that liberal base to support her, those people that are really antsy and really wanting elizabeth warren to run. what about that? will the liberal base be there for hillary? she comes from that base but she also has worked with republicans and in the senate was very effective as a senator that could work with the other side of the aisle. i m very amused about my compatriot here on the republican side being so concerned about hillary clinton. why are the republicans so preoccupied with hillary clinton with attacking and attacking when they still don t have a single idea how to get universal health care in this country? their ideas are lacking, so all they know how to do is attack attack. i hope they stay on that course.
live much longer? i hate to see the senate turn in just another version of the house. i think there are responsibilities that go along with being a senator and i would hate to see on legislation curtailed. but the fact of the matter is things have to change. the current status quo is absolutely unacceptable. jim manly, always a pleasure. thank you. almost immediately harry reid said chuck schumer would be a replacement. not everyone is happy about it. schumer is known for his extremely close relationship to washington which is why some liberal groups are encouraging elizabeth warren to run. this comes at a time when
getting elizabeth warren to run. i think anyone who is realistic needs to give up on elizabeth warren. she s made it clear she s not going to run. but the ascended wing of the party, everything like fashion, comes around again. suddenly you do see a much more robust liberal wing of the party. bill de blasio is part of it. elizabeth warren is leading it in the senate. the democrats do need to have a debate between their more corporatist and liberal wing. i will say on the biden wing i believe joe biden should be vice president forever and ever and ever. he s available. i m down with that draft biden thing. christina, the progressive change campaign committee are the people who really kind of drafted elizabeth warren into running for senate in massachusetts. she wasn t interested in being an elected official. they kept pushing her and pushing her and they got her to do it. but there s a fundamental difference running for the senate and the presidency of the united states. the p
for his aggressive style, to be nice about it will end up with a different role apparently. she s also distancing herself from some of the liberal donors as though she s trying to you know, signal you know that she s got enough money, she s got this thing, and she s not going to be owned by anybody on the left. she s her own kaernt. interesting. some progressives don t view hillary as a shoo-in, they want to be sure she s vetted. over the weekend boston globe ran several stories asking elizabeth warren to run. one group is launching an initiative in in that new hampshire and iowa. the aggressive change campaign committee is urging candidates to adopt a bold what they call elizabeth warren-style agenda. for more let s go to adam green, cofounder of the p triple c.
in an unprecedented lead editorial, the boston globe urged massachusetts senator elizabeth warren to run for president, and adding unprecedented to unprecedented, the globe ran three separate op ed column, urging elizabeth warren to run. since 1960, when john f. kennedy won the presidency, the boston globe has grown accustomed to endorsing a local boy. john kerry in 2004. the globe never had to urge any of them to run for president. in an editorial entitled democrats need elizabeth warren s voice in the 2016 presidential race, the globe specified some policy differences between hillary clinton and elizabeth warren. unlike clinton or any of the prospective candidates, warren has made closing the economic gaps in america her priority, and calling for more bankruptcy protections.