Still good to vote for the single best candidate

[Jayhawker Soule]

The most conservative voice on MSNBC sounds a lot like ...
... All of which support the claims I made, no assumptions needed
not propaganda, just facts

MSNBC - Media Bias/Fact Check

<ignore-list>

pathetic rubbish​

</ignore-list>

 

[Heyo]

Yeah....

She just didn't come across well compared to master campaigners like Biden and Sanders, who are frankly up on a high level, both instantly likable pretty much all of the time. Warren would only be likable some of the time, and other times would seem too angry (even though of course she was angry for a totally good reason) -- that is, needed more...of something like...more easily visible equanimity/faith in the nation maybe: that sense of...it's ok/we're going to turn in the right direction -- we're going to be ok, that people like. People want that.

Master campaigner Biden? :rofl: He campaigns to tell people to vote for someone else. (Sometimes literally.) The only things he is surfing on are his name recognition and the fact that he has come to be the "not Sanders" candidate.
Warren is too analytical for the feel-good voters, yes. But that isn't her problem. She relied to much on tactical maneuvers. She tried to be the compromise candidate by kicking to both sides. That didn't work out in the divisive climate of progressives vs. conservatives. People thought she was a progressive but then she attacked Sanders. (And it was a very clumsy attack that included playing the woman card.) That was the moment she tanked in the polls.
And she was still too progressive to appeal to the conservative voters. These are not the times when you can be the laughing third. You have to pick a side and stick to it.

 

[halbhh]

Master campaigner Biden? :rofl: He campaigns to tell people to vote for someone else. (Sometimes literally.) The only things he is surfing on are his name recognition and the fact that he has come to be the "not Sanders" candidate.
Warren is too analytical for the feel-good voters, yes. But that isn't her problem. She relied to much on tactical maneuvers. She tried to be the compromise candidate by kicking to both sides. That didn't work out in the divisive climate of progressives vs. conservatives. People thought she was a progressive but then she attacked Sanders. (And it was a very clumsy attack that included playing the woman card.) That was the moment she tanked in the polls.
And she was still too progressive to appeal to the conservative voters. These are not the times when you can be the laughing third. You have to pick a side and stick to it.

yah. you gotta wonder at Biden right? Little budget, no ground team in many states, not much going for him, and won a bunch of them over Elizabeth Warren, and it wasn't even slightly close. Biden does though say things people like.

I think you are correct that Warren shot herself in the foot at times on the debate stage, because people don't actually like to hear direct attacks on other candidates (but instead will be ok with simply saying something more like one's own plan or such is better for ___ reasons, or something positive like 'Americans are willing to elect a woman' or such).

 

[ecco]

Warren is too analytical for the feel-good voters, yes. But that isn't her problem. She relied to much on tactical maneuvers. She tried to be the compromise candidate by kicking to both sides.

How about she was just too screechy.

 

[Heyo]

How about she was just too screechy.

I never felt that way and have never heard that argument before. But it may apply to some low information voters.