I would like to start by saying that I typically don’t contribute to response articles because it tends to make one person out to be the bad guy. However, I thought it necessary to offer an alternative opinion.    

In an article regarding candidate Elizabeth Warren from the last edition, it was suggested that many voters are hesitant to support a female candidate. I agree that we need women in politics, but I think this rhetoric is divisive. It isn’t about who’s the first xyz; it is about the policies a candidate proposes.

I don’t hesitate about Warren because she’s a woman. I hesitate about Warren because her policies are dangerous. The argument was made that Warren is the best candidate because of her passion on issues, excitement in the electorate and that she will “fight for us.” It was also contended that, rather than choose a safer candidate such as former Vice President Joe Biden, Democrats should nominate Warren for her aggressively forward policy stances. I think it is important to consider why Biden is considered “safer.” What is it about Elizabeth Warren that Americans seem to have concerns about?

Because of the pull to the left by candidates Beto O’Rourke, Kamala Harris and Bernie Sanders, it isn’t surprising that Warren has followed suit.

The issue with Warren’s move to the left is that it creates concerns about her motives. She’s highly educated in law, which adds to her inauthentic enthusiasm for some of the policies she is proposing. As a student of the law, she knows better than to advocate for proposals and plans that are unrealistic and compromise constitutional principles. Many of her platform positions and her endless “plans” project to radically expand the role of the executive branch to an unconstitutional point and threaten the balance of powers set forth by our founding fathers. Her agenda openly holds constitutional boundaries in contempt. She isn’t ignorant of the law’s limits — she just disregards them.

Her proposals to tax lobbying, create extensive executive orders and bypass Congress demonstrate that blatant indifference to the Constitution will be her administration’s approach to policy if elected. By adopting impractical policies and imitating the political rhetoric of big promises from Senator Sanders, Warren misleads the American people.

Warren also affirms her lack of authenticity because at the foundation of her power and influence is a lie. She appropriated an identity for personal advancement. By claiming to be Native American to aid in her application and acceptance to an Ivy League law school, she was dishonest about something very fundamental: who she is. If Warren once lied about who she was simply to get ahead, who’s to say she isn’t doing it again? How can we believe in someone’s principles if we can’t even believe what they say?

The Democrats have a challenge. Incumbency is a proven advantage, and they spend a lot of time separating themselves from President Trump. But they have also inadvertently separated themselves from the American people. The majority of Americans do not want to lose their private insurance, they fear policies that tend toward socialism and global consolidation and don’t support their taxes funding abortion with a repeal of the Hyde Amendment. Whether you like it or not, Democrats should find a way to appeal to real Americans who expect authenticity, not radical platitudes.

Warren may be temporarily polling well in young, progressive circles, but she won’t grab the votes of those in the center or conservative Democrats. The American people do not want a plan for everything as Warren promises because they don’t want government looking over their shoulders to manage their lives. The American people want security in their jobs and in their families, and Warren puts that at risk for many.

If Democrats, including Warren, don’t acknowledge the realities of the American majority, then I think we’ll enjoy another four years of Mr. Trump.