A thought occurred to me:
8 years ago, the Democratic primary race shifted when a very influential Senator from Massachusetts stepped in to support the challenger over the front-runner.
This year, a very influential Senator from Massachusetts, holding the same seat, sat on her hands, and chose *not* to influence the race at all.
Her rationale does not make sense to me. She says that she wanted to see the primaries "play out" without her intervention. But Why???
Everyone who has ever endorsed a candidate does so to influence the outcome of the race. Why did Warren choose not to attempt to influence the race? What possible reason does one have to avoid influencing such an important outcome?
I'm a big fan of Senator Warren, and I am confused by her motives here.
Sunday, Jun 12, 2016 · 1:35:42 PM +00:00
·
David B
All the replies here are just speculation. You don't know the answer, and neither do I. Most of you answer as Monday Morning QB's, giving what you believe to be the most rational reason for what may have been irrational behavior.