When the media says that Senator Elizabeth Warren is being “divisive,” what they really mean is that she’s too female:
What's the biggest beef against Sen. Elizabeth Warren, who is considering a run for president against Donald Trump?
It's that she's "too divisive," an argument put forward by her hometown newspaper, the Boston Globe, in a widely discussed editorial last week urging her not to run for president. It sparked both public rebukes of the paper and some private nods of agreement from Democrats as they begin to consider in earnest what kind of person their party should put up against Trump in 2020:
A fighter, a friendly face or some combination of both?
"Democrats will be looking for someone who can float like a butterfly and sting like a bee," said Matt Sinovic, the executive director of Progress Iowa. "The nominee will have to point out Trump's many (many) failures and lies in a compelling way, fire up the base — all while reaching persuadable voters as well."
Warren is probably overqualified to be president, so let’s clear that up right now. She understands the law, she knows economics and she knows how Washington D.C. works. She is miles ahead of any Republican anywhere in terms of being able to lead this country effectively. But, what’s happening here is tragic. She is being discounted because she’s a woman. And, let’s be clear that, in no uncertain terms, there is a wide swath of people who won’t accept anyone but Bernie Sanders and they’re ready to burn everything to the ground if he doesn’t get the nomination.
In the era of Trump, how in the hell could anyone be more “divisive?” I don’t understand that at all.