# Warren forms Exploratory Committee **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [December 31, 2018, 2:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warren-forms-exploratory-committee/826983 "2018-12-31T14:40:43Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 9
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2019, 11:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warren-forms-exploratory-committee/826983/161 "2019-01-05T11:29:12Z")
Also, just speaking as one poster to another, can we not turn this thread into a gun control debate? Thanks. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2019, 1:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warren-forms-exploratory-committee/826983/162 "2019-01-05T13:18:06Z")
Keeping this political- that claim would be made and Trump would get NRA support biggly with ads saying it. Would that, in today’s environment, cost an election. Specifically would it lose her PA, WI, and MI? I don’t think so. It would lose her the single issue gun rights voters and win her the single issue gun control voters. And each of those would already be decided by other factors. Her swing strength won’t be rural (as Brown’s might be) it will be suburbia. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2019, 1:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warren-forms-exploratory-committee/826983/163 "2019-01-05T13:22:45Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > Also, just speaking as one poster to another, can we not turn this thread into a gun control debate? Thanks. To be fair, there is a substantial faction for whom \*the \*only issue in \*any \*election is guns. But you’re right that we needn’t cater to them. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2019, 1:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warren-forms-exploratory-committee/826983/164 "2019-01-05T13:51:10Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > To be fair, there is a substantial faction for whom \*the \*only issue in \*any \*election is guns. But you’re right that we needn’t cater to them. I guess my point would be that a debate over the proportion of the electorate that would otherwise vote for a Dem, but would be turned off by Harris’ stances on guns, would be entirely relevant to this thread. But getting into details like microstamping, or where the line is on what gun control laws are Constitutional and which ones wouldn’t be - that’s a gun debate, not a debate about Harris’ electoral viability. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2019, 1:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warren-forms-exploratory-committee/826983/165 "2019-01-05T13:59:35Z")
That’s a cover story for finding an excuse to call a candidate a gun-grabber and opposing them, protestations to the contrary notwithstanding. But you’re right in saying that faction cannot be debated with and there’s no point trying. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2019, 2:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warren-forms-exploratory-committee/826983/166 "2019-01-05T14:30:19Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > Keeping this political- that claim would be made and Trump would get NRA support biggly with ads saying it. > > Would that, in today’s environment, cost an election. Specifically would it lose her PA, WI, and MI? > > I don’t think so. It would lose her the single issue gun rights voters and win her the single issue gun control voters. And each of those would already be decided by other factors. > > Her swing strength won’t be rural (as Brown’s might be) it will be suburbia. And that will be true for most Dems nowadays. I’ve been following the discussion in [Josh Marshall’s ‘numbers peeps’ Twitter list](https://twitter.com/joshtpm/lists/numbers-peeps), and they’ve been doing a lot of mapping of the electoral results, and posting maps of how the D-R split has changed geographically over time. And one of the most visible changes is that the urban/rural split has increasingly become a chasm: while rural areas have always been more conservative and GOP-leaning than cities, they still used to have a large minority of Dem voters. And the suburbs used to be mostly GOP strongholds. But all that’s changed. The rural Dem vote has shrunk, inner suburbs are strongly Dem, and the line between Dem and GOP majority areas is increasingly further out in the suburbs/exurbs. Where I’m going with this is that with rural voters being a much smaller part of the Dem coalition than they’ve ever been, pro-gun voters are probably a much smaller part of the Dem coalition than they’ve ever been as well. Sure, there are pro-gun suburbanites too, but rural areas are where you find heavy majorities being against gun control - and those voters are already mostly lost to Dem candidates; Dems are increasingly winning the suburbs, and are winning without the rural voters they used to need. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2019, 2:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warren-forms-exploratory-committee/826983/167 "2019-01-05T14:55:51Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > That’s a cover story for finding an excuse to call a candidate a gun-grabber and opposing them, protestations to the contrary notwithstanding. But you’re right in saying that faction cannot be debated with and there’s no point trying. That’s not what I’m saying. If DrDeth wants to say in this thread that **he** won’t vote for Harris because he considers her to be a gun-grabber, it’s got some relevance to this thread, even if it’s just a single data point and doesn’t tell us that much. Or if he wants to say that the Dems will lose the election if they nominate Harris because **lots** of otherwise Dem voters wouldn’t vote for her on account of her gun-grabbing tendencies, that’s quite germane to this thread, and we can debate that. (I’ve already made an argument that he would be wrong to say that; I can’t gripe if he argues that **I’m** wrong! :D) But it’s not necessary or particularly relevant to get into the nuts and bolts and clips and magazines of the gun control issue, or what regulation is or isn’t constitutional under _Heller_, to argue either side of that debate. Now I’m perfectly willing to get into debates over the specifics of gun control from time to time: if I’m going to be pro-gun-control, I think it’s necessary for me to test my positions against strong counterarguments to see how well they hold up, even if I don’t stand a chance of convincing someone like **DrDeth**. But my strong personal preference is that I’d much rather do that in threads that are specifically about guns and gun control (which I can jump into or stay out of, depending on mood, time, and energy), rather than finding myself suddenly mired in a gun control debate in a thread that’s intended to be about something entirely different. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2019, 4:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warren-forms-exploratory-committee/826983/168 "2019-01-05T16:14:58Z")
> [@](#): > > Quoth **RTFirefly** : > > I guess my point would be that a debate over the proportion of the electorate that would otherwise vote for a Dem, but would be turned off by Harris’ stances on guns, would be entirely relevant to this thread. Actually, even that wouldn’t be relevant, because this thread is about Warren, not Harris. ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2019, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warren-forms-exploratory-committee/826983/169 "2019-01-05T17:23:53Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > If DrDeth wants to say in this thread that **he** won’t vote for Harris because he considers her to be a gun-grabber, it’s got some relevance to this thread, even if it’s just a single data point and doesn’t tell us that much. > > Or if he wants to say that the Dems will lose the election if they nominate Harris because **lots** of otherwise Dem voters wouldn’t vote for her on account of her gun-grabbing tendencies, that’s quite germane to this thread, and we can debate that… The 2020 election will be decided by how vigorously the candidate opposes the sacred 2nd Amendment. This is dismal commentary on U.S. voter stupidity, but it is true. > [@Poll and discussion for Democratic/liberal/progressive voters: your early preference for 2020](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/poll-and-discussion-for-democratic-liberal-progressive-voters-your-early-preference-for-2020/825263/168): > > According to [a recent Gallup poll](https://news.gallup.com/poll/244367/top-issues-voters-healthcare-economy-immigration.aspx), **72% of voters said that Gun policy would be extremely/very important to their choice of candidate** for Congress. This was a higher percentage than for Taxes or Income/Wealth Distribution, and way ahead of Trade Policy and Climate Change. > … In March 2018 … _ **a whopping 13%** of Americans said “Guns/Gun Control” was **“the most important problem facing the country today.”** _ We’re left to guess how many of these were pro- and how many anti- but … either way … Wow! _ **Thirteen percent!** _ > > I hope the D candidate can find some wishy-washy middle-ground, lulling the “moderate” gun nuts while not angering the gun-control nuts. > > - > - I’ve added emphasis to this earlier post. Is adding emphasis to one’s own posts permitted under the Dont-change-quote rule? Read it and weep. ---
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Chance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jonathan_chance/32/701_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Chance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jonathan_Chance)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2019, 5:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warren-forms-exploratory-committee/826983/170 "2019-01-05T17:36:31Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > Actually, even that wouldn’t be relevant, because this thread is about Warren, not Harris. Yes it is about Warren. So that’s enough of the hijack. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2019, 8:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warren-forms-exploratory-committee/826983/171 "2019-01-05T20:34:50Z")
nm ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2019, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warren-forms-exploratory-committee/826983/172 "2019-01-05T21:27:04Z")
> [@Jonathan\_Chance](#): > > Yes it is about Warren. So that’s enough of the hijack. Good call. I have started a new thread in GD about this issue. ---
**Author:** ![Lamoral](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lamoral/32/16078_2.png) [@Lamoral](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamoral)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2019, 1:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warren-forms-exploratory-committee/826983/173 "2019-01-06T01:19:06Z")
There’s a now a meme going around showing a photo of Warren drinking beer, with [what is supposedly a racist trinket in the background.](http://shorenewsnetwork.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Mammie.jpg) I am skeptical. It looks like it could be just some sort of pottery with handles on the side and a red blotch in the design, which someone has tried to pass off as resembling the racist sculpture even if it’s entirely coincidental. But the optics of it are still pretty bad, given the way the meme-o-sphere works. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2019, 1:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warren-forms-exploratory-committee/826983/174 "2019-01-06T01:25:41Z")
> [@Lamoral](#): > > There’s a now a meme going around showing a photo of Warren drinking beer, with [what is supposedly a racist trinket in the background.](http://shorenewsnetwork.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Mammie.jpg) I am skeptical. It looks like it could be just some sort of pottery with handles on the side and a red blotch in the design, which someone has tried to pass off as resembling the racist sculpture even if it’s entirely coincidental. But the optics of it are still pretty bad, given the way the meme-o-sphere works. I think it is one, buit so? It’s not like it’s at her house. ---
**Author:** ![Covfefe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ee7513/32.png) [@Covfefe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Covfefe)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2019, 1:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warren-forms-exploratory-committee/826983/175 "2019-01-06T01:53:53Z")
This was at her house. She did a livestreamed Q&A on instagram on New Year’s Eve. Looks like nothing interesting; reactionaries are more interested in saying by drinking a beer she’s trying too hard to look authentic. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2019, 2:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warren-forms-exploratory-committee/826983/176 "2019-01-06T02:21:45Z")
Mamie has four arms? ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2019, 2:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warren-forms-exploratory-committee/826983/177 "2019-01-06T14:25:55Z")
Looks like Warren’s Iowa trip is [going well](https://twitter.com/mikememoli/status/1081709761085755392) - large crowds, lots of enthusiasm. ---
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Chance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jonathan_chance/32/701_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Chance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jonathan_Chance)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2019, 3:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warren-forms-exploratory-committee/826983/178 "2019-01-06T15:46:01Z")
First mover advantage is real. Can’t deny it. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2019, 4:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warren-forms-exploratory-committee/826983/179 "2019-01-06T16:32:43Z")
I’ll deny it. This s so early, I can’t believe she’s going to be in full campaign mode for this long. And I don’t really know what to expect at this stage, but these don’t seem like large venues. The one mentioned in RTFirefly’s linked tweet said 700 people. I don’t mean that as a criticism-like I said I’m not really sure what to expect this far out. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2019, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warren-forms-exploratory-committee/826983/180 "2019-01-06T17:19:01Z")
I’ll deny it too. Let’s go back to 1992. First mover as a serious top tier candidate was Tsongas. Bill Clinton didn’t announce until October (!) 1991. (Of course that cycle you had a lot who were making announcements early … that they were NOT running. Gore, Gephardt, Rockefeller … My impression is that being a first mover more often is a sign that you are the weaker candidate and that you hope having the stage to yourself for a bit will save you. It generally ends up having little impact. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warren-forms-exploratory-committee/826983.md?page=8) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warren-forms-exploratory-committee/826983.md?page=10)