This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/25/us/politics/hillary-clinton-elizabeth-warren.html

The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Senator Elizabeth Warren Tells Trump: ‘Nasty Women Vote’ Liberals Hope Elizabeth Warren Will Serve as Clinton’s Scrutinizer in Chief
(about 7 hours later)
MANCHESTER, N.H. — Weaponizing a debate-stage insult that has become a rallying cry for female supporters of Hillary Clinton, Senator Elizabeth Warren let fly a stern, swaggering warning on Monday to Donald J. Trump: “Nasty women vote.” Senator Elizabeth Warren delivered a blistering rebuke of Donald J. Trump on Monday, warning him that “nasty women vote” and imploring a crowd to cast ballots for Hillary Clinton.
In a blistering rebuke of Mr. Trump, with Mrs. Clinton seated and smiling onstage beside her, Ms. Warren took furious aim at the Republican nominee’s personal and political record, ticking off his history of disparaging remarks during the election and reminding the crowd of the many accusations of sexual assault against him. “I don’t know about you,” Mrs. Clinton said as she flashed a thankful smile and seized the microphone from Ms. Warren at a rally in Manchester, N.H. “But I could listen to Elizabeth Warren go on all day.”
“He thinks that because he has a mouthful of Tic Tacs that he can force himself on any woman within groping distance,” Ms. Warren said, alluding to Mr. Trump’s invocation of the breath freshener in a 2005 clip that found him boasting about forcing himself on women. She might have to.
Ms. Warren said, “Women have had it with guys like you.” Then she added the adjective: “Nasty women have really had it with guys like you.” With polls and early voting data signaling that Mrs. Clinton is likely to prevail against Mr. Trump in two weeks, liberal Democrats are already looking past Election Day — and relying on Ms. Warren to become the thorn in chief in Mrs. Clinton’s side, scrutinizing her appointments and agenda.
It was the description that Mr. Trump had deployed, five days earlier, in a heated debate exchange with Mrs. Clinton during Wednesday’s debate. Since then, the term “nasty woman” has become a rallying cry, the stuff of quickly-produced knockoff T-shirts among admirers of Mrs. Clinton. Mrs. Clinton has vowed that if elected she will work across the aisle with congressional Republicans, but relations with liberals, including Ms. Warren of Massachusetts and Senators Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Sherrod Brown of Ohio, could prove quite contentious.
“Nasty women are tough. Nasty women are smart. And nasty women vote,” Ms. Warren said, her voice building. “We nasty women are going to march our nasty feet to cast our nasty votes to get you out of our lives forever.” Some Democrats are not waiting for Nov. 8. With Mrs. Clinton’s transition team considering applicants to fill as many as 15 cabinet positions and about 200 subcabinet positions, the left has begun to exert pressure over her potential choices.
Even by Ms. Warren’s standards of fiery delivery, it was a rousing address, jolting an outdoor campus crowd of thousands at Saint Anselm College. Amid chants of “Hillary,” students watched from the windows of an ivy-covered building behind the stage, the autumn foliage appearing to glow in a midday sun. “Personnel is policy,” said Robert B. Reich, a secretary of labor during the Clinton administration who supported Mr. Sanders during the nominating fight. Mr. Reich said he anticipated intense resistance to any appointees with ties to Wall Street. “As far I can tell, those discussions have already begun,” he added.
“I could do this all day, but we’ve got a great speaker here,” Ms. Warren said, after recalling Mr. Trump’s caustic words about African-Americans, Mexicans and Muslims, among others. Asked on Saturday whether she had thought about her cabinet appointments, Mrs. Clinton told reporters onboard her campaign plane: “No, I really haven’t. I’m a little superstitious about that.”
Taking the microphone moments later, Mrs. Clinton suggested she would not have minded waiting a little longer. But that has not stopped liberals from voicing concerns. “We need a secretary of the Treasury who is prepared to take on the greed and recklessness of Wall Street, not someone who comes from Wall Street,” Mr. Sanders wrote in an email on Monday. “We need an attorney general who will enforce antitrust legislation,” he added, in light of AT&T’s proposed $85 billion acquisition of Time Warner.
“I don’t know about you,” she began, her hair blowing a bit in the wind, “but I could listen to Elizabeth go on all day.” Democrats frequently point to Ms. Warren as a model for how to gain the public’s attention in effectively blocking appointments. Last year she foiled President Obama’s appointment of Antonio Weiss, a senior investment banker at Lazard, to a top Treasury Department post, a coup that thrilled the left when Mr. Weiss withdrew his name. If she is elected, Mrs. Clinton will face similar pressures filling cabinet positions.
If Mrs. Clinton was not quite so explicit about her opponent, she plainly reveled in Ms. Warren’s introduction. From the left, the most scrutinized of those choices would be for Treasury secretary. Front-runners for the post include Lael Brainard, a Federal Reserve governor who has emerged as a leading opponent of raising interest rates, a position popular with the left, and Sarah Bloom Raskin, a deputy Treasury secretary and former state banking regulator.
“We’re up here without our phones so we can’t check tweets, but I kind of expect that if Donald heard what she just said, he’s tweeting away,” Mrs. Clinton said. “She gets under his thin skin like nobody else.” Brian Fallon, a spokesman for Mrs. Clinton, said that her singular focus was winning in November and that speculation about personnel in her potential administration “is entirely premature.”
Mrs. Clinton made a gentler appeal on gender grounds, while describing her penchant for planning. Before she became a senator, Ms. Warren, who has taken aim at the financial deregulation of the Bill Clinton era, criticized Mrs. Clinton, then a New York senator, for shifting positions to support bankruptcy legislation that would have made it more difficult for families to receive debt relief.
Women, she said, “make lists. And we try to write down what we’re supposed to do and cross it off as we go through.” But the two Democrats have since formed a warm alliance. Ms. Warren was vetted as a possible running mate and has proved a potent surrogate, bringing her populist appeal and quirky straight talk to a campaign that has struggled to connect with young voters and liberals.
Both speakers took care to emphasize the importance of down-ballot races, an argument that has become more prominent at Clinton events in recent weeks as her campaign places a higher priority on lifting Democrats in congressional contests. And few surrogates have been able to rattle Mr. Trump like Ms. Warren, who has called the Republican nominee a “thin-skinned bully who thinks humiliating women at 3 a.m. qualifies him to be president.”
If Democrats retake the Senate, of course, Ms. Warren is certain to emerge as a pivotal figure. On Monday, Ms. Warren took furious aim at Mr. Trump’s remarks on women and the sexual assault allegations against him.
On the roster of high-profile supporters bolstering Mrs. Clinton, Ms. Warren is viewed as perhaps the likeliest to turn from ally to adversary should Mrs. Clinton win the White House. “He thinks that because he has a mouthful of Tic Tacs that he can force himself on any woman within groping distance,” she said, alluding to Mr. Trump’s mention of the breath freshener in a 2005 recording in which he boasted about forcing himself on women.
Along with Senator Bernie Sanders, who has also crisscrossed the country for the Clinton cause in recent weeks, Ms. Warren stands as a progressive check on Mrs. Clinton’s more centrist tendencies, eager to condemn the outsize influence of Wall Street and rail against the Trans-Pacific Partnership, which remains a source of wariness for some Clinton skeptics in the Democratic Party. Ms. Warren has directed her singular brand of venom at the Obama administration, in which policy negotiations often include aides raising the caveat of “What would Elizabeth Warren say?”
Mrs. Clinton supported a version of the trade agreement, before opposing the final product during the primary after intense pressure from liberal activists and Sanders supporters. “She’s a very powerful ally to have on your side, but it’s well known that she’s a very formidable opponent to have working against you,” said Adam Green, a co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee.
In the Senate, Ms. Warren recently took aim at John G. Stumpf, the chief executive of Wells Fargo when employees opened about 1.5 million bank accounts and applied for 565,000 credit cards that might not have been authorized by customers, regulators say.
“You should resign!” Ms. Warren said in a fiery exchange with Mr. Stumpf that quickly became a YouTube sensation. Mr. Stumpf has since resigned.
“Some of the best TV you can see is on C-Span when Elizabeth is going after a bank executive or a regulator,” Mrs. Clinton said on Monday.
Though Mrs. Clinton earned an enthusiastic reception on Monday, Ms. Warren remained the more powerful draw for a number of more left-leaning voters. Some attendees had traveled from her home state to see her speak.
Haydee Bembenek, 75, of Massachusetts, said it was healthy that the pair would “keep each other in check” as partners in government should Mrs. Clinton win.
Then Ms. Bembenek offered a prediction. “She’ll be good to run for the presidency,” she said of Ms. Warren, 67, “once Hillary is done with her eight years.”
Mrs. Clinton won over many liberals when she adopted Mr. Sanders’s plan for free in-state college tuition for middle-class families and when she turned against the Trans-Pacific Partnership, Mr. Obama’s 12-nation trade pact. On Monday, Mrs. Clinton said she looked forward to “working with” Ms. Warren “to rewrite the rules of our economy.”
But many on the left remain skeptical of whether Mrs. Clinton would push liberal policies or adopt a more centrist agenda, like that of her husband.
“I’m going to vote for Hillary Clinton on Nov. 8 — and on Nov. 9, I am going to demand the platform we wrote be implemented,” said Jonathan Tasini, a labor activist who challenged Mrs. Clinton for her Senate seat in New York in 2006 and supported Mr. Sanders in the primary.
Concerns on the left have been exacerbated by hacked emails released by WikiLeaks showing Mrs. Clinton sympathetic to Wall Street and her aides conflicted about opposing the trade pact. In excerpts from paid speeches to financial institutions and corporate audiences, she said she dreamed of “open trade and open borders” in the Western Hemisphere.
Asked on Sunday whether Mrs. Clinton would pursue an Asian trade agreement if elected, her running mate, Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia, said they had not directly discussed the topic.
“Look, we aren’t against trade,” Mr. Kaine told Chuck Todd of NBC. “You never close the door if you can get a deal that’s going to be good for American workers and our economy.”
Those kinds of comments sent a shudder through liberals who regret an initial hesitancy to antagonize the current administration.
“Obama had a very lengthy honeymoon when there wasn’t much pressure on him from the left,” said Dan Cantor, the national director of the Working Families Party. “That won’t be the case with Hillary Clinton.”