2016 Postmortem

Matt_in_STL

(1,446 posts) Wed Apr 27, 2016, 02:32 AM Apr 2016

Now that we have our presumptive nominee, let the speculation begin

Which Democrats run against President Trump in 2020? Will Elizabeth Warren decide she is ready by then or is she possibly just not interested in the presidency?

8 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Now that we have our presumptive nominee, let the speculation begin (Original Post) Matt_in_STL Apr 2016 OP

all she has to do is win the obama states. let trump win the rest nt msongs Apr 2016 #1

We could be at war then. Skink Apr 2016 #2

if she sucks half as bad as speculation here, you can try to primary her in 2020. bettyellen Apr 2016 #3

Warren? Why would you want someone who was a republican even more recently than Hillary? ContinentalOp Apr 2016 #4

I don't use previous party affiliation as my barometer Matt_in_STL Apr 2016 #6

Nobody currently on the Democratic political stage... Chan790 Apr 2016 #5

I can agree with all of that Matt_in_STL Apr 2016 #7

A little more than 2 years ago, the NSA was going to be ... Tortmaster Apr 2016 #8

msongs

(67,395 posts)

1. all she has to do is win the obama states. let trump win the rest nt

Reply to Matt_in_STL (Original post)

Wed Apr 27, 2016, 02:42 AM

Apr 2016

Skink

(10,122 posts)

2. We could be at war then.

Reply to Matt_in_STL (Original post)

Wed Apr 27, 2016, 02:45 AM

Apr 2016

So I wouldn't recommend changing horses. Even if it is Hillary.

bettyellen

(47,209 posts)

3. if she sucks half as bad as speculation here, you can try to primary her in 2020.

Reply to Matt_in_STL (Original post)

Wed Apr 27, 2016, 02:45 AM

Apr 2016

ContinentalOp

(5,356 posts)

4. Warren? Why would you want someone who was a republican even more recently than Hillary?

Reply to Matt_in_STL (Original post)

Wed Apr 27, 2016, 02:47 AM

Apr 2016

Matt_in_STL

(1,446 posts)

6. I don't use previous party affiliation as my barometer

Reply to ContinentalOp (Reply #4)

Wed Apr 27, 2016, 02:57 AM

Apr 2016

I prefer to pay attention to actions and words. I mean, using that as a decision maker for me would be like voting for a candidate solely because they are a woman and we know nobody would do that.

Chan790

(20,176 posts)

5. Nobody currently on the Democratic political stage...

Reply to Matt_in_STL (Original post)

Wed Apr 27, 2016, 02:55 AM

Apr 2016

both Castros chances would be obliterated by their ties to Clinton if she falters. Their careers or at-least higher ambitions would be over.
same with Hillary's VP choice whoever that is.
Warren will be too old in her own view (if she was going to, it would have been this term) and probably not interested.
Webb never really has a chance because he's an anti-progressive Democrat.
Nobody else stands out as an emerging candidate.

So...either M O'M if he can keep himself relevant or someone who hasn't yet emerged as a bright star of the future of the party.

Matt_in_STL

(1,446 posts)

7. I can agree with all of that

Reply to Chan790 (Reply #5)

Wed Apr 27, 2016, 02:59 AM

Apr 2016

Warren would be a great option to have but you are right, I don't think she really wants the presidency anyway. Webb doesn't even seem to be a small D democrat these days and is more to the right than Hillary in a lot of respects.

Tortmaster

(382 posts)

8. A little more than 2 years ago, the NSA was going to be ...

Reply to Matt_in_STL (Original post)

Wed Apr 27, 2016, 04:40 AM

Apr 2016

... the biggest issue in the 2016 election. And you guys now want to talk about 4 years into the future?

As somebody who apparently supported Senator Sanders (and perhaps still does even after his shocking New York Daily News interview), your prognostications are not something you should trumpet.

The Republicans who supported Senator Sanders will slowly creep back into the weeds, and Secretary Clinton will select Julian Castro for VP, and Democrats will crush in 2016.

Reply to this discussion