![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
barking_iguanaThere's a bullshit Politico piece out, with a headline making it seem that Sanders is accusing Warren of representing the elites. As I said, it's bullshit. Sanders didn't do that.
First, I've seen it reported that the quotes from 'instructions' to staff were actually suggestions from a random volunteer. And that the post on Slack was pulled quickly.
More importantly, the actual quotes, even if they had come Sanders' real team, were rather benign and perfectly legit as something for voters to consider. They are NOT about Warren's motivation or what she'd do as President.
Here are the quotes: Warren's support comes from "𝘩𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘭𝘺-𝘦𝘥𝘶𝘤𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘥, 𝘮𝘰𝘳𝘦 𝘢𝘧𝘧𝘭𝘶𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘸𝘩𝘰 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘨𝘰𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘩𝘰𝘸 𝘶𝘱 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘷𝘰𝘵𝘦 𝘋𝘦𝘮𝘰𝘤𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘤 𝘯𝘰 𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵” and that “𝘴𝘩𝘦'𝘴 𝘣𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘯𝘰 𝘯𝘦𝘸 𝘣𝘢𝘴𝘦𝘴 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘋𝘦𝘮𝘰𝘤𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘤 𝘗𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘺.”
The first quote is true. The second, I think is overstated, but it's probably true in comparison to Sanders.
Warren (at her best) addresses me and most of you the way we like to be addressed--with sentences that show the thinking behind the thoughts. But to people who don't encounter closely reasoned arguments often in their daily lives, listening to Warren can be work--she sounds like she's talking to the hoi paloi.
On the other hand, Sanders speaks more simply. Which leaves out some important caveats. So he may seem to you like he's pandering. But he gets his message across with less work on the part of the listener.
So far, there's no story here. Except Warren fell for the Politico story. And said on TV that she's disappointed that Sanders is telling his people to go out and "trash" her. Which isn't happening.
It's bad enough that the media uses all the candidates as pawns like they're in a Professional Wrestling narrative. But the candidates need to see through that and not be egged on. last time, both candidates were actually very good at that. Had Sanders' supporters and Clinton's supporters been half as good at that as the candidates themselves, the party would be in better shape now.
Six months ago, Warren would not have fallen for this trap, I think. She has seemed over-rehearsed (and likely had too little time to process and/or sleep instead of presenting) for some time now. That feeling has been gnawing at me for a couple of months. If she doesn't regain what she had earlier--the presence to think new thoughts on the fly, I fear her campaign will last no longer than Dean's did.
First, I've seen it reported that the quotes from 'instructions' to staff were actually suggestions from a random volunteer. And that the post on Slack was pulled quickly.
More importantly, the actual quotes, even if they had come Sanders' real team, were rather benign and perfectly legit as something for voters to consider. They are NOT about Warren's motivation or what she'd do as President.
Here are the quotes: Warren's support comes from "𝘩𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘭𝘺-𝘦𝘥𝘶𝘤𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘥, 𝘮𝘰𝘳𝘦 𝘢𝘧𝘧𝘭𝘶𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘸𝘩𝘰 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘨𝘰𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘩𝘰𝘸 𝘶𝘱 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘷𝘰𝘵𝘦 𝘋𝘦𝘮𝘰𝘤𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘤 𝘯𝘰 𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵” and that “𝘴𝘩𝘦'𝘴 𝘣𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘯𝘰 𝘯𝘦𝘸 𝘣𝘢𝘴𝘦𝘴 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘋𝘦𝘮𝘰𝘤𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘤 𝘗𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘺.”
The first quote is true. The second, I think is overstated, but it's probably true in comparison to Sanders.
Warren (at her best) addresses me and most of you the way we like to be addressed--with sentences that show the thinking behind the thoughts. But to people who don't encounter closely reasoned arguments often in their daily lives, listening to Warren can be work--she sounds like she's talking to the hoi paloi.
On the other hand, Sanders speaks more simply. Which leaves out some important caveats. So he may seem to you like he's pandering. But he gets his message across with less work on the part of the listener.
So far, there's no story here. Except Warren fell for the Politico story. And said on TV that she's disappointed that Sanders is telling his people to go out and "trash" her. Which isn't happening.
It's bad enough that the media uses all the candidates as pawns like they're in a Professional Wrestling narrative. But the candidates need to see through that and not be egged on. last time, both candidates were actually very good at that. Had Sanders' supporters and Clinton's supporters been half as good at that as the candidates themselves, the party would be in better shape now.
Six months ago, Warren would not have fallen for this trap, I think. She has seemed over-rehearsed (and likely had too little time to process and/or sleep instead of presenting) for some time now. That feeling has been gnawing at me for a couple of months. If she doesn't regain what she had earlier--the presence to think new thoughts on the fly, I fear her campaign will last no longer than Dean's did.
