Elizabeth Warren

BOSTON (CBS) – The Globe devoted a big chunk of its editorial pages Sunday to an assortment of exhortations to Sen. Elizabeth Warren to run for president.

If Sen. Warren is as smart as I think she is, she will ignore every one of them.

The common denominator of these arguments seems to be that capitalism’s excesses and the income inequality, wage stagnation and working-class anxiety they have created are the most important issues we face, and that Warren, who is a forceful critic of that status quo, must run to advance the cause of reform. As a Globe editorial puts it: “the big-picture debate on financial regulation and income inequality is what’s most at peril if the Democratic primaries come and go without top-notch opponents for [Hillary] Clinton,” who they argue lacks the “gumption” to take on those issues.

But none of that rings true.

The way things are going, it’s entirely possible that terrorism and foreign affairs will be the dominant issues of the 2016 presidential race. Those are not Sen. Warren’s issues, and if they dominate, a run would sidetrack her voice, not amplify it.

Meanwhile, “gumption” is defined as “shrewd or spirited initiative.” Secretary Clinton may not seem as spirited as Warren, but she easily wins the shrewdness derby.

As the Obama experience has demonstrated, electing Elizabeth Warren president is a great way to force her to moderate everything she stands for; she could never speak out as bluntly as she does now for fear of crashing the markets and alienating much of the broad coalition a winning national candidate needs.

And while one of the Globe’s Warren boosters describes her possible candidacy as a “win-win,” I beg to differ. Unless you think the election of a Republican president by swing voters uninterested in yet another liberal president from the Ivy League is somehow a win for the Warren agenda.

http://boston.cbslocal.com/2015/03/23/keller-large-why-warren-shouldnt-run-for-president/