Home | About | Donate

Elizabeth Warren Versus Joe Biden

Elizabeth Warren Versus Joe Biden

Ruth Conniff

Joe Biden’s almost-certain decision to jump into the 2020 presidential race means that the top three candidates for the White House in 2020 are all white men over the age of 75—Biden, Bernie Sanders, and Donald Trump.

There’s something wrong with this picture in a political era defined by #MeToo, Black Lives Matter, and a massive backlash against the White Man’s Last Stand presidency of Donald Trump.

And the problem is bigger than the optics of race and gender.

1 Like

Biden never even made it to my list at all, and I know there are plenty of others like me. The MSM will fawn all over him becuz he’s a Dino. If that’s enough to get him through the primaries, we will have wasted yet another opportunity and Drumpf will be with us for another 4 years.


Biden has always struck me as empty scornful vessel to posture however the handlers decide reflects the greatest potential for advantage at any given moment: law to benefit corporations.
He and the Clinton cabal, along many others of their ilk, are joined at the hip in this regard. And that advantage is ALWAYS extractive… across the board, in all dimensions. He is of the school of never being sated. The appetite always exceeds the capacity for any degree of empathy. The later ALWAYS fails in performance because there is no there there. You can practically see him silently counting between postures because he has been told that it is good acting technique.

Open Secrets is worth a visit. He sure looks like the lobbyist’s lawyers bud


Warren has a wee chance in 2020.

Biden, no chance at all.

Only Democrats addicted to the label will vote for Biden. If, the DNC, and the Democratic Party Establishment manage to silence all others.


Biden WILL assure that the Democrats’ corporate money addiction continues to be fed by the corporations.


Joe Biden’s “early [manufactured] lead” won’t last long.


I agree that his lead is manufactured, in a, hopefully vain effort to make it real. Biden is in the lead of all contenders as far as TPTB are concerned. Everyone else, not so much.


manufactured lead
Yes, Indeed.
The anybody but Bernie -Status Quo - Wall Street Crowd will see to it


Biden actually might not run. He has already been pretty thoroughly tarred by the leaks from the Clinton campaign in 2016, and it probably would not take much attention to start all that ablaze again. I should think that there are a lot of people fairly close to him who might prefer to not endure the risks that might be encumbent.

If Conniff wants to build Warren up, which I guess is not the worst project I have seen good people mire themselves in, she probably ought to make a more relevant comparison–to Sanders, perhaps, or to Tulsi Gabbard.

It would also be more honest or informed (one seldom knows) to admit that Warren’s small interface with foreign policy has been quite poor, as far as it has gone. A pro-war candidate for presidency of an empire is not a workers’ candidate. Even though Bernie Sanders has shown weakness in this area, his record and his statements are distinctly better than are Warren’s.

It is disappointing that identity politics movements that address valid needs for recognition and equality should be reduced to calling for support for candidates of a given demographic without proper reference to their positions and policies, their statements and records. There will surely be other women campaigning for president. Tulsi Gabbard is, but gets no attention here. Jill Stein will surely be back, but gets no attention here.

One may wish to argue that these are not leading candidates, that they do not control much of the vote. This is true enough, though we all probably ought to remember that it was true of Bernie Sanders, round about 2015 as well–and that all the king’s journalists and all the king’s men could not keep him from the candidacy and keep their collective face at the same time, so they stole the nomination in plain sight.

To a very large degree, decent candidates do not control much of the vote because journalists and pundits praise candidates who have already bought into the Washington machine.

Despite her economic insight and willingness to take on bankers in public hearings, which is certainly leagues ahead of Joe Biden or Beto O’ Rourke, Warren is most assuredly bought into Washington politics. Why else would she admit that the 2016 nomination was rigged and then recant the point of view within days, were this not simply under instruction from above? Admittedly, Sanders is considerably bought in as well. But when Mr Sanders goes to Washington, he does drive a harder bargain than does or at least has Ms. Warren. They are both quite well suited to remaining in relatively safe posts in liberal New England and working out domestic policy, but Bernie at least has taken on the MIC at times, albeit inconsistently.

It is reasonable that Conniff points out that there is something wrong with the Democratic candidacy being led by three geriatric white males. But that is what happens when you support people who purge the party of the politicians supported by its living base–in the case of the Democrats, the relatively progressive candidates who were drummed out of national politics by the Clintons and Obama and their allies. You get a huge gap in age, and you get people like Sanders and Warren filling in from outside the party. The problem that she bemoans is the result of policies of people she is willing to support, if perhaps only because of a few superficial aspects of their demographic identities. No, jproduce a candidate who can be examined based on issues as well.

Better let’s have a look at Tulsi Gabbard, whose policies are at least comparable to Bernie’s. Let’s have a look at Jill Stein, whose policies are better, even if some policy decrees that the article must be in disagreement. Let’s have a look at a popular possibility like Bernie Sanders. Let’s have an examination of why it is a particularly bad thing that Sanders is male and white and old, if those are the issues to somebody. Let’s have some sort of piece explaining why it is the demographic identities of these candidates that are important rather than their policies, if that is what is supported. It would be refreshing, at this point, to see an article about what it was not important that Obama was neoliberal come neoconservative in his policies–a “Reagan Democrat,” in his own words–because the main thing was that he was partly of African descent and a relatively young sprout as presidents go.

But no. Let the sleeping dog Biden sleep, if he’s willing to do that. If Warren is of valid timbre as a candidate, she ought to be worth comparing to people who are running. It’s not as through there were not enough of them. And it seems to me that she ought to be compared on the basis of her positions and her record unless a case can be made that the fact of her gender is a better qualification for office.

A lot of people on CD are of some sort of progressive or liberal or similar persuasion. Why not an article comparing people that most of the readership might happily vote for, particularly this early in the campaign, when there are likely to be some changes in polls, a good year and a half before the convention?


But, he’s not in the lead. He and Bernie are tied ( within the margin of error ) in some national polling. And, you have to understand the myth of the undeclared " unifer " in these early polls. As soon as he becomes a candidate, he’ll lose some support.
This article is hardly Ruth’s A game in terms of exposing how rotten Biden’s record is after 44+ yrs in nat’l politics. However, I understand she has to cross herself now, ala St. Joe, whenever she starts her Toyota hybrid or rides her bike to yogo class. A Biden fan supposedly even sent Ruth a picture of Tony Conigliaro, after he was hit by " a hard brushback pitch " just to show Joe is taking no prisoners this go-round ( as opposed to the last 7 times he’s run for POTUS ).


I thought the 2016 election proved to us all, that no one can trust the polls.

Don’t let yourself trust anything that they can buy.


Great analysis by Ruth Conniff. I agree completely, Biden is just another old white guy working to maintain the status quo. As corrupt as our political system is, especially the DNC, he will likely be the candidate for the Dems.

I want some female leadership for a change. I think Tulsi and Warren would be terrific.

1 Like

The author identifies the three men, Biden, Trump and Bernie as ‘men over the age of …’ Better to drop this ‘identity politics’ feign for ability, and clearly say that Biden is a neo-liberal and therefore can be counted on to support Wall Street.

Presidential leadership derives from the quality of the mind, not his or her chronological age, the tick-tock of the clock. Whoever said that FDR had too aged a brain to lead the country to victory in WWII ought to have his own head examined. In politics, age is appropriate for use only as a metaphor; thus we say ‘the strutting and bravura of a teen’, as in Bush II, or ‘the mind of a petulant child’, as in Trump. Bernie’s vitality, clarity of vision, and enduring values reflect a quality of the mind at the height of its powers.


The Progressives started something good here and makes Biden is a fish out of water. He does not represent our interests. We want change, and that’s the furthest thing from Biden’s Staus Quo mind. He was promted to run by the same people we want gone. Even if he decides to run, we don’t have to give him our votes. Another corrupt Election is headed our way, led by the lying Media who will always put the numbers in Biden’s favor. It’s up to Us what happens in 2020. I hope most of us will ride the Prog- Wave. If We don’t get Trump out… We’re done!


Sorry Ms Conniff but your Sexism is showing.

It is not Warren that is going to stifle Biden’s race to the White House but Bernie Sanders who you hardly mention even though he is leading in the polls.

Warren a former Republican will make a great running mate for Bernie.

      BERNIE  -  LIZ  2020

“…And the problem is bigger than the optics of race and gender…”
Amazing to me that you spend almost the entirety of your summary comment talking about the optics of race and gender, and then you end it by saying that these optics are less important than the problem which you leave largely unmentioned and unaddressed,…curious that.

The problems largely revolve around the candidates’ public policies, and their histories of support for those policies., but of course when policies and records of support are focused upon, your comments focus on generic “white men over the age of 75” sounds more than a little hypocritical.

1 Like

Generally agreed, though I’d personally prefer a cabinet position for Warren (AG) and then an appointment to USSC after 4-6 years, perhaps in a newly expanded USSC. As for a Veep, I see a lot of potential in Gabbard, Buttigieg, and numerous others both among the current contenders for the Dem 2020 ticket and among the broader progressive political movement. Additionally, there are a lot of federal agencies still working on skeletal management and staffing which will require competent teams, especially in the face of a broad and boldly Progressive agenda.


I agree, but the problem is the MSM is now fawning all over Joe and Joe is on the super, delegates, list!


I don’t want to be negative, but Ruth Conniff’s analysis is just plain awful. Sen. Warren, cultural appropriator par excellence, showed her true colors in 2016, championing Wall Street-neocon Hillary Clinton over FDR-Democrat Bernie Sanders – when the Democratic Primary was blatantly being rigged before our eyes.

After the damage was done, Warren – like DNC Chair Tom Perez, DNC Interim Chair Donna Brazile, and Kyle Kulinsky – admitted that the primary was rigged.

Even Noam Chomsky, a paragon of precision and restraint, admitted that Bernie would have won it, were it not for DNC “shenanigans.” (And would be our president, right now, as all polls showed him mopping the floor with Trump by 10-13%.)

Of course, following Sen. Warren’s admission that the 2016 Primary was rigged, the authoritarians in charge of the Democratic Party had a few words with her, and Sen. Warren resumed shutting up about the rigged primary. The establishment can always count on Warren to follow orders and betray progressives. That’s simply her record.

And the reason Elizabeth Warren gave a standing ovation to Trump’s “socialism-never” claptrap, during his State of the Union Address, is simple: she agrees with him (on that point and so much more – where is she on Venezuela? Yemen? Syria? Ukraine? AWOL or standing with the neocons, as usual).

Whatever Bernie-esque noises she’s making, these days, Warren’s record suggests that she will fight against Medicare-for-All, tooth and nail. The same applies to the Green New Deal, the Fight for $15, tuition-free state college, and more. And her recent announcement that she’d like to see the end of the Electoral College is pretty weak tea, failing to address the multitude of factors that make U.S. elections the most corrupt in the Western world, per a 2016 Harvard University study: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NxXKr2hKCz0

An establishment pawn, Warren will fight democratic socialism at every turn. And she’s a warmongering neocon, to boot. How is she distinguishable from Sec. “We came, we saw, he died” Clinton when it comes to foreign policy? (And how was Clinton distinguishable from Dick Cheney, with regard to the neocons’ genocidal agenda? She wasn’t.)


Because all of the other contenders, from PhRMA’s Booker to Wall Street’s Gillibrand to Wall Street’s Harris to PNAC’s Biden, on down… they’re total, unconscionable shit. One sellout after another. They will never excite the base, win the middle, or draw conservatives away from the neo-fascist Trump.

Gabbard/Sanders (possibly reversed) will.

That’s simply the reality of it.

Like Bernie in 2016, the more people get to know Tulsi Gabbard, the more they like her. The grassroots folks are already excited. For my money, Rep. Gabbard is unquestionably "the horse to bet on" in 2020… that is, if our primaries were not rigged. (Oh crap… but they are, Blanche, they are… Gee, that sucks… I guess when I say that “Gabbard is "the horse to bet on in 2020" what I mean is that she will probably end up as the "Bernie Sanders” of 2020: they’ll steal it from her/progressives, but a year after the election, she’ll be the most popular politician in the country.)


Sorry Ms Conniff–
Totally agree with you about Biden, but Warren, while a capitalist with principles, is still a capitalist. And, in a field of very flawed candidates, only Bernie shines like a beacon to those of us that look beyond gender or color–or age–for an individual whose lifelong political philosophy and social conscience resonate with what has now–at last–become a powerful need for profound change in this country!

1 Like