CNN Reports people claiming Warren was told by Sanders that a woman can't win.

[CarnalK]

@Lantern

And AFAIK Margaret Thatcher and Angela Merkel, the two most successful female politicians in the Western world, did not play the gender card either.

They came into leadership in different eras, cultures and selection procedures. And I rather doubt you were remotely as attentive of their leadership bids as you are of this one.

That being said, playing the “woman card” can be a risky game I would agree.

[Gyrate]

@Unreconstructed_Man

I’m not misrepresenting anything. I’m just not bending over backwards to be charitable to her.

No bending required on our part, and yes you blatantly are.

Still waiting on that list of other “integrity problems” you mentioned.

[Happy_Lendervedder]

@UnwittingAmericans

I’m ruling Warren out after this cheap stunt and I hope she gets primaried.

OK bro.

[Velocity]

Looking more intense now:

Warren to Bernie Sanders during handshake moment: 'I think you called me a...

[Unreconstructed_Man]

@Gyrate

No bending required on our part, and yes you blatantly are.

Still waiting on that list of other “integrity problems” you mentioned.

I never said she had ‘other’ integrity problems. I said she had an integrity problem, and this is it.

Look, you’re happy to accept that Elizabeth Warren (who, for all her other faults, is certainly not stupid) got her own race wrong on a census form. I’m not. I don’t think having a tiny amount of Native ancestry makes you an ‘American Indian’ any more than being able to trace your ancestors back to the Norman conquest makes you French, and I don’t think a smart person would make that mistake, no matter what their family said. If you don’t agree then…we’ll, I dunno what to tell you.

[Fiddle_Peghead]

@Left_Hand_of_Dorkness

This would be true of most politicians–but Bernie’s main selling point is that he hasn’t changed his tune since 1888.
This seems far and away the likeliest explanation to me. Sanders almost certainly tried to dissuade Warren from running, and she almost certainly tried to dissuade him from running, because not doing so would be stupid. Sanders probably talked about the attacks that would get leveled at Warren, just as she probably talked about the attacks that would get leveled at him.

I’m not impressed with how Warren has handled this, at all.

Assuming your “likeliest explanation” is what happened, I could see that. But, what if it isn’t what happened? Which leads me to make what is undoubtedly the most important thing I’ve ever said here on the dope: if I had to bet, I would say Sanders did say it. If Warren made it up, it would reek of a desperation that I don’t think she has to feel at this point, despite being behind Sanders in the polls. In any case, can we please get back to the truly important things leading up to the primaries: why the fuck does Steyer keep wearing that same dumb ass tie?

[Airbeck]

@Unreconstructed_Man

I never said she had ‘other’ integrity problems. I said she had an integrity problem, and this is it.

Look, you’re happy to accept that Elizabeth Warren (who, for all her other faults, is certainly not stupid) got her own race wrong on a census form. I’m not. I don’t think having a tiny amount of Native ancestry makes you an ‘American Indian’ any more than being able to trace your ancestors back to the Norman conquest makes you French, and I don’t think a smart person would make that mistake, no matter what their family said. If you don’t agree then…we’ll, I dunno what to tell you.

I don’t think you really care about that. You just don’t agree with her policies. You, and the entire right, are just using that to smear her since you can’t actually debate the policies. All the GOP has now is insults, smears, innuendo. Nothing substantive.

[Happy_Lendervedder]

Interesting perspective from Nate Silver on the Warren campaign’s decision to taking a shot at Bernie.

@Nate Silver

Here are a few rather obvious truths about the Democratic primary:

1. Only one candidate can be nominated.
2. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, two of the more likely people to be nominated, have heavily overlapping bases of support.
3. But Warren narrowly trails Sanders in the national polls (both candidates trail Joe Biden) and Sanders is perceived as having momentum.
4. There are less than three weeks to go until Iowa.

What might you expect to happen under circumstances like these? Well, you’d probably expect the Warren campaign to become less risk-averse. If, for example, it had a damaging piece of opposition research on Sanders, now might be the ideal time to drop it. You’d disrupt the current, good-for-Sanders-and-not-so-great-for-you news cycle and shake things up a bit. But there would also be just enough time to pivot to a more positive message in the final week or so before Iowa.

…

This [going negative] is all pretty normal at this point in a presidential campaign — especially for a candidate in Warren’s situation. And there’s even some initial evidence that her strategy is working! Voters in our post-debate poll with Ipsos gave Warren the highest grade of any candidate for her debate performance — which mostly featured a positive, policy-oriented message along with a couple of chilly moments between her and Sanders. Meanwhile perceptions of Warren’s electability improved among voters in the poll after the debate, while Sanders’s favorability ratings worsened.

More nuanced analyses of the Sanders-Warren conflict suggest that maintaining a nonaggression pact would be mutually beneficial because otherwise Biden could run away with the nomination. But the word “mutually” is debatable. I’d argue nonaggression toward Warren is pretty clearly in the best interest of Sanders, who was in the stronger position than Warren heading into the debate and who would probably prefer to focus on Biden. But it’s probably *not *beneficial to Warren. Any scenario that *doesn’t *involve Warren winning Iowa will leave her in a fairly rough position — and winning Iowa means beating Sanders there.

Will this strategy work? It appears the immediate response was good for Warren. Long term? Time will tell. But the numbers that Nate show she has to finish ahead of Bernie in Iowa to have any sort of chance at the nomination. Taking the opportunity to ding him at this point, like Nate said, allows her to pivot back toward a positive message before Iowans caucus.

So while some individuals here may not like her decision to play the “woman card,” or attack poor old Bernie, or go “low,” or call herself “Native American,” or whatever, the immediate Ipsos/538 poll after the debate rates this a net win for Warren. Again, whether that holds or shows up in any other polls, time will tell.

[SuntanLotion]

Last night on Fox, Tucker Carlson said CNN set this up to discredit Sanders because of his support for some cnn workers who had gone on strike.

[MyFootsZZZ]

I came in here thinking very poorly of Warren when I made this thread. I quite honestly don’t think either of them are lying. One of them may be mistaken, (Warren).

I can’t see Warren lying about this, but I can’t see Bernie lying either.

Despite what people say about “Bernie Bros”, If something were to happen to Bernie… Warren would STILL be my number 2.

I’m really sick of the “Bernie Bro” labeled, but whatever. What does it imply? That only men vote for Bernie? That women only vote for Bernie because of men? Do women, (especially progressive women), not have agency? I’m sick of the Bernie is sexist trope too.

He’s an amazing man who has been nothing but consistent.

Warren is also awesome…

This is very unsettling.

[QuickSilver]

@SuntanLotion

Last night on Fox, Tucker Carlson said CNN set this up to discredit Sanders because of his support for some cnn workers who had gone on strike.

Good ol’ Tucker. No conspiracy theory too far fetched that he won’t spread it. Like a case of the clap.

[iiandyiiii]

@MyFootsZZZ

I came in here thinking very poorly of Warren when I made this thread. I quite honestly don’t think either of them are lying. One of them may be mistaken, (Warren).

I can’t see Warren lying about this, but I can’t see Bernie lying either.

Despite what people say about “Bernie Bros”, If something were to happen to Bernie… Warren would STILL be my number 2.

I’m really sick of the “Bernie Bro” labeled, but whatever. What does it imply? That only men vote for Bernie? That women only vote for Bernie because of men? Do women, (especially progressive women), not have agency? I’m sick of the Bernie is sexist trope too.

He’s an amazing man who has been nothing but consistent.

Warren is also awesome…

This is very unsettling.

Don’t let it unsettle you. It’s okay if two good people have a disagreement – sometimes they even let personal feelings get in the way. It doesn’t mean that they’re not decent people (or decent candidates). This isn’t a big deal, even if one or both is letting ego and feelings affect them. They’re only human. You can like both of them even when they have a little spat (or whatever this is).

[MyFootsZZZ]

@iiandyiiii

Don’t let it unsettle you. It’s okay if two good people have a disagreement – sometimes they even let personal feelings get in the way. It doesn’t mean that they’re not decent people (or decent candidates). This isn’t a big deal, even if one or both is letting ego and feelings affect them. They’re only human. You can like both of them even when they have a little spat (or whatever this is).

Thanks.

Nice way of putting it. I’m worried about the issues as well. But whatever happens, happens.

[Lance_Turbo]

@Unreconstructed_Man

I don’t think having a tiny amount of Native ancestry makes you an ‘American Indian’ any more than being able to trace your ancestors back to the Norman conquest makes you French, and I don’t think a smart person would make that mistake, no matter what their family said.

You are ignoring the fact that there are a ton of people who have a tiny amount of Native ancestry and not only self identify as ‘American Indian’ but also are members of Native American tribes and recognized by the tribes as such (e.g. Tom Cole and Markwayne Mullin).

There’s a lot of people like this across the country and there’s a particularly high concentration of such people in Oklahoma. Growing up in Oklahoma, Elizabeth Warren would have known many such people so the idea that she should have known that she should have known that she wasn’t Native American by looking in the mirror is ridiculous because her own experience would have been that there are many Native Americans that don’t look particularly Native American.

There’s a lot of ‘I don’t think’ in your post, but the real world doesn’t give a shit what you think and it doesn’t operate the way you think it should when it comes to who can and can not legitimately claim to be Native American. The fact that you don’t think the world should work this way is your problem, not Elizabeth Warren’s.

Warren ticked the ‘American Indian’ box on a form because she thought she had Native American ancestry necessary to legitimately do so. She thought this because she was told this repeatedly by family members her whole life. She later took a DNA test that verified that there was some truth to what her family members had told her.

There’s not even a scintilla of dishonesty in Warren’s actions here and there’s a giant middle that you are excluding in your dishonest or stupid false dichotomy.

[QuickSilver]

Is “Bernie Bro” an allusion to male supporters? I had no idea. I previously thought it was a generic hard core Sanders supporter. TIL.

[QuickSilver]

@Lance_Turbo

You are ignoring the fact that there are a ton of people who have a tiny amount of Native ancestry and not only self identify as ‘American Indian’ but also are members of Native American tribes and recognized by the tribes as such (e.g. Tom Cole and Markwayne Mullin).

There’s a lot of people like this across the country and there’s a particularly high concentration of such people in Oklahoma. Growing up in Oklahoma, Elizabeth Warren would have known many such people so the idea that she should have known that she should have known that she wasn’t Native American by looking in the mirror is ridiculous because her own experience would have been that there are many Native Americans that don’t look particularly Native American.

There’s a lot of ‘I don’t think’ in your post, but the real world doesn’t give a shit what you think and it doesn’t operate the way you think it should when it comes to who can and can not legitimately claim to be Native American. The fact that you don’t think the world should work this way is your problem, not Elizabeth Warren’s.

Warren ticked the ‘American Indian’ box on a form because she thought she had Native American ancestry necessary to legitimately do so. She thought this because she was told this repeatedly by family members her whole life. She later took a DNA test that verified that there was some truth to what her family members had told her.

There’s not even a scintilla of dishonesty in Warren’s actions here and there’s a giant middle that you are excluding in your dishonest or stupid false dichotomy.

I think this is well stated. There is no great reason to assume negative motives. People are so weird when it comes to their ancestry. Some could care less and others are obsessive about it. With the emergence of an OTC genetic test kit, people are more and more interested in their ancestry and I imagine the self identification with whatever they find in their genetic results report will drive a lot of these personal decisions.

[Unreconstructed_Man]

nm

[MyFootsZZZ]

@QuickSilver

Is “Bernie Bro” an allusion to male supporters? I had no idea. I previously thought it was a generic hard core Sanders supporter. TIL.

It use to be the first description. People claim that men were voting for Bernie and women were voting for Bernie because of men. I’m not lying about that.

Now it’s kind of turned into an all-encompassing name, I think.

Bernie Bro

[MyFootsZZZ]

Maybe they exist but most are not.

[Thing_Fish]

If there was ever a grain of truth to that characterizaation, there certainly isn’t now. Recent polls have shown that 58% of women have positive views of Sanders, and that his supporters are more likely to be female than supporters of any other candidate.