Clinton Courts Warren

J. Scott Applewhite/AP

Facts matter: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter. Support our nonprofit reporting. Subscribe to our print magazine.


Back in December, Hillary Clinton and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) reportedly met in private for what is being described as a “cordial and productive” conversation inside Clinton’s Washington D.C. residence. The New York Times’ Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Martin have the scoop, published Tuesday, which makes clear Clinton did not ask for Warren’s endorsement, but instead sought the senator’s thoughts on a number of policy issues.

News of the one-on-one conversation comes not only as Clinton continues to build a formidable 2016 campaign team—most recently with the hire of Mandy Grunwald, a longtime Clinton confidant who had lately been advising Warren—but also as liberal activist groups urge the Massachusetts senator to challenge her for the Democratic nomination. While Clinton, who has yet to formally announce her candidacy, is widely viewed as the party’s frontrunner, a possible run by Warren and her trademark populist message would certainly complicate her campaign.

Despite calls for her to run, however, Warren has repeatedly said she will not be seeking the nomination. But a sit-down at Clinton’s home, sans political aides and initiated by Clinton, is the most clear signal Clinton is well aware she will be needing Warren’s deeply popular economic liberalism in order to be successful come 2016, especially at a time when even Republicans appear to be freely borrowing from the senator’s populist platform.

We've never been very good at being conservative.

And usually, that serves us well in doing the ambitious, hard-hitting journalism that you turn to Mother Jones for. But it also means we can't afford to come up short when it comes to scratching together the funds it takes to keep our team firing on all cylinders, and the truth is, we finished our budgeting cycle on June 30 about $100,000 short of our online goal.

This is no time to come up short. It's time to fight like hell, as our namesake would tell us to do, for a democracy where minority rule cannot impose an extreme agenda, where facts matter, and where accountability has a chance at the polls and in the press. If you value our reporting and you can right now, please help us dig out of the $100,000 hole we're starting our new budgeting cycle in with an always-needed and always-appreciated donation today.

payment methods

We've never been very good at being conservative.

And usually, that serves us well in doing the ambitious, hard-hitting journalism that you turn to Mother Jones for. But it also means we can't afford to come up short when it comes to scratching together the funds it takes to keep our team firing on all cylinders, and the truth is, we finished our budgeting cycle on June 30 about $100,000 short of our online goal.

This is no time to come up short. It's time to fight like hell, as our namesake would tell us to do, for a democracy where minority rule cannot impose an extreme agenda, where facts matter, and where accountability has a chance at the polls and in the press. If you value our reporting and you can right now, please help us dig out of the $100,000 hole we're starting our new budgeting cycle in with an always-needed and always-appreciated donation today.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate