No, not really. You realize an effective surrogate could be any supporter with a decent sized audience. It doesn’t need to be an “above the fray” politician. A Sarah Silverman, Meryl Streep, Elizabeth Banks, Jennifer Granholm, Mark Cuban or Jon Stewart would be able to pull it off and get some buzz out of it.
Why the hell are you tap dancing for other people? Who gives a crap what those people you listed say? What was posted above was 'is it time for a Clinton surrogate (maybe Warren) to start really pushing the message: “Trump is losing the presidential race because he’s a loser.”'Elizabeth Warren is not frigging Sarah Silverman.
Excuse me? Would you care to explain what you mean by this?
Well apparently not you, but that’s not my point. Likewise, not everyone gives a crap what Elizabeth Warren says. Whether you like it or not, celebrities are sometimes more influential with this kind of stuff than an Elizabeth Warren or Joe Biden or Nancy Pelosi. Satire and comedic jabs can work wonders. Highlighting Trump’s loser qualities, for instance.
“Maybe Warren” means just that. Maybe Warren, or maybe someone else like I suggested. And I suggested it doesn’t even need to be a politician for a message to be effective. Jon Stewart. Jennifer Granholm has done some hard-hitting attacks. Bill Maher has a following. Point being, there are effective ways to get attacks out against Trump to further ruffle his feathers other than through the campaign, sitting politicians and the party. And not everything needs to be classy. Politics never have been.
That only matters if she wants to be president, and like Bernie Sanders, Warren is not presidential material. But she’s good at being a principled progressive, and we need a few of those in the senate and in the House to put pressure on the natural instincts of people like Clinton to gravitate toward the center, who would prefer to reach accord, cross something off the checklist, and move onto the next item on the agenda.
Don’t see a problem with Warren or people who aren’t really presidential material calling Donald a loser, poopyface, or whatever. I would have a problem with it if it were someone like Tim Kaine, Cory Booker, Kamala Harris, or someone with a potential future as a presidential contender. Maybe Carnal’s saying it’s un-presidential and I agree that it is. But that only matters if we’re dealing with presidential contenders, which Warren is not and never will be.
Absolutely agree. It’s not something for any surrogates with presidential aspirations to touch. Other surrogates, whether political, post-political or celebrity, those kind of attacks can be effective, especially against a candidate with paper-thin skin.
Warren is not Presidential material but she was a Harvard law prof, a Senator and an intelligent, educated and successful consumer rights advocate. Lowering herself to Trumpian name calling battles is a big waste of her usefulness.
Seriously, I’m assuming that, now that the DNC is over, they’re just releasing what they have when they get it. They may have enough to drip, drip, drip throughout this whole election, but if they have a bombshell, their timing has to be exact for it to matter… and I don’t think they have it.
