someone said "A woman cannot win", then the debate has already failed. Sometimes disengenuous people do this, but sometimes it's an honest mistake that didn't need to happen if the language was more precise. Had someone said "In this day and age, it would be more difficult for a woman to win than for a man with the same platform because we haven't evolved as a society enough to overcome that", that would be hard to misconstrue. Maybe someone did say that and it was paraphrased into "a woman cannot win". When that happens, as it often does here, then the debate is basically over, unless the participants want to spend 2 or 3 pages haggling over initial intent.

There are many career fields that could benefit from more precise language. The problem is it becomes tedious after a bit, and the lay person won't even read it - but dumbing it down so the lay person can understand it or even wants to read it means contaminating with a higher probability of being misconstrued. We see that a lot here, on this forum - some intentional, some not.

---

i didnt say you did. i was playing out a hypothetical discussion to show how absurd a response that would be.

i dont doubt the precise language is important, and its part of why i made the post above that i referenced. its just a silly notion that i wanted to be an attorney because i thought words were important.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spurraider21

i didnt say you did. i was playing out a hypothetical discussion to show how absurd a response that would be.

i dont doubt the precise language is important, and its part of why i made the post above that i referenced. its just a silly notion that i wanted to be an attorney because i thought words were important.

---

You just proved my point. I didn't say you wanted to be an attorney because you think words are important but if you didn't think words were important you probably wouldn't be an attorney.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DMC

Warrens' best move would be to leak, through back channels, some shit that would cripple Biden. Her problem isn't Bernie. She needs to dump Biden so she at least has a shot. Once Biden is dumped, then she can focus on separating herself from Bernie. Maybe focus on his heart attack in a caring way.

---

I don’t think Biden is dumpable, I thought he’d be done by now but he’s stuck around and isn’t going anywhere. His supporters don’t seem to mind the fact he looks like he belongs in a dementia care home during the debates.

She and Bernie needed to collaborate and figure out which one has the best chance at winning the primary so one could get behind the other and combined support bases. Infighting between Bernie and Warren is going to tank both of their campaigns imo.

Meh- complete nothing-burger


establishment is in a panic that a leftist like bernie or warren might have a shot

so they are manufacturing bullshit to make sure a weak republican (biden/bloomberg) wins instead of a true progressive


wgaf if bernie said whatever- non- issue

anti semitic shit didn't work, so now DNC is playing the sexist card on Bernie.

Anyone really think he'd say that, and to her? She and Biden have been in a freefall. Bernie has been surging, and is winning in Iowa and Cali.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Proxy

Anyone really think he'd say that, and to her?

---

"She Said He Said" it, to her

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DMC

You just proved my point. I didn't say you wanted to be an attorney because you think words are important but if you didn't think words were important you probably wouldn't be an attorney.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DMC

But it's being spun the other way. This is why I think words are very important (as do you else you wouldn't be an attorney).

The shit deal isn't that a woman can or cannot win, is that the only choices anyone will really have are 80 year old white people. Since when did 80 year old, damn near senile people represent great leadership? Wisdom often comes with age, but that should become apparent by age 50. 80 is nursing home level.

---

speaking of semantics... you gotta word this better then :lol