Is there a handy term— like mansplaining or microaggression— to describe when someone likes a woman but defers anyway to others’ more negative views? Someone pls coin one quick, b/c I see this all the time, in reporting and in life.
Warren’s answer to ⁦⁩ on electability concerns: “Nothing will overcome people’s worries more than success”
NEW: has steadily grown in the polls but she still faces questions, even from her admirers, about whether she can defeat Trump She and her staff know it, are trying to address it in ways that are obvious (beating Scott Brown!) and more subtle >
If your strongest electability argument is that you won in Massachusetts — besting the powerhouse that is Scott Brown! — you’ve got an electability problem.
There are a lot of problems with 's handwringing article about Warren, so let's list a few. THREAD.
🎉🎉🎉 this is quite an achievement for and the politics desk at the nyt. they published an entire piece on warren’s chances and didn’t include any polls that show her beating trump or anyone who thinks she can win because of her bold agenda.
Interviews with dozens of Democrats showed enthusiasm for Elizabeth Warren but also concerns about her in a general election. Voters worried her liberalism would alienate moderates in key states and Trump would drown out her message with slurs against her.
In Council Bluffs, waiting to see Ms. Warren take the stage, Herb Christensen was succinct about why he liked her — and why he worried about her as the nominee. “My god, she’s smart,” he said. “Pocahontas, that’s the only thing.”
Elizabeth Warren inspires intense enthusiasm among Democratic voters. But she also inspires concerns among them, including her admirers. For all of Warren's strengths, she faces persistent questions about whether she could beat President Trump.
Read ⁦⁩ on the “the head-versus-heart debate” playing out in the Democratic primary, especially as it relates to Warren, who is rising in the D polls but faces persistent questions about how she’d fare in a general
This line emphasizes how much oomph the “Pocahontas” attack has lost, for now. It used to be that Warren *had* to respond because it was a major story when Trump attacked her. But he’s been dropping “Pocahontas” in speeches it hasn’t made news.
A overview on Dem voters pondering the electability question with Elizabeth Warren. Never understood why people do that. If you listen to pundits, or try to be one, CW could turn on a dime next week. Why not vote for candidate you think is best?
Voters at Warren rallies mention electability concerns from Harvard professor to gender to ideology to Trump attacks
Sample size please? Statistical plan and results? I'm only sort of kidding. builds a story out of a few interviews, while waits for more data before saying anything definitive about .
“Nothing will overcome people’s worries more than success,” [Warren] said.