Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) says she’s not running for president in 2016, but the liberal rock star’s progressive base say her actions indicate otherwise.
This year alone she’s launched a book tour for her best-selling autobiography A Fighting Chance.
{mosads}She’s hit the campaign trail for 2014 Democrats, though she’s stayed away from states such as Iowa or New Hampshire that might prompt further speculation she’s go the White House on her mind.
Warren has even hit the talk-show circuit, including an appearance earlier this month on “The Late Show With David Letterman.”
On Thursday, she cast a vote against President Obama’s request to arm and train Syrian rebels in the fight against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria.
The vote underlined Warren’s anti-war credentials at a time when the national political discussion is turning back to Iraq.
“I do not want America to be dragged into another ground war in the Middle East, and it is time for those nations in the region that are most immediately affected by the rise of ISIS to step up and play a leading role in this fight,” she said in a statement.
Both the vote and Warren’s comments were music to the ears of liberals looking for an alternative to Hillary Clinton.
They think Warren is keeping her options open.
“She’s been politically smart by doing everything that a potential 2016 candidate needs to do if she decide to run,” said Neil Sroka, spokesman for the progressive Democracy For America.
“Her actions speak louder than words with what she’s doing in terms of a possible presidential run,” said Erica Sagrans, campaign manager of the Ready For Warren political action committee, which wants Warren to run in 2016.
“I believe her when she’s says she’s not running – but I take that to mean not currently,” Sagrans said.
Warren has given every indication that she won’t run for president despite pleas from the left, which serenaded her with cries of “Run, Liz, Run” at the Netroots Nation conference in July.
In August, Warren’s attorney publicly said she had not intention to run for president, and even took the action of sending a letter to the Federal Election Commission disavowing
Ready For Warren. The letter said the senator had nothing to do with the group, which has organized rallies nationwide in support of a Warren run.
Warren also said she was not running for president in December 2013 during a Boston news conference.
Warren, who did not respond to a request for comment for this story, and her political staff have long-argued that she’s not acting politically, but simply using her political spotlight to advocate for issues she’s championed for years, such as more stringent Wall St. regulations and reforming the student loan system.
It’s no secret that liberals would like someone to take on Clinton, who is the frontrunner for the Democratic nomination in 2016 if she chooses to run.
The Hill revealed secret emails this week highlighting discontent with Clinton from a progressive list-serve that included prominent Democrats, Sierra Club officials, senior union representatives and journalists with liberal news outlets such as The Huffington Post.
In the e-mails, members of the “Gamechanger Salon” criticized Clinton as too much of a war hawk and too cozy with Wall Street.
Members openly pined for a run by Warren.
“The establishment Dems need to be punished, and the best way for that to happen is for Warren to beat Hillary in the primary on a populist message,” Carl Gibson, a progressive activist and writer for Occupy.com, wrote in one email.
Sagrans said she’s not taking no for an answer, at least for now.
“All politicians – anyone who is possibly going to run says they aren’t running until they decide to run,” she said. “Barack Obama said he wasn’t going to run in 2008. Hillary Clinton said she wouldn’t run a second time. It’s the thing people have to say before they make that decision.”