UPI/Newscom news photo
Democratic Party presidential candidates Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders shook hands before last night’s debate but declined to do so afterward during an apparent little tiff. If it’s a fight that Warren wants, I say: Bring it!
I think it’s as likely that Bernie Sanders told Elizabeth Warren in private that a woman cannot be elected as president as that he let out a war whoop while giving her a tomahawk chop with his hand over her claim to possess significant Native American ancestry.
Warren stands by her conveniently timed account, whereas Bernie has said that he only told Warren in that private meeting “that Donald Trump is a sexist, a racist and a liar who would weaponize whatever he could.” That’s absolutely true.
Warren forces us to believe her or to believe Bernie.
I believe Bernie.
Thing is, Warren’s track record on truthfulness and embellishment is not great. No, falsely claiming Native American heritage is not the biggest political scandal in U.S. history, but it’s not nothing, either.
And when we’re forced to look at character and history, as Warren now has forced us to do, we are reminded that until 1996, Warren was a registered Repugnican. Bernie never has been a Repugnican and has been a progressive his entire time in elected office, which began in 1981. Bernie calls himself a democratic socialist; Warren is still quite in bed with capitalism, which she still somehow defends.
Warren’s probably false claim — false because she’s flat-out lying or false because her memory differs from what actually occurred — that Bernie told her during a private, one-on-one meeting in 2018 that a woman couldn’t win the presidency is just way too convenient of a springboard for her to have pointed out in last night’s Democratic Party presidential debate in Des Moines, Iowa, that none of the male candidates on the stage had defeated a Repugnican incumbent in the last 30 years. (She neglected to tell us during the debate that she herself was a registered Repugnican within the last 25 years…)
Indeed, at the debate last night, Warren, tag-teaming with the insufferable centrist Amy Klobuchar, was on a castrating roll.
To me, to be feminist means to promote the equality of the sexes — not to assert that one sex is better than the other, which women have stated, correctly, has been the problem for centuries: men (and plenty of women, too) believing that men are superior to women at least in some areas, such as to be the commander in chief.
Misandry — man-hating, which we saw in Billary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign and which an apparently desperate Warren has resurrected just in time for the Iowa caucuses — is not the antidote to misogyny. The equality of the sexes means the equality of the sexes.
That said, I do not believe that Elizabeth Warren could beat “President” Pussygrabber in November 2020. I mean, she might, but if I had to put money on it, I’d bet on her loss to Pussygrabber.
Yes, there are plenty of voters who don’t believe that a woman should be commander in chief — I do not at all share that view (and I could make the argument that a female commander in chief might be less trigger-happy and more mindful of human life and human well-being than a male commander in chief) — but what would sink Warren as the 2020 Democratic Party presidential candidate, I believe, is not that she’s a woman, but that Pussygrabber would paint her, very probably successfully, as just another clueless egghead from Massachusetts, a la Michael Dukakis and John Kerry. (Warren was, after all, a professor at Harvard.) Anti-intellectualism is rampant within the U.S. electorate. It’s not fair or right, but it is what it is.
Don’t take just my word for it; the polls also indicate that Warren very well could lose to Pussygrabber in November. Real Clear Politics’ average of match-up polls between Warren and Pussygrabber right now shows Warren at only 0.4 percent ahead of Pussygrabber — while Bernie beats Pussygrabber by 3 percentage points and Joe Biden beats Pussygrabber by 4 percentage points. (In case you were wondering, Pussygrabber beats Pete Buttigieg by 0.7 percent.)
If you truly want to deny “President” Pussygrabber another term, Warren probably is not your best bet. The polling bears that out.
Everything else aside, is the American electorate too sexist to elect a female as president? Perhaps — and recall that many women (most of them right-wing Repugnicans, of course) wouldn’t vote for a female president.
But let’s not blame Bernie Sanders for lingering sexism in the United States — as convenient a whipping boy and punching bag that he is — and if Elizabeth Warren believes that it’s smart to follow the “Bernie bros” page of the Billary Clinton 2016 Playbook, she’s going to find that it’s going to backfire.
And by forcing the Democratic and Democratic-leaning voters to choose between the real, time-tested progressive candidate and the “progressive”-come-lately candidate, Warren will lose.
P.S. In his defense during the debate last night, Bernie said this, in part:
Anybody who knows me knows that it’s incomprehensible that I would think that a woman cannot be president of the United States. Go to YouTube today. There’s a video of me 30 years ago talking about how a woman could become president of the United States.
In 2015, I deferred, in fact, to Senator Warren — [there] was a movement to draft Senator Warren to run for president. And you know what, I stayed back. Senator Warren decided not to run, and I then did run [for president] afterward.
Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by 3 million votes. How could anybody in a million years not believe that a woman could become president of the United States?
And let me be very clear: If any of the women on this stage or any of the men on this stage win the nomination — I hope that’s not the case, I hope it’s me — but if they do, I will do everything in my power to make sure that they are elected in order to defeat the most dangerous president in the history of our country.
Bernie had stepped aside for Warren — who is too much of a spineless, self-serving party hack to have dared to challenge Queen Billary’s coronation in 2016 — only to have her repay the favor by biting him like the snake in the grass that she is.
Last night’s pre-planned and coordinated-with-CNN “feminist” spectacle during the debate not only damaged Warren’s campaign and reputation, but damaged true feminism by having tried to weaponize it for personal and political gain.