Andrew Sullivan has a new Intelligencer column out in New York magazine, and while it covers a number of topics, one of them is, “Is there a Democrat who can win?” That’s juicy enough, but the excerpt in the tweet really sells it:
"Elizabeth Warren is unelectable as president. There. I said it … But she may well get the nomination. She has that quintessential perfume of smug, well-meaning, mediocre doom that Democrats simply cannot resist."https://t.co/AS8Kvi1Mbz
— Andrew Sullivan (@sullydish) October 25, 2019
Sullivan also has a lot to say about the other candidates, such as, “O’Rourke is a woke, moronic bigot” and “Harris has revealed herself as a feckless, authoritarian, lying opportunist.” But back to Elizabeth Warren, who’s in the Big 3.
Warren is surging, but she is, I fear — yes, I’ll say it — unelectable. I may be wrong, but by pledging to rip everyone off their current private health insurance, it certainly seems like she has thrown away the core advantage of her side — health security. By floating the notion in the CNN forum that her future Secretary of Education would have to be approved by a transgender 9-year-old boy, she’s placing herself firmly inside a cultural revolution most Americans are deeply uncomfortable with.
And the Trump game plan against her writes itself: She’s a supercilious, smug, know-it-all Massachusetts liberal who reveals contempt for the deplorables the way Clinton did last time. The “first woman of color” to get hired as a professor at Harvard Law School is the stuff that GOP dreams are made on. That any suspicion of the viability of her candidacy will be ascribed entirely to misogyny will only help Trump, the way it did in 2016.
Recommended
In short, she’s Hillary 2.0. We’d say the exception is that Hillary didn’t pretend to be Native American, but she has told some fibs in trying to make her political ascension seem like more of a struggle than it was.
You may be right. But you (and many of us) no doubt said the same thing, with great confidence when Trump got the nomination. So don’t be so sure.
— peter zeidenberg (@przeidenberg) October 25, 2019
Nope. Check the record. I predicted Trump would win and that Clinton was unelectable throughout 2016. I was widely mocked for it at the time. Almost alone among Washington pundits, I was right.
— Andrew Sullivan (@sullydish) October 25, 2019
No misogyny at all
— eWarren 1st Female MA Senator, Next up President (@chhelenach) October 25, 2019
Your misogyny is showing.
— Joel Andren ?? (@joelandren) October 25, 2019
"That any suspicion of the viability of her candidacy will be ascribed entirely to misogyny will only help Trump, the way it did in 2016." https://t.co/AS8Kvi1Mbz
— Andrew Sullivan (@sullydish) October 25, 2019
Among the many things that distinguish Andrew as an exceptional writer is his ability to sum up a situation with a concise, devastating comment like this.
— MIKE BRESLIN’S POINTLESS TWEETS (@mikebreslin815) October 25, 2019
True, she'll win five states if she's lucky.
— IleanaE. (@FilleGitane) October 25, 2019
There is nothing well-meaning about authoritarian socialism. Plenty of evidence for smugness & mediocrity, though.
— Troy Riser (@TroyRiser) October 25, 2019
I’ll take “Fig Leaves that Let Me Vote for Trump and Still Look at Myself in the Mirror” for 800 Alex.
— Karl Runser (@KarlRunser) October 26, 2019
You didn’t read the piece either.
— Andrew Sullivan (@sullydish) October 26, 2019
“Don’t get me wrong. I’ll vote for anyone, including Warren or Sanders or even the vacuous “Beto” to defeat Trump,” Sullivan writes. “But let’s be honest: This is a field that has largely wilted upon inspection.”
Terrified that you're right on Warren. Just one ray of hope there: her folksiness, while irritating, is a lot less obnoxiously feigned than HClinton's was.
But yes, she may blow that advantage in her steely determination not to lose the trans 9yo vote.
— Sveta Istoothin (@istoothin) October 25, 2019
Andrew's right. Warren needs to win the Independents in 3 or 4 states in the upper midwest and FL. Those people aren't going to buy what she's trying to sell. And she absolutely will not get the AA vote. They'll just stay home. She will lose to Trump.
— SuzanneRenee (@susierbcc) October 25, 2019
Her nomination will succeed in removing the one ace-in-the-hole issue Ds have going for them…health care. Flush that and the election down the toilet…
— _dcs_ (@gnostic19) October 25, 2019
I’m here for all of that and more, Andrew.
— TestaDuda (@TestaDuda) October 25, 2019
I fear you may be right, and that makes me sad.
— michael epps (@michael_epps) October 25, 2019
Agree
— Tonio (@TonioToGo) October 25, 2019
Agree 100%
— kaba (@kaba33154168) October 25, 2019
I'm glad someone had finally described her perfectly! Being a moderate, I would not vote for her.
— Lynda Gage (@Lynda_Gage) October 25, 2019
She's the female John Kerry for sure.
— j II (@jamejonson) October 25, 2019
Female Mike Dukakis. Can't wait to see her ride in a tank.
— M. Ira Miles (@murmiles) October 26, 2019
I totally get it. I don’t like it but I understand and agree.
— Susanne Casey (@SusanneCasey) October 25, 2019
I agree 1000%
— WhiskeyTangoFoxtrot (@MithrandirMaia) October 26, 2019
As a moderate republican I could not agree with you more. If I don’t want to vote for trump, and I can’t vote for a far far left progressive, I am screwed. This is the best our country has to offer?
— ???? Mike Hunterstein (f/k/a Avi C.) (@mikehun92597824) October 26, 2019
I don't think she will get it. I am surrounded by Democrats and I not a single one supports her. Name recognition is different than whose name u click on in the voting booth. Democrats have picked centrists in their party in the last 15 years.
— MomOfTwo (@MomOfTw91113732) October 25, 2019
Precisely.
People who tend to the center get the most votes because most people are centrist. They see some good ideas on both sides of the aisle and want the person who'll enact the good ideas regardless of where they came from.
Radicals only get the radical vote.— Jason (@Freman67) October 25, 2019
Great piece. A depressing way to start my morning!
— Alex (@AlexHaskell) October 26, 2019
100% correct
— Yossarian628 (@Yossarian6281) October 26, 2019
Damn, I wish you would be wrong on this @sullydish. But you're spot on again. *sigh*
— 4evrNeverTrump (@4evrNeverTrump) October 25, 2019
I agree. Not sure why Reps aren’t encouraging their party to vote in the primary for her. It’s a clear win in Nov for them. Politically speaking.
— Independent Mark (@malavemark) October 25, 2019
Did anyone on this thread actually read the article?
— Trump's Shrink (@Spence08340080) October 26, 2019
Of course not. This is Twitter.
— Andrew Sullivan (@sullydish) October 26, 2019
Related:
Andrew Sullivan drops Mother of All Reality Checks, blames Hillary Clinton alone for her epic fail https://t.co/mYRsVPNzCj
— Twitchy Team (@TwitchyTeam) April 15, 2017
Join the conversation as a VIP Member