Elizabeth Warren HQ: She's Got A Plan!

AnonymityX1000

Veteran
Joined
Jun 6, 2012
Messages
30,290
Reputation
2,825
Daps
68,071
Reppin
New York
@jayshiggs

If Warren is gonna start scooping Bernie ppl you think he doesn’t run?
I see in his fund raising emails he is saying he will only run if he believes he is the best available candidate. It got me thinking maybe if her or Tulsi get off to a great start he won't run. If they sputter he goes in.
Do you think stuff like campaign people switching teams is a bigger factor?
 

FAH1223

Go Wizards, Go Terps, Go Packers!
Staff member
Supporter
Joined
May 16, 2012
Messages
71,481
Reputation
8,137
Daps
216,207
Reppin
WASHINGTON, DC


I see in his fund raising emails he is saying he will only run if he believes he is the best available candidate. It got me thinking maybe if her or Tulsi get off to a great start he won't run. If they sputter he goes in.
Do you think stuff like campaign people switching teams is a bigger factor?

Depends on if higher folk from 2016 end up migrating and then Bernie is starting from scratch which ain’t a good look
 

storyteller

Superstar
Joined
May 23, 2012
Messages
16,156
Reputation
4,955
Daps
61,423
Reppin
NYC
@jayshiggs

If Warren is gonna start scooping Bernie ppl you think he doesn’t run?

They met less than a month ago. Since then she's brought the pharmaceuticals bill out; announced her run (well basically did); and then picked up a well known former staffer...I'm wondering if they came to an understanding there. That's been the Seder theory since that pharmaceuticals bill dropped but I never bought it; this makes me think twice though.

https://www.albanyherald.com/news/b...cle_51ddf726-39b7-55d3-8a91-524eaac837c4.html
 

acri1

The Chosen 1
Supporter
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
23,632
Reputation
3,710
Daps
102,861
Reppin
Detroit
Hillary Clinton spent $370 million more than Trump on the presidential election. Now you tell me, was it effective? :mjgrin:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-election-its-a-doozy/?utm_term=.f32168407882

Nate Silver doesn't think it was too effective either.
Have you Heard Nate Silver's Thoughts about Russiagate? He's not a Believer. It's a Math Thing.

How much did Russia spend again? You got receipts?

A Russian troll factory had a $1.25 million monthly budget to interfere in the 2016 US election

Nate Silver has a right to his opinion but that's a pretty huge waste of money by a foreign government if that's the case. Although even Nate Silver kinda backpedaled on this and said he's agnostic about it -

How Much Did Russian Interference Affect The 2016 Election?

Overall, then, my view on the effects of Russian interference is fairly agnostic. I tend to focus more on factors — such as Clinton’s email scandal or the Comey letter (and the media’s handling of those stories) — that had easier-to-prove effects. The hacked emails from the Clinton campaign and the DNC (which may or may not have had anything to do with the Russians) potentially also were more influential than the Russian efforts detailed in Friday’s indictments. Clinton’s Electoral College strategy didn’t have as much of an effect as some people assume — but it was pretty stupid all the same and is certainly worth mentioning.

But if it’s hard to prove anything about Russian interference, it’s equally hard to disprove anything: The interference campaign could easily have had chronic, insidious effects that could be mistaken for background noise but which in the aggregate were enough to swing the election by 0.8 percentage points toward Trump — not a high hurdle to clear because 0.8 points isn’t much at all.
 

AnonymityX1000

Veteran
Joined
Jun 6, 2012
Messages
30,290
Reputation
2,825
Daps
68,071
Reppin
New York
A Russian troll factory had a $1.25 million monthly budget to interfere in the 2016 US election

Nate Silver has a right to his opinion but that's a pretty huge waste of money by a foreign government if that's the case. Although even Nate Silver kinda backpedaled on this and said he's agnostic about it -

How Much Did Russian Interference Affect The 2016 Election?
Yeah, spending money proves nothing about influence. Hillary spent more than double than Trump and what 30X more than that Russian entity you posted about but lost? Russia had that much better ad targeting than the Clinton campaign?!:mjlol: Wow that would make her team a bunch of real dummies.
And the Nate Silver article you posted is 9 months before the one I posted. So it's the other way, he has gotten more doubtful over time, he has not backpedaled. Nice try tho. :mjgrin:
 

NkrumahWasRight Is Wrong

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
46,320
Reputation
5,840
Daps
93,956
Reppin
Uncertain grounds
What's the fiasco? What's funny about it ?

Seems like an attempt to appear relatable and show off her personality and charm that backfired bigly

Thanking her husband for being home? :what:

Its obviously not a major deal and her appeal is in her policies but if this is a glimpse into her campaign then :skip:
 

acri1

The Chosen 1
Supporter
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
23,632
Reputation
3,710
Daps
102,861
Reppin
Detroit
Yeah, spending money proves nothing about influence. Hillary spent more than double than Trump and what 30X more than that Russian entity you posted about but lost? Russia had that much better ad targeting than the Clinton campaign?!:mjlol: Wow that would make her team a bunch of real dummies.

Why do you keep bringing up Clinton? I have no interest in defending her terrible campaign..but that's not the topic at hand.:what:

Obviously Russia didn't spend as much as one of the major parties, that doesn't somehow negate their influence. Especially with the election being close as it was and them targeting certain demographics in key areas. My point is Russia wouldn't have wasted the money and effort if they didn't think they could sway a significant number of voters.
 
Top