The problem with "Run Warren Run"

The worst thing about being politically and socially aware is that it gets me a lot of e-mail. You write to a senator, sign a petition, or contribute to a cause, and your inbox gets inundated. I realize it's possible to unsubscribe, but that's a hassle, and maybe sometimes I want stay informed, for at least some of them. It's frustrating.

Anyway, I get a lot of email. Often I will hear about the same issue from multiple sources, and a lot of sources are all about getting Elizabeth Warren to run, despite her saying that she will not run. I wasn't paying a lot of attention, but I am doing so more now after seeing a few things.

I guess I already had in mind that the reason people want her so badly is because she seems so radical. Even traditional Democratic candidates end up upholding the existing structure, which is easy to do once you become part of it. I understand the belief that Warren would not give into that, which is nice, but I question how fun it would be for her with the kind of opposition that President Obama has been getting. I think he would like to be at least somewhat more radical than he has been, and it is not completely his fault that he can't.

So that was in mind, and then I read someone (I can't remember whom) tweeting about how presidents go gray, and he was suggesting it was due to the lives they were responsible for. You become president, and you become a killer.

Warren's focus has been on economic issues, and that's what people love her for. The president also has to deal with diplomacy and war and the CIA and many other things. For someone who has a strong focus, it may be easier to pursue that focus in the legislative branch via committees and drafting bills. It is possible that someone who has been working with the system for a while now may have the best idea of where she can be most effective and what will work best for her.

That is where the patronizing tone of some of these boosters becomes so disturbing, and that leads to the other thing I read:

http://www.shakesville.com/2014/10/i-have-problem-with-this.html

I was struck by the irony of a voting bloc that is theoretically pro-choice and pro-gender equality feeling so comfortable planning on coercing a woman into doing something she doesn't want to do. And sure, they can say they think she will change her mind and want to run, but "she only thinks she doesn't want it" is not really an improvement.

It reminds me of what happened when Jessica Williams announced that she didn't want to host "The Daily Show". Sure, she has actually worked in that environment and so would have a reasonable idea of the job description. Yes, the reasoning that she gave made a lot of sense, and seemed to be part of a greater plan for gaining experience in a timely manner that would result in her having the career she wanted rather than the one other people felt she should have, but no, she must lean in!

I'm not saying no one can ever have good advice for anyone else, but a big part of my personal growth has been not just learning to listen to my inner voice but especially learning that my voice matters. I know things about me that you can't.

It does seem that this well-intended "encouragement" is more likely to be aimed at women than at men, and that is annoying. Okay, not everyone gets that women are people yet, but yes, we have minds and we can make decisions for ourselves. Specifically, Jessica Williams and Elizabeth Warren have both done pretty well for themselves. Let's respect their judgment.

If you want a better candidate for president, there's still time to work on that. I know that there isn't anyone who captures the progressive imagination quite as well as Warren right now, but on the plus side, all the purported Republican contenders are horrible. That sounds dangerous, but it works in our favor, so don't despair.