this here shows why we need a big old dose of elizabeth warren. also i think she is running for president. also i think she can beat hillary clinton. it strikes me that no one outside the top 1% of the 1% has any reason to vote for hillary other than her gender, and in this respect elizabeth warren is her equal. forecasting the hillary campaign: it will be boring and empty to a point that is euthanizing. believe it or not, i think that it might become so evident so early that hillary is going to get smacked again like she did in 2008 that she never actually announces. obama will be a millstone. hillary has no convincing way or reason to run away from him. warren, as that huffpost piece shows, already is, and already is doing it effectively and for principled reasons. hillary is hauling so much baggage from every period of her life and career that it is almost absurd.
also a million things have to unfold but it is not impossible that elizabeth warren could be elected president.
to my way of thinking, a randpaul/lizzy campaign would be a renaissance of american political discourse. both of them say something, which has to be the starting point. hillary clinton says nothing and means nothing and, in public space, is nothing. and obviously warren could beat rand on a given november day, though rand is a surprisingly good politician and on another november day might beat her. (rand i think, has a less plausible road to the rep nomination than warren to the dem.) i like her against christie too, though i don't think christie will be the nominee. she makes a good contrast in a number of ways to jeb bush, whereas jeb and hillary are indistinguishable.
harvard prof is a problem. but she has been campaigning like mad and she is getting better and better on the stump and in putting across her common touch. i think the populist/egalitarian thing translates to some pretty concrete economic proposals, and i think you might be surprised how well such a program might play even in parts of the south. she could stage some interesting red-state invasions, as rand the other way round.
i think people may be overestimating money as a factor just because the entire system is swamped in infinite cash: any given ad means nothing; even the mid-term just sank into interminable incredibly stupid slop that no one could possibly pay attention to. warren or paul or whomever will have plenty of money and plenty of wealthy supporters; there just will be billions of money in this campaign no matter who the nominees are. but rand and liz could also raise a lot in small amounts from everywhere, which would be some little victory in itself.