In the end, it will probably come down to money and networking, which will more likely benefit Hillary than Warren. The Democrats offer nothing of value.
There has been a lot of grumbling among the leftist hordes of the Democratic Party that indicate something less than overwhelming enthusiasm for the coronation of Hillary Clinton as their standard-bearer in 2016. It is difficult to imagine why, considering her charm, effervescence, eloquence, and unquestionable past, there would be anything but unanimous support for the good lady – unless it is because none of those qualities are attributable to her.
Now comes the proposition that since she has signed on for paid speaking engagements (virtually the only thing she has been successful at) until March of 2015, Hillary can wait until April to announce her presidential run. That is an example of considerable hubris, considering that her last coronation was upended in 2008 by a junior senator from Illinois with absolutely no accomplishments in federal or state government.
There does not seem to be a “golden one” waiting in the wings this year, since most of the alternatives mentioned are white males who, for the most part, are out of fashion in the Democratic Party. While Bernie Sanders and Joe Biden will bring a smile, they will attract no votes.
But then there is Elizabeth Warren – she of “You didn’t build that” and “I’m Cherokee because of my high cheekbones” fame. The sad thing for the Democrats is that their bench is so thin that they will literally have to choose between a Wall Street tool and a clueless and hypocritical academic. She is, after all, somehow a millionaire. I wonder how that happened, since she could not have possibly “built that.”