Can Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley challenge Hillary Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination? Personally, I believe Warren is too liberal while O’Malley is a relative unknown. Still, Barack Obama was a relative unknown when he started the 2008 presidential campaign and ran a stellar campaign against the Clinton establishment the first time around. That’s why I am giving Martin O’Malley a second look. He certainly has less baggage than Clinton.
Martin O’Malley was well-received in Iowa during a recent appearance in Davenport. He blasted the GOP presidential contenders on their stance on income inequality.
“How ironic since their choices led to it,” he told The Des Moines Register in an interview Saturday. “This is their theory, and we tried it for the better part of these last 30 years: Concentrate wealth at the top, take regulation out of the equation and keep wages low. So for them now to say that they’re somehow very appalled and concerned about inequality is ironic, to put it most kindly.”
During O’Malley’s appearance at the Scott County Democrats’ “Red, White and Blue Dinner,” he offered a prescription for “making the dream true again” that includes raising the minimum wage, expanding Social Security benefits, making pre-kindergarten universally available and ensuring equal pay for women. “Sing it with me people,” O’Malley said. “When women succeed, America succeeds.”
The speech, which drew multiple standing ovations, both underscored O’Malley’s opportunities and the challenges in the nation’s first presidential nominating state, where early polls show Clinton with a commanding lead and O’Malley barely registering. In interviews afterward, many Democratic activists said they were only starting to learn about O’Malley. Source: Des Moines Register
The Boston Globe is making the case for Elizabeth Warren. I like her a lot because she’s for the middle class, but I find some of her positions too liberal. She would have to move a little to the center for me.
Unlike Clinton, or any of the prospective Republican candidates, Warren has made closing the economic gaps in America her main political priority, in a career that has included standing up for homeowners facing illegal foreclosures and calling for more bankruptcy protections. If she runs, it’ll ensure that those issues take their rightful place at the center of the national political debate.
Some of Warren’s admirers feel she’d be better off fighting for those causes in the Senate — but her opportunities to enact reforms there are shrinking, which should make a presidential run more attractive. As a member of the minority party in the Senate, her effectiveness is now much more limited than when she first won election, since Republicans control the legislative agenda. Democrats face an uphill challenge to reclaim the Senate in 2016 and face even slimmer prospects in the House. For the foreseeable future, the best pathway Warren and other Democrats have for implementing their agenda runs through the White House.
A presidential campaign would test Warren as never before. Her views on foreign policy are not fully formed. And on many other important issues — climate change, gun control, civil rights — Warren could struggle to articulate clear differences between herself and Clinton. That’s a risk she should be willing to take.
It will be interesting to see who will step up and challenge Hillary Clinton. The path to the White House shouldn’t just be handed to another Clinton or another Bush, for that matter.